Want a UHD monitor but run P3D at QHD

[diajohn 169]

I know my computer is getting a bit long in the tooth but runs P3D decently at 30FPS almost always fully loaded.  Its an old I-2500K o/c to 4.3 with a 6GB 1060 video card.    I want a bigger monitor and UHD seems to be the way to go but my poor old computer would come to its knees trying to run P3D at that resolution.

My financial compromise is to get the 27" UHD monitor and run it at 1440P.  If it struggles too much then a GTX 1660 TI should help out.  What do you think?

Opinions please.

John

[Bert Pieke 7,585]

You can still get 1080p monitors..  I have one.

27" is a nice size

[diajohn 169]

Bert, I considered that but chose to move up because my resolution would decrease at 27" 1080P compared to my current 23.8 at 1080P.  I am going as much for sharpness as size although a 27" is where I want to be.  That would take me from 91 to 108 PPI at 1440P

[Bert Pieke 7,585]

It is always best if you can run at the native resolution of the monitor..

So, if 1440p is what you are after, get a 1440p monitor!

Edited July 23, 2019 by Bert Pieke

[diajohn 169]

Thats likely where I will end up but wanted to ask if anyone has a UHD they are running at 1440P with P3D and how they felt it worked. 

Just trying to futureproof a bit and watch some 4k content on my computer.

[Jetset408 108]

Edit - misread. I have a 1440p monitor and run at that. Never expect good results from using non native resolutions. You have been warned. You can always sell a 1440p in future and buy a 4k which will come down in price anyway over time.

But i will vouch for 1440p. Love it. Mine is 32" so i use 4x MSAA with it. A smaller sized UHD monitor may not need any AA. Running off a 1080Ti, I get near constant 30fps+ and plenty of GPU headroom, whatever the situation with medium/high settings. Moreover, I can actually read the text on Fslabs/PMDG plane instruments!

I did have a 4K but even on my 1080Ti, I wasn't happy with the FPS in situations such as Fslabs/EGLL/overcast/dynamic lighting. 

But now I am!!!!!

Edited July 23, 2019 by Jetset408

[Ray Proudfoot 8,954]

11 hours ago, diajohn said:

Thats likely where I will end up but wanted to ask if anyone has a UHD they are running at 1440P with P3D and how they felt it worked. 

Just trying to futureproof a bit and watch some 4k content on my computer.

I have a superb BenQ 32" UHD monitor and instruments on the PMDG737 are pin sharp at that resolution. But I also fly FSL Concorde which remains a 32-bit version so I have to downscale my display to 1920*1080. With a few tweaks the image quality is acceptable but still not as good as a native 1920*1080 display. And that's with a very expensive monitor.

The advice offered here is sound. Always run at the native resolution otherwise IQ is compromised. 1440p will give you a modest improvement in sharpness over 1920*1080 but no more. For UHD you probably need a 1080Ti or equivalent and a new CPU. In other words, a new system.

[ckyliu 1,749]

I run 1440p at 27" and it's great. My research indicated that 4K doesn't become markedly beneficial until you reach 32"+, and I'm happy with the selection I made.

[diajohn 169]

Thanks to all  of you.  I hoped for a better read but you confirmed my original thought that I should forget the 4K for now and upgrade to a 2K 1440P.  Maybe its finally time to bite the bullet and build a new system.  It may be a good time in a month or so with all of the new hardware released or ready to be released.

 

John

[ckyliu 1,749]

Just a note to say 2K ≠ 1440p (1440p is actually 2.5K or WQHD).
2K is 1080p but a little bit wider (it's 18:9 instead of 16:9). Do check when ordering your screen!

I actually hate 4K as terminology, the TV industry copied the movie industry measuring horizontal rather than vertical resolution because the bigger number sounded like a better improvement to customers (4K is 2048p, the latter is a closer number to FulllHD's 1080p)

 

Edited July 24, 2019 by ckyliu

[Ray Proudfoot 8,954]

19 hours ago, ckyliu said:

I actually hate 4K as terminology, the TV industry copied the movie industry measuring horizontal rather than vertical resolution because the bigger number sounded like a better improvement to customers (4K is 2048p, the latter is a closer number to FulllHD's 1080p)

You’re not alone. Very little equipment is actually 4K. That would require a horizontal resolution of 4096. I’ve never seen 4K monitors available although I believe projectors are available at that resolution.

The correct terminology is UHD which is 4 times the resolution of FullHD. 3840*2160.

But I suppose 4K sounds sexier than UHD hence the use of it. 🤨