Question about my gtx 550 ti

[lakshitharxx]

Hey all, I have a question here.. My 550 ti ( i know it is not a best card for money ) perform very well in 1360x768 resolution.. Like i play bf3 on ultra.. It gives me 40 average FPS.. I recently checked nvidia site..

http://www.geforce.com/Hardware/GPUs/geforce-gtx-550ti/performance/Battlefield-3-NVIDIA-GeForce-GTX-550-Ti-OPS

There is only 4-5 FPS difference in 1920x1080 vs 1280x1024.. Is that true? 1080p fps is without AA and other one is with 4x AA.. does 4x AA kills that much fps?

 

[ricardois]

1920x1080 is not small, if your video card have 1gb of VRAM you should be ok, maybe lowering some settings (like Anti Aliasing, removing V-Sync on some games, Anisotropic Filter, etc)

Like you see there, Lowering some settings allow you to play on high resolutions, yes Anti Aliasing is a very heavy post processing feature, used to Smooth the 3D objects edge lines.

and check that also the Ambient Occlusion is lowered that give you also more frames, Nvidia customizations is normally right, if the rest of your system is ok, you will be running just like that.

 

[CaedenV]

Most games are designed for multiple platforms (like consoles) and so they really don't take all that much horse power to run them at 1080p. I think what you will find though is that while the 'average' is only a 4-5 fps difference, that your slower card will choke a lot in high action areas where you really need that fps to keep you moving. But yes, it should be playable at decent settings at 1080p if 30fps is your standard (most people around here get pretty annoyed when playing less than 50-60fps though).

AA and other filtering will bring almost any computer to it's knees if you crank it up high enough. It is a very heavy feature, which makes things look more polished, but has diminishing returns the higher you turn it up. I generally run at 2-4x AA just to take the edge off, after that I start to not really notice the visual difference, but I do notice a fps slowdown (sub 60fps), which is generally not worth it.

 

[ricardois]

Most games are designed for multiple platforms (like consoles) and so they really don't take all that much horse power to run them at 1080p. I think what you will find though is that while the 'average' is only a 4-5 fps difference, that your slower card will choke a lot in high action areas where you really need that fps to keep you moving. But yes, it should be playable at decent settings at 1080p if 30fps is your standard (most people around here get pretty annoyed when playing less than 50-60fps though).

Well some games like battlefield, run in console only at very low specs and low res (720p), so that is why you get good frames on the console. increasing resolution really requires more graphics power, graphics card loose a lot of frames that is why you don't see any game on consoles running at 1080p, maximum you see some interlaced 1080i but that is not the same. in desktop some games you notice half of frames loss or more, just by increasing resolution from 720p to 1080p.

 

[lakshitharxx]

Most games are designed for multiple platforms (like consoles) and so they really don't take all that much horse power to run them at 1080p. I think what you will find though is that while the 'average' is only a 4-5 fps difference, that your slower card will choke a lot in high action areas where you really need that fps to keep you moving. But yes, it should be playable at decent settings at 1080p if 30fps is your standard (most people around here get pretty annoyed when playing less than 50-60fps though).

AA and other filtering will bring almost any computer to it's knees if you crank it up high enough. It is a very heavy feature, which makes things look more polished, but has diminishing returns the higher you turn it up. I generally run at 2-4x AA just to take the edge off, after that I start to not really notice the visual difference, but I do notice a fps slowdown (sub 60fps), which is generally not worth it.

Is 550 OK at 1080p without AA, V-Sync? for me OK means playable with 30-35 FPS with high and ultra settings.. At this time i can't go for a new GPU..

720p+AA+VSync+better FPS or 1080P+No AA/V-sync/normal fps? I mostly want to know about the visual quality from this 2 options? which is better? 30fps is ok with me..

 

[lakshitharxx]

1920x1080 is not small, if your video card have 1gb of VRAM you should be ok, maybe lowering some settings (like Anti Aliasing, removing V-Sync on some games, Anisotropic Filter, etc)

Like you see there, Lowering some settings allow you to play on high resolutions, yes Anti Aliasing is a very heavy post processing feature, used to Smooth the 3D objects edge lines.

and check that also the Ambient Occlusion is lowered that give you also more frames, Nvidia customizations is normally right, if the rest of your system is ok, you will be running just like that.

720p+AA+VSync+better FPS or 1080P+No AA/V-sync/normal fps? What would you recommend?

 

[ricardois]

720p+AA+VSync+better FPS or 1080P+No AA/V-sync/normal fps? What would you recommend?

i would recommend you playing on your NATIVE resolution, if you screen is 1080p play at 1080p... playing at native resolution is always the way to go. i would say to lower that only when your graphics are already at minimum specs, and you can't increase frames, so i would try lowering resolutions.

V-Sync should be always off, you should only turn on this feature if you are seering screen tearing, like this ones:
http://cdn.overclock.net/0/08/0820e580_vbattach106180.jpeg

otherwise you don't need v-sync.

 

[lakshitharxx]

i would recommend you playing on your NATIVE resolution, if you screen is 1080p play at 1080p... playing at native resolution is always the way to go. i would say to lower that only when your graphics are already at minimum specs, and you can't increase frames, so i would try lowering resolutions.

