is playing 2550*1440 resolution on 4k monitor is possible and good idea

[vicki7]

i saw these online youtube benchmarks with 1080ti on 4k.
watch dogs 2 -- 36 fps
deus ex mankind divided --- 37.3 fps
ghost recon wildlands -- 37.8 fps
crysis 3 -- 38.7 fps
all other games were between 50 to 80 fps.

thats what i was planning to buy.
so,i was wondering if i buy 4k monitor and 1080ti. can i play games like these on lower resolution like 2550*1440 to gain better fps.

if yes
{is it's going to look same as it is going to look on native qhd monitors?}
if yes
{is there anything else i should know about this}
if no
{then whats going to be the difference}
thanks guys.

 

[juanrdp]

if yes

Yes you could allways play at lower resolution.

{is it's going to look same as it is going to look on native qhd monitors?}

No way. Depending on the monitor you have one or two options
a) Play at lower resoltion with the screen size of those resolutions and the rest black bars. -> You get the same image quality that a true lower resolution pannel but less screen size
b) Interpolate the remaining points from the gpu resolution to 4k, that makes the image blurry and often you get less image quality than a true lesser resolution pannel, not to talk of a 4K pannel.

{then whats going to be the difference}

Or a reduced screen size used and the rest with black bars or a blurried image that used all the screen, the final quaility of that image depends of the concrete upscaling capabilities of the monitor (if it could do that).

As rule of the tumb is a very, very bad idea use a non native resolution of a LCD pannel.

 

[vicki7]

I WAS LOOKING AT "lg-27UD68P 4k 27" 60hz non gsync".
THATS ALL MY BUDGET ALLOWS ME AT THIS POINT.
SO MY SCREEN SIZE IS GOING TO BE EVEN LESS THAN 27 INCH?
SO OVERALL IS ITS GOING TO BE BAD EXPERIENCE THEN?
CAN I SAY GOING WITH "lg34UC98C 21:9 34" 60hz non gsync" IS BETTER?

 

[MaDDD]

Half of these benchmarks use Anti Aliasing (Which tends to hit performance a lot) which I would think is perhaps unnecessary at such a high resolution for the more common monitor sizes (24-34 inch).

 

[juanrdp]

I WAS LOOKING AT "lg-27UD68P 4k 27" 60hz non gsync".
THATS ALL MY BUDGET ALLOWS ME AT THIS POINT.
SO MY SCREEN SIZE IS GOING TO BE EVEN LESS THAN 27 INCH?
SO OVERALL IS ITS GOING TO BE BAD EXPERIENCE THEN?
CAN I SAY GOING WITH "lg34UC98C 21:9 34" 60hz non gsync" IS BETTER?

I had a previous iteration of that monitor (an LG 34UM94C) paired with a 1080 and i would said that the WQHD is ok for a single 1080, i would not go for a 4k pannel for gamming with that card and the image quality is wonderfull.

For the lg-27UD68P concrete performance with 2550 to 4k upscaling and/or black bars, my choice would be allways a WQHD pannel playing at native resolution.

 

[vicki7]

MY PLANNED MONITOR IS 27" 16:9.IF I PLAY AT LWR RESL
AM I GOING TO FACE THIS LESS SCREEN SIZE THING U SAID?

"
Play at lower resoltion with the screen size of those resolutions and the rest black bars. -> You get the same image quality that a true lower resolution pannel but less screen size
"

AND WHAT U SAY

4k 27 inch (60hz non gsync)+1080ti

OR

3440/1440 34 " (60hz non gsync)+1080

 

[juanrdp]

Half of these benchmarks use Anti Aliasing (Which tends to hit performance a lot) which I would think is perhaps unnecessary at such a high resolution for the more common monitor sizes (24-34 inch).

Not sure about it, they are still noticiable at 34'' at least on WQHD but it's true that you need it a lot less than with FullHD and 27'' pannels.

Anyway even without antialiasing a single 1080 struggle to get playable framerates on current gen games, it's not trully a future proof build even for the next gen.

 

[vicki7]

THANKS FOR UR QUICK REPLY AND U R THE BEST ANSWER.
BTW I WAS PLANNING 1080TI WITH 4K.

 

[vicki7]

SO 21:9 IS BETTER CHOICE?

