[SOLVED] Jumping from 1366x768 to 1920x1080 monitor, GTX 1070 performance

[VulpHex]

Hi, Im currently using a 1366x768 monitor usually playing most games on ultra or custom high presets achieving 60fps ( 60hz ) on AAA games. I was thinking of buying a new monitor and got worried about the performance loss and FPS penalty of using a higher resolution monitor.

I know PPI is important and 1080 resolution is basically standard in any situation, but Im having doubts.
Is 1366x768 Ultra better than 1920x1080 on Mid-High settings?
My gtx 1070 can´t run ALL games on ultra 60fps, I sometimes have to customize settings for intensive games so I´m worried I won´t achieve 60Fps in a 1080p monitor, and smothness is very important to me. Also one thing I was hoping for is using 75hz to smooth out the experience even more.

Because I am Argentinian, monitors are very expensive and the one I can afford and I like is this one:

Monitor Curvo pantalla LED 24” serie F390 | SAMSUNG

Disfruta de una experiencia visual más inmersiva gracias al nuevo monitor curvo 24" C27F396FHU de diseño Super Slim con curvatura 1800R para un mayor campo de visión.

www.samsung.com

My specs:
Gpu: GTX MSI 1070 8gb
Ram: 16gb 3200mhz
Cpu: Ryzen 5 2600

Can anyone give me an advice? Ty!

 

[Prad_Bitt]

You could try something like 1600×900 too to find a sweet spot. Also I'm pretty sure 1070 can do 60 fps ultra unless AA and Grass quality and stuff like that is extremely high, those eat fps like crazy. But the sharpness in a 1080p panel is worth it vs the 768p. There's no point having very high quality textures when you don't have enough pixels to differentiate between those textures

 

[VulpHex]

You could try something like 1600×900 too to find a sweet spot. Also I'm pretty sure 1070 can do 60 fps ultra unless AA and Grass quality and stuff like that is extremely high, those eat fps like crazy. But the sharpness in a 1080p panel is worth it vs the 768p. There's no point having very high quality textures when you don't have enough pixels to differentiate between those textures

I´ve heard the higher the resolution the lower AA you would want to use, because its gpu intensive and also because there will be less jagged edges. I suppose this is true from 768 to 1080 too, as it doubles the PPI.

So you say I shouldn't worry too much about the performance or FPS loss?. What do you think about buying that 1080p Samsung monitor which has a 75hz refresh rate, 24 inches, FreeSync and VA panel?

Too many questions, sry!

 

[LordVile]

I´ve heard the higher the resolution the lower AA you would want to use, because its gpu intensive and also because there will be less jagged edges. I suppose this is true from 768 to 1080 too, as it doubles the PPI.

So you say I shouldn't worry too much about the performance or FPS loss?. What do you think about buying that 1080p Samsung monitor which has a 75hz refresh rate, 24 inches, FreeSync and VA panel?

Too many questions, sry!

Depends what games you’re playing and what CPU you have. A 1070 should be capable of playing all games at 60FPS high at 1080p barring stuff like cyberpunk and flight sim.

 

[Prad_Bitt]

I´ve heard the higher the resolution the lower AA you would want to use, because its gpu intensive and also because there will be less jagged edges. I suppose this is true from 768 to 1080 too, as it doubles the PPI.

So you say I shouldn't worry too much about the performance or FPS loss?. What do you think about buying that 1080p Samsung monitor which has a 75hz refresh rate, 24 inches, FreeSync and VA panel?

Too many questions, sry!

AA on creates less jagged edges, and eats fps. You'll have much less jagged edges anyway because you're moving to denser pixel screen.

About the monitor, it's a lot of personal preference and inidivudal reviews. Some people like TN over IPS and VA. Some like IPS or VA more. Some (like me) like OLED but they're $4000 so nvm lol. VA usually has more contrast and more input lag etc, IPS has better color reproduction and lesser input lag than VA. TN has poop color and least input lag

 

[VulpHex]

AA on creates less jagged edges, and eats fps. You'll have much less jagged edges anyway because you're moving to denser pixel screen.