V-Sync should be always off, you should only turn on this feature if you are seering screen tearing, like this ones:
http://cdn.overclock.net/0/08/0820e580_vbattach106180.jpeg

otherwise you don't need v-sync.

I recently bought a 1080P monitor for my use but i gave it to my cousin.. Now i have a idea of buying another one.. I am currently using a 19" monitor at 1360x768 (native).. If i bought new one i would definitely play at native (1920x1080, 1920x1200).. So i still have the same question? 720P+ultra graphics or 1080p high/medium graphics.. which gives better visual quality?

Also i have that screen tearing problem in this monitor.. But i am checking it again.. Because it is not very noticeable, like in that picture..

 

[ricardois]

I recently bought a 1080P monitor for my use but i gave it to my cousin.. Now i have a idea of buying another one.. I am currently using a 19" monitor at 1360x768 (native).. If i bought new one i would definitely play at native (1920x1080, 1920x1200).. So i still have the same question? 720P+ultra graphics or 1080p high/medium graphics.. which gives better visual quality?

Also i have that screen tearing problem in this monitor.. But i am checking it again.. Because it is not very noticeable, like in that picture..

it is not a quality preset, bigger screens requires higher resolutions, looking over a small screen at 720p and on a big screen at 1080p present no Quality difference. but the video card will have a much harder work when using a bigger array.

So if you have the option go for the 1080p screen that will allow you to get bigger screens since you will view "bigger images" on it, of course you take the 1080p, and low a little the graphics, i always would recommend buying the biggest screen, so if you in some games present lag, you can always reduce the resolution... while if you buy a 720p screen that is not possible.

Like i said before, if your screen is 1080p, use 1080p with lowest graphics, it will be much better than a resized 720p image...

 

[lakshitharxx]

it is not a quality preset, bigger screens requires higher resolutions, looking over a small screen at 720p and on a big screen at 1080p present no Quality difference. but the video card will have a much harder work when using a bigger array.

So if you have the option go for the 1080p screen that will allow you to get bigger screens since you will view "bigger images" on it, of course you take the 1080p, and low a little the graphics, i always would recommend buying the biggest screen, so if you in some games present lag, you can always reduce the resolution... while if you buy a 720p screen that is not possible.

Like i said before, if your screen is 1080p, use 1080p with lowest graphics, it will be much better than a resized 720p image...

Ya I thought the same thing about lowering resolution. doesn't it make my images blurry when i play at non-native resolution?

 

[ricardois]

Ya I thought the same thing about lowering resolution. doesn't it make my images blurry when i play at non-native resolution?

of course they will look blurry if the screen is too big for the resolution, you will be using more than one pixel for the same same image that would be using one pixel at 1920x1080, of course depending on your distance from the screen... that is why a 23.6 screen uses the same resolution than a 50" screen, because from distance it is good to have big pixels.

 

[lakshitharxx]

of course they will look blurry if the screen is too big for the resolution, you will be using more than one pixel for the same same image that would be using one pixel at 1920x1080, of course depending on your distance from the screen... that is why a 23.6 screen uses the same resolution than a 50" screen, because from distance it is good to have big pixels.

Then if games present lag i couldn't lower the resolution because it makes crappy images.. I did some research and everybody say not to go for non-native resolution.. Then my only choice is reducing the graphic quality to medium/low in very demanding games.. I know there won't be much difference between high and ultra but there will be noticeable difference between ultra and low.. So should i go for 1080p? or otherwise stay in 720p for now and later buy a better GPU and 1080p monitor? Also i saw everyone recommend bigger screen.. What is the reason?

 

[ricardois]

Then if games present lag i couldn't lower the resolution because it makes crappy images.. I did some research and everybody say not to go for non-native resolution.. Then my only choice is reducing the graphic quality to medium/low in very demanding games.. I know there won't be much difference between high and ultra but there will be noticeable difference between ultra and low.. So should i go for 1080p? or otherwise stay in 720p for now and later buy a better GPU and 1080p monitor? Also i saw everyone recommend bigger screen.. What is the reason?

Bigger screen is much more immersive, i would say minimum 21" and up to 27" for 1080p, YES go for 1080p, it is much better, and for gaming, playing at 720p on a 1080p screen will be no problem, it will be much better than just playing it on a small screen.

if you don't like to lower graphics on some specific games, just down to 720p, there will be no problems... at least you will have to option yo go to 1080p on lighter games.

YES go for 1080p

 

[lakshitharxx]

Bigger screen is much more immersive, i would say minimum 21" and up to 27" for 1080p, YES go for 1080p, it is much better, and for gaming, playing at 720p on a 1080p screen will be no problem, it will be much better than just playing it on a small screen.

if you don't like to lower graphics on some specific games, just down to 720p, there will be no problems... at least you will have to option yo go to 1080p on lighter games.

YES go for 1080p

I am going to buy a 22" BenQ led one.. Thanks ricardois.. Really appreciate your help..

 

[lakshitharxx]

Best answer selected by lakshitharxx.

 

[Mousemonkey]

This topic has been closed by Mousemonkey