 

[juanrdp]

4k 27 inch (60hz non gsync)+1080ti
OR
3440/1440 34 " (60hz non gsync)+1080

- Top-Image-quality related allways 4k+1080ti (But you are also paying close to 50% more for that jump)
- My personal choice in this moment a 34x3440 and a 1080ti
- Value oriented choice a 27-34x3440 with a 1080

 

[vicki7]

no no no
in my case
lg34UC98C 21:9 34" 60hz non gsync (monitor cost $1050)
lg-27UD68P 4k 27" 60hz non gsync (monitor cost $580)

so i have 2 possible combinations:

4k 27 inch (60hz non gsync)+1080ti

or

3440/1440 34 " (60hz non gsync)+gtx 1080

i cant buy 1080ti with 34" 3440.its out of my budget.
its only if i buy 4k 27",bcz its cheaper.
so now which one u will choose?

i dont know what 4k or wqhd gaming feels like.all i want is ammmmmazing gaming experience.i just dont know which one to choose for that.
and ya i only or mostly play RPG's.Witcher 3 is my fav.

 

[juanrdp]

lg34UC98C 21:9 34" 60hz non gsync (monitor cost $1050)
lg-27UD68P 4k 27" 60hz non gsync (monitor cost $580)

You are jumping from a 68 to a 98 in spite of the size, you have the 34UM88-P for example as low as 650$, but anyway in your case i will choose a lg-27UD68P with a 1080ti, i would hate to loose the inmersion of the 21:9 screen ratio but the improvement of the 4k and the 1080ti are worth it.

and ya i only or mostly play RPG's.Witcher 3 is my fav.

Witcher 3 looks wonderfull on a 34'' 3440x1440 😉

 

[vicki7]

i live in india and monitors are really expensive here. these r the only two which suits my pocket.
u said "i would hate to loose the immersion of the 21:9 screen ratio"
i mean if 21:9 is that much better than 4k, may be i should go for that?
ya obiously with a gtx1080. but i can always buy a second one for sli or just upgrade to next gen.
but where i live its impossible to sell a monitor like this,means i can only do it once and then i will have to live with that for very long. i dont wanna buy best gpu, i wanna buy best monitor outof these two.As i hv no experience with any of these and looks like that u like 21:9 more than 4k , im thinking about going 21:9 and gtx1080. plz give ur opinion.
and really thanks u r a big help.

 

[juanrdp]

u said "i would hate to loose the immersion of the 21:9 screen ratio"
i mean if 21:9 is that much better than 4k, may be i should go for that?

It's a personal preference, with a 21:9 screen ratio yuo have a lot more periferic vision at the sides while gamming, you could get a comparison in this video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MFMw4vBghwc

At the same time 3440x1440 is more or less half the pixels of a true 4K and need half the gpu power, it helps the 1080 to get playable framerates.

For example, this ia a image of my monitor with an Witcher3 image on ultrawide.

ya obiously with a gtx1080. but i can always buy a second one for sli or just upgrade to next gen.

Yep true, but i usually trend to avoid SLI, more now that the SLI is almost not supported (only on 1070+ cards, and i doubt that a lot of effort would be put in SLI)

As i hv no experience with any of these and looks like that u like 21:9 more than 4k , im thinking about going 21:9 and gtx1080.

Yep, i like more 21:9 than 4K currently. The reasons:
- The increased field of wiew for games, really helps a lot with the inmerson in a lot of games (think about it like looking thru a window to a landscape vs being in a wiewer and having periferic vision)
- In productivity the increased working space (could handle two documents openned at the same screen)
- Only needs half the gpu of a true 4K
- At the same time is still a great improvement over FullHD, but it's true that is worse in quality than a true 4K, its like 1K->2.5K->4K, something more than half the true 4K but not the same.
- Love the 34'' size for ultrawide from factor , almost 1m wide monitors xD (84cm wide)
- They are (relatively) cheap, in my country the WQHD have the same price for 34'' than the 4K 27''
- If you use the monitor to see films, and the film is properly ripped from original cinema format no black bars on playback 😉

But thats a personal preference, you must see the cons and drawbacks of each one and available money.

plz give ur opinion. and really thanks u r a big help.

Tyvw, its a pleasure to help.