The physical size of a monitor is not relevant to performance, it's the resolution setting/number of pixels.  At 1920 x 1080, that's 2,073,600 the video card has to drive.  Getting a physically larger monitor with the same resolution (1920 x 1080) looks exactly the same to the video card and work load is identical, so no changes to settings would be needed.  Reducing the resolution to 1366 x 768, that's only 1,049,088 pixels, or half the resolution.  So it's like doubling the power of your video card or halving it's workload.  So it's no wonder you can drive the setting up higher.  A 4K monitor has a resolution of 3840 × 2160 which is 8,294,400 pixels which equates to 4 times the resolution of your prior 1920 x 1080 settings.  That would put quite the load on the video card.  So when quoting settings, it's important to also point out what resolution you're running at to keep things in context.  I run 2560 x 1440 (3.6M pixels)...no way can I run 8xSSAA+FXAA.  So keep in mind that if you're shopping for a 4K monitor, it's probably going to require a new video card or reduced settings (maybe substantially) from a 1366 x 768 setting.

 

Also a monitor looks best at its native resolution, which is always the number of physical pixels the monitor contains.  Using a lower resolution will create artifacts because a 1366 x 768 (as an example) just doesn't fit exactly into a physical 1920 x 1080 matrix...so the video drivers will interpolate as best they can.  Artifacts are particularly noticeable when looking at text in windows.  In many cases it can look awful...and that's the reason.  And with lower resolution on a large monitor, fonts will tend to look less smooth overall.  But like Jiimmy said, if it works, enjoy!

The physical size of a monitor is not relevant to performance, it's the resolution setting/number of pixels.  At 1920 x 1080, that's 2,073,600 the video card has to drive.  Getting a physically larger monitor with the same resolution (1920 x 1080) looks exactly the same to the video card and work load is identical, so no changes to settings would be needed.  Reducing the resolution to 1366 x 768, that's only 1,049,088 pixels, or half the resolution.  So it's like doubling the power of your video card or halving it's workload.  So it's no wonder you can drive the setting up higher.  A 4K monitor has a resolution of 3840 × 2160 which is 8,294,400 pixels which equates to 4 times the resolution of your prior 1920 x 1080 settings.  That would put quite the load on the video card.  So when quoting settings, it's important to also point out what resolution you're running at to keep things in context.  I run 2560 x 1440 (3.6M pixels)...no way can I run 8xSSAA+FXAA.  So keep in mind that if you're shopping for a 4K monitor, it's probably going to require a new video card or reduced settings (maybe substantially) from a 1366 x 768 setting.

 

Also a monitor looks best at its native resolution, which is always the number of physical pixels the monitor contains.  Using a lower resolution will create artifacts because a 1366 x 768 (as an example) just doesn't fit exactly into a physical 1920 x 1080 matrix...so the video drivers will interpolate as best they can.  Artifacts are particularly noticeable when looking at text in windows.  In many cases it can look awful...and that's the reason.  And with lower resolution on a large monitor, fonts will tend to look less smooth overall.  But like Jiimmy said, if it works, enjoy!

In my last post, I said that I had switched TV/Monitors.  This one is 32" at 1920 x 1080 and is the same resolution as my previous monitor.  I am still running at 8xSSAA+FXAA and still getting the numbers.  Yes, I agree with your analysis above, but what I am saying is that it didn't change FRs with the higher resolution.  I still stick by the Nvidia panel setting, and offered it for no reason other than for others to try and see if it helps.  If it doesn't, just go back.  Nothing lost except a few minutes.  As you and Jimmy have said - it works, and I am enjoying.

 

John

Oh yeah, my mistake.  I thought you were saying you thought you would have to reduce your resolution because you bought a larger display, but you actually said the new display (TV) had a lower resolution.  Yep...it's clear now.  By the way, are you saying you're running the 8xSSAA setting on the nVidia setting directly?  If so, then what do you set it to inside XP?  Thanks!  

No - In my original post I said that I had only changed the Nvidia/Manage 3D Settings to Antialiasing - FXAA to ON (Default is OFF)

 

Inside XP, it is set to 8 x SSAA + FXAA.

 

They were the only changes.

 

Just finished a A350 flight and the lowest FR I saw was at landing 28 - 29.  I can live with that.  GPU-Z reports 4060GB usage, which means my card is maxed out, but it works!

 

John

OK thanks.  Apparently I'm having difficulty reading today.  :(

I run 2560 x 1440 (3.6M pixels)...no way can I run 8xSSAA+FXAA.

 

It's worth noting that 2560 x 1440 on a 32" monitor is very much a sweet spot... looks wonderful and doesn't have the super fine pixel pitch associated with a smaller high resolution screen.