Does 4K DSR cause framerate loss compared to true 4K?

[qubit]

I think NVIDIA's new Dynamic Super Resolution feature is great for those of us like me with high end cards (mine is a 780 Ti) who have 2K (1080p) monitors to test our cards against the 4K resolution to see how well it would perform if we upgraded our monitors.

However, I've been wondering if DSR actually causes a framerate drop compared to driving a real 4K monitor. Could anyone with an NVIDIA card and 4K monitor please compare and let me know?

Free handy frame rate counter and benchmark tool: www.fraps.com

 

[m6tzg6r]

I also wonder the same, but my guess is Native 4K and DSR 4K tax the GPU the same, but i could be wrong, but i think i would be right.

My two 780's pull off 4K DSR very well, so if a real 4K monitor runs the same as 4K DSR then im pretty much 4K ready.

 

[CounterZeus]

I think it should drop, although I have no idea by how much:
1) you render at 4K (=speed of true 4K)
2) downscale to 1080p + gaussian filter (=performance loss vs true 4K)

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

Surely you can turn Aa off yo( to)counter it a bit?

Sorry bit too phoned

 

[Daemmon]

I can only help you with my experience.

I'm rolling a 960 @ 1080p. Tested it on several games and so far it performed slightly ABOVE what the benchmarks were reporting. DSR to 1440p and it performed slightly BELOW what the benchmarks were reporting (on what I assume are real 1440p resolutions).

It's not what you're asking specifically (1080p to 4K DSR) but anyway I do think that DSR has a small performance impact compared to plain ole rendering on the desired resolution.

 

[qubit]

Thanks for that. Sorry for the delay, I've only just seen your post.

Anyone else able to compare the two for me?

 

[Xxrandyxx]

No performance difference. I tested with my 1080p with 4k DSR vs native on GTA 5 and Dragon age inquisition.. Picture quality exactly the same. I am so happy now, I returned my 4k monitor for money for new GPU instead.

 

[Champ]

No performance difference. I tested with my 1080p with 4k DSR vs native on GTA 5 and Dragon age inquisition.. Picture quality exactly the same. I am so happy now, I returned my 4k monitor for money for new GPU instead.

Really? So a big 1080P monitor could potentially look as well as a big 4K?

 

[qubit]

No performance difference. I tested with my 1080p with 4k DSR vs native on GTA 5 and Dragon age inquisition.. Picture quality exactly the same. I am so happy now, I returned my 4k monitor for money for new GPU instead.

So same performance for you, ok thanks. I have to agree with Champ though about the picture quality, as it can't possibly be the same.

 

[newtekie1]

Really? So a big 1080P monitor could potentially look as well as a big 4K?

In my experience, no. It definitely isn't as clear and sharp as a real 4k monitor.

And there isn't a performance hit because the GPU has a scaler built into it, they have for several generations. The scaler doesn't use shades power, it is separate.

 

[Xxrandyxx]

Really? So a big 1080P monitor could potentially look as well as a big 4K?

I have a 27 Samsung s27B350h vs 27 samsung u28d590 4k monitor. These are the 2 that I tested. I believe my eyes and I believe myself for comparing these. I took pictures in game then I even used my phone to take pictures. Images and performance are so much alike that I can't find a single thing that stood out.. To be honest, I wanted to keep my 4k monitor, but I can't find a reason to.

So same performance for you, ok thanks. I have to agree with Champ though about the picture quality, as it can't possibly be the same.

Do me a favor, test this yourself if you don't believe me. Enable 4k DSR on 1080p, take pictures in game and also take pictures with your phone to compare. Open Amazon credit card account to buy 4k monitor and you can always return it. Make sure you record the fps. Ez right? Not much cost, online abit of your time. And I did just all that to see for myself

 

[qubit]

Thanks for the suggestion, but I'm not going to waste my time and effort verifying something so obvious.

I have no idea why they both looked the same to you, but I assure you there's a big difference, with 4K have four times the level of detail as 2K. Think about it: if there was no difference, then the 4K standard would not have been created as it wouldn't have been possible to sell it as "new and improved".

Note that taking a photo of the screens is a very bad way to try and compare them. You have to look at them directly with your own two eyes to properly see the difference and don't stand too far away either.

 

[Xxrandyxx]

Thanks for the suggestion, but I'm not going to waste my time and effort verifying something so obvious.

I have no idea why they both looked the same to you, but I assure you there's a big difference, with 4K have four times the level of detail as 2K. Think about it: if there was no difference, then the 4K standard would not have been created as it wouldn't have been possible to sell it as "new and improved".