About the monitor, it's a lot of personal preference and inidivudal reviews. Some people like TN over IPS and VA. Some like IPS or VA more. Some (like me) like OLED but they're $4000 so nvm lol. VA usually has more contrast and more input lag etc, IPS has better color reproduction and lesser input lag than VA. TN has poop color and least input lag

That's great, so I will be lowering AA for sure.

I preferred VA over IPS, can't stand the bleeding.

I've literally just read FreeSync only works on Nvidia if the monitor uses DisplayPort 1.2a and I can't find a single one with that spec, in fact, I can't find a lower than 100hz monitor with FreeSync AND DisplayPort 1.2a.

So probably FreeSync will not be possible neither GSync, is way expensive, more than double the price.

Is adaptable sync a must? Will overclocking it to 75hz and using Vsync instead be worth?
Seems like improving over smoothness won't be as easy as it seemed.

Really, thanks for your time. You're helping me a lot.

 

[Prad_Bitt]

That's great, so I will be lowering AA for sure.

I preferred VA over IPS, can't stand the bleeding.

I've literally just read FreeSync only works on Nvidia if the monitor uses DisplayPort 1.2a and I can't find a single one with that spec, in fact, I can't find a lower than 100hz monitor with FreeSync AND DisplayPort 1.2a.

So probably FreeSync will not be possible neither GSync, is way expensive, more than double the price.

Is adaptable sync a must? Will overclocking it to 75hz and using Vsync instead be worth?
Seems like improving over smoothness won't be as easy as it seemed.

Really, thanks for your time. You're helping me a lot.

Adaptive sync isn't a "must" but, for example when I play csgo (I always keep freesync off even though I use display port) I don't see any difference with or without freesync on or off (fps never goes under 144, always 250-400, 1% low is probably 180 and 0.1% is 150 ish), I keep it off for latency reasons. But when I play GTA, my fps fluctuates between 120-160 and that causes screen tearing and stutter withiut adaptive sync on. My monjtor is 144hz.

And if I'm not wrong Vsync is only useful when your GPU output fps is always above your monitor refresh rate. Otherwise it will stutter.

 

[VulpHex]

Adaptive sync isn't a "must" but, for example when I play csgo (I always keep freesync off even though I use display port) I don't see any difference with or without freesync on or off (fps never goes under 144, always 250-400, 1% low is probably 180 and 0.1% is 150 ish), I keep it off for latency reasons. But when I play GTA, my fps fluctuates between 120-160 and that causes screen tearing and stutter withiut adaptive sync on. My monjtor is 144hz.

And if I'm not wrong Vsync is only useful when your GPU output fps is always above your monitor refresh rate. Otherwise it will stutter.

Ok, yeah, adaptative sync makes fluctuations in FPS much more smoother. Even if you can´t reach Idk 144hz hypotetically, you can still cap the FPS into a lower refresh or get a much premium FreeSync with LFC to have a wider dynamic refresh rate.

In my case, I don´t play competitive games that much, I don´t need 144hz because I will be playing AAA games, so in best case scenario I will be getting 100Fps to 50Fps on AAA. So yeah, I suppose is way better than Vsync anyway, but Im already giving my hopes up for freesync.

Currently I play almost every game with Vsync on, to 60hz, or stutter and screen tearing will appear. Idk if it is true that you need more FPS above your monitor refresh rate always, maybe. In my experience, even if I don´t reach 60Fps or if I dip below it, it is a must on 99% games to be able to play them smoothly.

 

[Prad_Bitt]

Ok, yeah, adaptative sync makes fluctuations in FPS much more smoother. Even if you can´t reach Idk 144hz hypotetically, you can still cap the FPS into a lower refresh or get a much premium FreeSync with LFC to have a wider dynamic refresh rate.

In my case, I don´t play competitive games that much, I don´t need 144hz because I will be playing AAA games, so in best case scenario I will be getting 100Fps to 50Fps on AAA. So yeah, I suppose is way better than Vsync anyway, but Im already giving my hopes up for freesync.

Currently I play almost every game with Vsync on, to 60hz, or stutter and screen tearing will appear. Idk if it is true that you need more FPS above your monitor refresh rate always, maybe. In my experience, even if I don´t reach 60Fps or if I dip below it, it is a must on 99% games to be able to play them smoothly.

You can try using Vsync then on the new ones