Jump to content

4K Monitor 32" and Orbx Products/P3D v3


Recommended Posts

Hi all,

I am contemplating purchasing a 32" K4 Monitor using my present 28" monitors for support I.e. FSC, V Route etc. Looking at my system, could I or should I even consider this as an option. It is tough to believe that anything can improve the Orbx Scenery however I am very curious whether a K4 Monitor would work without negatively affecting the performance.

I should add that In addition to most regions, airports I have FTX Global, Pilots Global 2010, OLC Europe and Canada/Alaska and Vector and Cities for fat regions and Freeware Airports when they come out. All this on the P3D v3 platform.

Regards,

Rolf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you mean 4K? I guess :) If you do, then compare it with old resolution. If you have used multiple 28' monitors before, then your overall resolution was already close to 4K. If you were simming in 1080p, however, then 4K is about 4 times the pixels, and the performance drop will be noticable. What you can also do is to use a lower resolution on your new 4K, but that is kind of defeating it's purpose. My computer is stronger than yours and personally I wouldn't do 4K, it would wreck the performance. However I use FSX, and P3D V3 performs better. I still believe 4K is a long shot, and I don't recommend it, but someone who is using P3D can help out better here.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

4K takes a ton of power for (what I consider) acceptable performance in simming/gaming.


 


I currently use a 32" 1440p monitor I'm quite happy with, using a single gtx 980ti.


 


I would want at least 2 980ti's if I were to run any size monitor at 4k resolution.


 


A large monitor is fine (I enjoy mine), but I would stay clear of 4k until you can get some real video card muscle to run it.


 


Happy Flying :)


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Rolf,


I switched from 2560x1600 to 4096x2160 (31", 4K) and noticed only a minor drop of fps. The visual impression of i.e. ORBX scenery (sliders to the right) is of course much better (crisp), then before.  Even my 780ti graphics card with only 3 Gig memory managed the high resolution without problems.


Go and get it !


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Rolf,

I switched from 2560x1600 to 4096x2160 (31", 4K) and noticed only a minor drop of fps. The visual impression of i.e. ORBX scenery (sliders to the right) is of course much better (crisp), then before.  Even my 780ti graphics card with only 3 Gig memory managed the high resolution without problems.

Go and get it !

On a sidenote... I wondered about that crispness. Doesn't a higher resolution mainly have an effect on jaggy edges...? It seems to me that seeing ground textures at a higher resolution only makes it more obvious they aren't very high res? And don't late loading textures also become more obvious? I suppose you have to see it to understand the advantages... Up to now a 4K monitor mainly looks like a very expensive way to get rid of jaggies...
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On a sidenote... I wondered about that crispness. Doesn't a higher resolution mainly have an effect on jaggy edges...? It seems to me that seeing ground textures at a higher resolution only makes it more obvious they aren't very high res? And don't late loading textures also become more obvious? I suppose you have to see it to understand the advantages... Up to now a 4K monitor mainly looks like a very expensive way to get rid of jaggies...

 

My own experience, over the years, is that  increasing the resolution improves the crispness, decreases the jaggies and reduces the need for a stronger AA. At 2560*1440, I do not use any NI profile and P3D feels real nice (to me). Including the ground textures. Much better than the 1920 res. A little outside AA would make it better but not that much IMO and is not worth the loss of FPS. I suppose that going up to 4096*2160 (or even the false 4k, 3840*2160) is a nirvana of crispness :). . A prudent man, I'll wait the next generation of graphic cards though.

 

There is also that issue of some monitors (all?)  running the full res. at 30 Hz. I do not want any of that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My own experience, over the years, is that increasing the resolution improves the crispness, decreases the jaggies and reduces the need for a stronger AA. At 2560*1440, I do not use any NI profile and P3D feels real nice (to me). Including the ground textures. Much better than the 1920 res. A little outside AA would make it better but not that much IMO and is not worth the loss of FPS. I suppose that going up to 4096*2160 (or even the false 4k, 3840*2160) is a nirvana of crispness :). . A prudent man, I'll wait the next generation of graphic cards though.

There is also that issue of some monitors (all?) running the full res. at 30 GHz. I do not want any of that.

Ok, thanks. And actually: I am looking for a monitor that can do 30 hz because it seems to improve smoothness in P3D a LOT. I've read various reports already about people seeing P3D run on 30 hz and experiencing smoothness that can not be obtained in any other way.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, thanks. And actually: I am looking for a monitor that can do 30 hz because it seems to improve smoothness in P3D a LOT. I've read various reports already about people seeing P3D run on 30 hz and experiencing smoothness that can not be obtained in any other way

 

I had a bad experience of eye strain, some years back, going from a 75 to a 60 Hz screen. It took me quite some time to get used to it. I don't want to imagine what it'd be going from 60 to 30 Hz. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doesn't a higher resolution mainly have an effect on jaggy edges...?

 

Only if you make certain assumptions - i.e. that people are upgrading to 4K from low-dpi device such as big TVs. I guess the world is split three ways - those running large high-quality multi-screen displays, those running high-quality but relatively small single-screen displays, and those running low-quality single-screen displays such as big TVs. Only the last group will see better jaggies. If you upgrade from multi-screen to 4K you're likely not going to get more dpi and hence no impact on jaggies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regarding the OP's original question whether his graphics card can run acceptably at 4K resolution, you can actually test that for yourself. The GeForce 770 supports nVidia Dynamic Super Resolution (DSR) which enables the card to internally render the display at a higher resolution than the monitor supports, and then downsample the internal result to the monitor resolution before it gets displayed.

 


DSR was originally released only for the latest Maxwell GPUs (GeForce 750, 745 and the 900 series), but has later become available for Kepler and Fermi GPUs as well (Kepler is used in most of the 700 and 600 series, and Fermi in the 500 and 400 series).

 

So with your GeForce 770 and a 1920 x 1080 monitor, you can use DSR to make the card render the display at 3840 x 2160, which then gets downsampled to 1920 x 1080, but the performance hit will be as if you were using a monitor with 3840 x 2160 resolution. All you need to do is enable DSR in the nVidia Control Panel, and set P3D's display resolution to 3840 x 2160. 

 

When using DSR with P3D, you should also set your desktop resolution to the DSR resolution before starting P3D. Most games will automatically switch from your standard monitor resolution to the higher DSR setting, but P3D won't switch automatically (I'm guessing it's because it doesn't run true fullscreen, like most games do).

 

I use DSR in P3D v3 with my GeForce 970, rendering at 3620 x 1527 internally on my 2560 x 1080 monitor. It helps a lot with reducing transparency shimmers and giving a bit extra fine detail, with very little performance cost, and with the only disadvantage being that the menus and the UI is a bit smaller. I would like to go even higher than 3620 x 1527 but that would make the UI far to small to use.

 

I won't expect a GeForce 770 to run 4K resolution with acceptable performance. It's a 2 GB card, and 4K resolution really requires a 4 GB card. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...