Note that taking a photo of the screens is a very bad way to try and compare them. You have to look at them directly with your own two eyes to properly see the difference and don't stand too far away either.

Did you forget everything this discussion all about? It's not 1080p, it's 1080p DSR called dynamic super resolution. I guess I am done here. I hope you wont be disappointed when you find out after you bought the monitor that 4k DSR = 4k native monitor. Good luck!

Thanks for the suggestion, but I'm not going to waste my time and effort verifying something so obvious.


Note that taking a photo of the screens is a very bad way to try and compare them. You have to look at them directly with your own two eyes to properly see the difference and don't stand too far away either.

taking phone pictures were just the 2nd experiment. I looked at them with "my eyes" and capture screenshot with evga precision.
I guess I need a magnifying glass.

 

[qubit]

Did you forget everything this discussion all about? It's not 1080p, it's 1080p DSR called dynamic super resolution. I guess I am done here. I hope you wont be disappointed when you find out after you bought the monitor that 4k DSR = 4k native monitor. Good luck!

4K DSR cannot look as good as a 4K picture on 4K monitor! How can you even begin to think so? There's 4 times the number of pixels on the screen, making for a much more detailed picture.

I guess you didn't understand what I said about the new standard not making in the market without an actual improvement.

I get what you said about the phone picture, but it remains that it won't reveal a difference. So yeah, try it, but as you found out you can't tell.

 

[RCoon]

taking phone pictures were just the 2nd experiment. I looked at them with "my eyes" and capture screenshot with evga precision.
I guess I need a magnifying glass.

Please stop double posting, the forum rules ask you not to do this.

Also a 1080p display rendering at 4K DSR and scaling down to 1080p will not provide the same image quality as a true 4K monitor. It's a matter of lacking a few million pixels, and without those the image quality simply cannot be as good. There is no opinionated argument for this, it is simply a fact of displays.

Maybe your image quality requirements are so low that you don't notice/care.

 

[Xxrandyxx]

4K DSR cannot look as good as a 4K picture on 4K monitor! How can you even begin to think so? There's 4 times the number of pixels on the screen, making for a much more detailed picture.

I guess you didn't understand what I said about the new standard not making in the market without an actual improvement.

I get what you said about the phone picture, but it remains that it won't reveal a difference. So yeah, try it, but as you found out you can't tell.

Amazing, from someone who never experience a 4k monitor yet but defend it with all their lives. I hope someone else experience both monitors and comment on this.

Please stop double posting, the forum rules ask you not to do this.

Also a 1080p display rendering at 4K DSR and scaling down to 1080p will not provide the same image quality as a true 4K monitor. It's a matter of lacking a few million pixels, and without those the image quality simply cannot be as good. There is no opinionated argument for this, it is simply a fact of displays.

Maybe your image quality requirements are so low that you don't notice/care.

Lol I have a gtx 980 i7 4790k, I'm not sure what you mean by having low image quality requirement. It amazes me how people defend something so dearly without even experiencing it.

And for the forum rules, my fault, I'm new here. Thanks for telling me.

 

[qubit]

Amazing, from someone who never experience a 4k monitor yet but defend it with all their lives. I hope someone else experience both monitors and comment on this.

Yes, I've seen a real 4K display before, but I wouldn't need to. Also, as RCoon said, this isn't a matter up for debate, it's a fact.

You seem to be conveniently ignoring my explanations to you about why it has to be better, so sorry, but you're coming off as rather stupid now by continuing to argue about something that just isn't a matter of opinion.

 

[Xxrandyxx]

Yes, I've seen a real 4K display before, but I wouldn't need to. Also, as RCoon said, this isn't a matter up for debate, it's a fact. You seem to be conveniently ignoring my explanations to you about why it has to be better and sorry, but you're coming off as rather stupid now by continuing to argue about something that just isn't a matter of opinion.

Yah I'm the stupid one that experienced it. Good luck when you find out the truth. Anyway to answer your question fps performance for both are exactly the same. I hope my eyes didn't decieve me with the fps counter as well. You believing this or not wont matter anymore.

 

[qubit]

Yep and you're retarded. I'm done trying to help some idiots asking a question on the Internet who doesn't accept the answer he doesn't like. I didn't say that you couldn't tell a different. I told you to go out and experience it yourself. This is what I see and that's what I have been saying. If you don't like my opinion, you didn't have to try to argue with me.

Nice, your first posts on this forum and you start arguing and insulting an established member, lol. You're obviously incapable of listening to a rational argument and you just don't listen to what I'm telling you.

Actually, you did say you can't tell the difference:

Picture quality exactly the same

I hope you wont be disappointed when you find out after you bought the monitor that 4k DSR = 4k native monitor.

