Monitor QHD or Full HD
What is better to take for games? How many inches to take and in what resolution?24 inch full 1080p CHD briefly
or 4K до27 inch but it is very expensive. pitch for respectable gentlemen.
My fps in some games on a QHD monitor with 144 Hz. with G-SYNC higher than Full HD monitor is 60 Hz. and something did not notice that the fps was less. Processor i5-4590 msi 1070 RAM 12 GB. DELL monitor S2716DG.
It is better to take with a diagonal QHD 27, there is not really need smoothing. However, on one card a hundred years to sit in this solution will not work.
Of course, the minimum entry threshold for this permission - GTX 1070 with the expectation of a further upgrade.
depends on what kind of pocket, I personally do not use QHD because of the higher response and lower Hz updates
(I personally 1ms and 144 Hz - the picture is sooo nice. Monitor BenQ 24 XL2430 https://www.regard.ru/catalog/tovar229914.htm )
Glebpvera
Ah, QHD would be better. Compared to the FullHD (1920x1080), QHD (2560x1440) eats 15 frames (i.e. if the Witcher with a gtx 1080 FullHD will be 80 frames, then 2560x1440 is already 60-65 frames with the same settings).
Of course, if you have the capital, it is better to choose 2560x1440. I recently bought a second monitor to the system unit, picked at the price tag and the most appropriate was - FullHD, with a diagonal of 27 inches (68 cm). I more lean on the diagonal. After his TV-monitor lg 42lm640t, with a diagonal 42 inch (106 cm), I decided for myself that the diagonal is not weak so chooses. Came to me and asked - how do you for this work, and asked that same question to owners of laptops and monitors with a smaller diagonal.
Resolution to improve the picture significantly, but will also squander FPS. If you will find any monitor with a resolution of 2560x1440, and is ready to squander FPS, to get a good video card, or maybe squander settings (although, buying this monitor, expect to see the beauty in games, and then settings squander).
Here we need the allocated amount, for example, I put 12-13 thousand is a little money to FullHD thing, but on their list was a bit with 2560x1440, good monitors, so I took IIYAMA X2783HSU-B1 with a diagonal of 27 inches and a 3 year warranty, it has quite an excellent picture. Wanted to take from LG, but the monitor some rectangular, too, and complain to the guys that hurt my eyes, and inches, like he was 25.
Get used to the diagonal, and quickly. Personally, I continue. I will take the TV as a monitor with close to 40 inches diagonal. The second is a new, worth while to me, he seems so small and uncomfortable, just awful.
FullHD most common resolution, if to believe a recent blog, steam statistics, it is played 42% of users, the second - 1366x768.
Djonnikc
I now have world of tanks on 2560-1440 144 Hz. fps 120, connect the monitor FullHD 60 Hz. fps 90. Don't believe Oh well. If you want you can my videos on YouTube to see gtx 970 in gta5 WIN_20161024_12_39_20_Pro, now is 1070 fps 20-30 more for the same graphics settings.
An__ei
An__ei wrote:
connect the monitor FullHD 60 Hz. fps 90.
Everything is simple, you just have a CPU did not take out the video card
Vinni-Pukh
Everything is simple, you just have a CPU not remove the graphics card-Yes processor QHD monitor with 144 Hz. with G-SYNC on resolution 2560-1440 with 120 fps and exports on the monitor FullHD 60 Hz. not remove. HA HA HA.
An__ei
An__ei wrote:
well, Yes the processor QHD monitor with 144 Hz. with G-SYNC on resolution 2560-1440 with 120 fps and exports on the monitor FullHD 60 Hz. not remove.
All elementary Watson. The math part know? The smaller the resolution, the higher the load on the processor. When you expose 2160p, burden already falls on the GPU, and the processor is unloaded. That's why you got higher fps.
Vinni-Pukh
From nvidia there is a way via the control panel to play on the monitor in FullHD and QHD that fps uvelichivaetsya
An__ei
An__ei wrote:
From nvidia there is a way via the control panel to play on the monitor in FullHD and QHD that fps uvelichivaetsya
What? Why are you so tight? In QHD increases the load on the GPU, and the processor is unloaded. Here and above.
if the monitor old entrance that many games will try to limit fps to the monitor 60 and even if in-sung
if this is a new monitor format sdyme and the corresponding gertsovki games and song will try also to output fps is a multiple of gartovka.
and technically, the load on the graphics card increases with the resolution and often the graphics card is limiting fps. so for 1080p it is desirable to have 1080 avors. for 2K for a couple and 4K for 1070 peck-peck does not already exist a special set of cards 4K wins but that he does not need antialaising therefore, it can be limited to 2 top. for full QED AA is needed so the load will be comparable. as for the CPU the difference will be.
But I'm odd lit crawl on 4K. First I wanted a platform to change, thinking that the risen suitable will. But no... In the games is likely to be slower my old man Isami and so did not reveal my two pachucki.. 'm Thinking of taking 40 4K.
An__ei
Eddward West
Vinni-Pukh
Guys, go easy on the revs.
Guys, let's be friends! (C) Leopold the cat
VOVAN WOLF
I have now the monitor is 1920 x 1080 and nvidia 1080 with fps no, its even too much, so I decided to find out whether there is significant improvement in the graphics when moving from Full hd to Qhd or only if the magnifier to sit and look at pixels. and maybe even take 4k so to order 1080ti
I've never played on large monitors, the biggest is 1080p, so no comparison
warp 37
It is better to take with a diagonal QHD 27, there is not really need smoothing.
No, still need. Even when doing 4k using DSR, it is still no smoothing of the staircase visible at the edges of textures. But it's not a problem, just put to this resolution, FXAA and all in-date, high can be taken with this type of smoothing is 1 fps)
Glebpvera
Not for long you have Tishka enough in 4k. I have this permission in some games there is a drawdown, and with Tisha and will be for a long time. So take it or SLI, so comfortable everywhere and anywhere to play at 4k resolution. Or, if you mind the money to spend on such an expensive pitch fun take Monique with a resolution of 2k. The difference between him and a Full there, but not so significant in the picture.
Glebpvera
About 4k wrap comrade STANDS of Mishiguri, here it is below, just noted. Go to his profile and look what sistemnik collected for 4k. The price tag is 4k: processor (28000) + RAM (10000) + two gtx 1080TI/1080 (80000 - 110000) + motherboard with support for SLI (12000). If the processor is level 4770/4790/6700/7700 what goes, and most importantly, to the Mat. the fee was in line with BP. Of course: these are the terms 4k 60 FPS!. Well, the monitor itself, cost, the budget of 18 thousand middling thousand 25-30, somewhere in the eyes. That count.
Recently a guy bought a 4k monitor, Narada, it's BETTER than DSR - convert using a video card that is much better. DSR - cheapest option, without any extra expenses. Monitor not overjoyed, BUT aware that in some games you do not play, therefore, means reducing the resolution to FullHD, but on small monitors, it's not particularly noticeable.
A link to the conversation and 4k, theme: 4K should I buy take off in the PM. By the way, there he gets out with FPS, with a weak graphics card. You can write to ask that as a Yes.
Yes, 2k is not a very big difference, but still there.
GTX 1080 could cope with 2k, subtract from the current 10-15 FPS frame rate FullHD.
The main thing is to find a good monitor at a reasonable price tag.