I'm going to tell you yet again: I've seen 4K and can clearly see the improvement. So, why do you keep on telling me to see for myself when I've already seen it? It looks like you have reading comprehension issues, sheesh.

And again, 4K is much better, that's not up for debate. It's a fact so you should stop arguing about it and making yourself look a fool. Look, even Caps has now given his opinion of your rants on here. Just Google it FFS if you want to learn more about it.

 

[Xxrandyxx]

https://www.flickr.com/photos/132182650@N06/17165399208/in/photostream/
here are the photos.
Note: these photos look so whitish for some reason. It doesn't look plain white like this on my pc. I am not sure why flickr can't upload these pictures correctly.

These are the 3 pictures of 1080p NO DSR, 4k Samsung Native and 1080P with 4K DSR. If you still don't believe me, I guess let's end this topic here all right? I think I spent enough time arguing with a stranger.

 

[qubit]

I've also spent enough time arguing with a stranger, especially one who just ignore every point I'm saying to them.

For what it's worth, I've looked at the pictures and can confirm that screenshots don't cut it, but it must be seen in person. If you were to do a true comparison, the 4K screenshot would be twice as long and twice as high as a 2K one and these aren't, for some reason. Did you set your DSR to 4x? You will then see a resolution of 3840x2160 in the driver control panel. Setting another value will give you a lower "super" resolution.

With a 4K screenshot, the extra detail would be there, but you would have to pan and scan to see it all on a 1080p monitor if the pixels are rendered at 1:1 with the monitor's resolution. Taking a look at curves and small details would make for the most obvious differences. If you then scale that 4K picture to fit the 2K resolution, you would lose the benefit of that resolution, making them look the same. It might look a bit more antialiased perhaps, depending on the scaler, but that's it.

Note that a 4K DSR screenshot will look identical to a 4K screenshot when using a 4K monitor. The video scaler (post-processing to get it on a 2K display) is the only difference.

 

[AsRock]

Please stop double posting, the forum rules ask you not to do this.

Also a 1080p display rendering at 4K DSR and scaling down to 1080p will not provide the same image quality as a true 4K monitor. It's a matter of lacking a few million pixels, and without those the image quality simply cannot be as good. There is no opinionated argument for this, it is simply a fact of displays.

Maybe your image quality requirements are so low that you don't notice/care.

That's true but even so, but i have tested this with so many games there is a difference in performance and image quality differences. Not sure about nVidia but with AMD's CCC goes too 3200x1800.

Which is why some games i use SMAAx4 if it's @ 1080 and if running 3200x1800 i don't use AA ( no need ), and using 3200x1800 all so courses higher electric usage too.

Aand of course there is a difference or we be on 320x240 res still lol.

 

[qubit]

@AsRock Indeed, I have noticed that running a higher resolution does make the graphics card run hotter, regardless of brand or model. With vsync unlocked I don't understand why, because the card should be doing the same amount of work regardless of the resolution (assuming no CPU bottleneck) and will just go round the loop faster for a lower resolution.

 

[Xxrandyxx]

I've also spent enough time arguing with a stranger, especially one who just ignore every point I'm saying to them.

For what it's worth, I've looked at the pictures and can confirm that screenshots don't cut it, but it must be seen in person. If you were to do a true comparison, the 4K screenshot would be twice as long and twice as high as a 2K one and these aren't, for some reason. Did you set your DSR to 4x? You will then see a resolution of 3840x2160 in the driver control panel. Setting another value will give you a lower "super" resolution.

With a 4K screenshot, the extra detail would be there, but you would have to pan and scan to see it all on a 1080p monitor if the pixels are rendered at 1:1 with the monitor's resolution. Taking a look at curves and small details would make for the most obvious differences. If you then scale that 4K picture to fit the 2K resolution, you would lose the benefit of that resolution, making them look the same. It might look a bit more antialiased perhaps, depending on the scaler, but that's it.

Note that a 4K DSR screenshot will look identical to a 4K screenshot when using a 4K monitor. The video scaler (post-processing to get it on a 2K display) is the only difference.

they are 3840x2160... that's what it says when you mouse over them... and yes it's 4x of course or it would render this discussion useless. Anyway I won't comment on anything anymore. From my experience, I'd rather save the money and upgrade my gtx 980 to an SLI or new gpu like gtx 980 ti playing at 4k dsr than playing on a 4k native monitor with a single GPU because 4k at gtx 980 is crazy for some titles like GTA 5 or dragon age. dragon age gta 5 needs at least sli 980 or for the best performance is sli gtx titan x which i am waiting for gtx 980 ti to buy them sli, could save me good amount of money than buying 2 gtx titan x