That depends of the size of the monitor, big tv screen big resolution i think.

2 hours ago, MrFuzzy said:

The best resolution is always the native one. 

Thanks, I always forget that.   No wonder 4K looks best on my BenQ 32" -- it's native res is 4K

Even nVidia image sharpening (from the nvidia control panel) on a lower res doesn't make the gauges look as good as the native res (4K)

5 hours ago, Mace said:

  You guys running less than 4K...aren't things like gauges not as crisp at the lower resolutions?   I tried 1440p (wanting a 60 lock) and I had to go back to 4K.  Is that just my monitor (it's native res is 4K) or am I missing some setting to keep things sharp at lower resolutions?

I run a 27"  at 2560*1440  with a 1080 and the gauges look sharp enough for my not so sharp eyesight.  

Anyway a good question. I can't upgrade my rig right now (how original !) but I am pondering the 2560*1440 vs 4k question. I suppose going for a larger screen would call for 4k.

1 hour ago, Dominique_K said:

I run a 27"  at 2560*1440  with a 1080 and the gauges look sharp enough for my not so sharp eyesight.  

Anyway a good question. I can't upgrade my rig right now (how original !) but I am pondering the 2560*1440 vs 4k question. I suppose going for a larger screen would call for 4k.

Yes but with a GTX 1080 4K would be too heavy...

Also, have you tried 2560x1440 with render scaling at 70-80 instead of 1920x1080?

6 hours ago, rka said:

There is no real reason to keep 30% of your VRAM unused. If there are no stutters, why wouldn't you want to use the full amount of VRAM?

I'm on 4k with a 2070 on a 27" screen.

I was concerned that exhausting vram would cause the odd CTD.

bs

15 minutes ago, MrFuzzy said:

Yes but with a GTX 1080 4K would be too heavy...

Also, have you tried 2560x1440 with render scaling at 70-80 instead of 1920x1080?

Yes I know, my thoughts are in the perspective of building a new rig.

2560*1440 at a render scaling of 100 works well for me in MFS and I do not want to go back to 1920*1080 . One of the best upgrades of my simming was 8 years ago when I went from 1080 to 1440. 

4k on a 78" Samsung TV @30 Hz. Best experience ever. 😉

I think there are 2 point in this topic

1) Whats best to look at? 

Well how far away do you sit for a start and how good are your eyes?

2) Whats best to run the sim? Easy 1080p

Now balance the two. If you have a huge tv then you need 4k.

But like it or not the hit on performance is huge at 4k. Only really do 3090 like 4k.

Personly for me I went for a 32" monitor @1440p I also sit very close to it around 50cm away. For me the res is fine, am sure 4k would be even sharper but then for me the FPS is to great hit.

So there is no wrong or right here its personly taste. 

"The best resolution" is the one that suits your needs.

Edited June 11, 20214 yr by Nyxx

25 minutes ago, ThomseN_inc said:

4k on a 78" Samsung TV @30 Hz. Best experience ever. 😉

how far from the screen are you seated ?

I run 4 screens from the Sim computer.

Windowed out the wind screen on the top 3. So 4000-5000x1000 roughly Windowed main screens.

Instruments on the lower one either AirManager or pop outs.

And a few other tablets and laptops for charts, plates etc.

5 year old system usually 30-50 fps. Lower over NYC etc.

13 minutes ago, Nyxx said:

  

"The best resolution" is the one that suits your needs.

Of course, of course... 

 Hmmm... But I look at how wide a Corsair or  Spitfire front panel is  (I dunno why I chose these examples ?) and how wide is my 27" screen. The later is a bit smaller than the former 😏.  So suppose  I get  a larger screen, wouldn't it be cool for, how do they call it, oh yes immersion  😁 ? Like being in front of the real thing ? 

That would be why I'd go 4k as a larger screen requires, I suppose, sharper resolution. 

But all this is daydreaming as there is no way to to build up a new rig these days at a reasonable cost.

1080Ti, Intel i9 (8086k) running at 5.1 Ghz, 32 Gb ram at 3600.

I can't quite believe the performance I am getting. 

I run at 4k scaled at 70% on a 4k 27 inch monitor.  Settings high / ultra.  I can hold 30 fps most of the time (I get the odd drop off in London city etc., which is to be expected).
With all  the testing and tweaking I have done, this is definitely the best for my kind of spec. 

I do use sharpening from Nvidia CP at 50%, as when turned on in the user config, I find it is too much, it looks unnaturally too sharp, but likewise, no sharpening at all looks a bit too bleary on the instruments, so 50% seems good to me.

I get pauses / mini-pauses, but these are nothing to do with framerate, and seem to happen in those random (and specific) places that should not really trouble the PC.  (talked about in another thread somewhere).

Overall though, I am really impressed with the performance.  It should be even better with the improvements Asobo have announced for testing.

Also, I lock at 30 fps, so the card stays nice and cool and quiet, and no stuttering.  If you can't make 60 fps it is pointless aiming for anything else really.

47 minutes ago, Dominique_K said:

how far from the screen are you seated ?

I'd say 2 meters... i'm more of a casual simmer...sitting in my Gaming beanbag having the stick and mouse on the side.

Works out pretty well for me.

Playing on a huge TV also works great for other games of course. 

Edited June 11, 20214 yr by ThomseN_inc

2 hours ago, bean_sprout said:

I was concerned that exhausting vram would cause the odd CTD.

bs

Zero issues here. As a side note I max out VRAM in all games when possible. I bought 8GB to use 8GB 😄

I have to correct myself though, it's a 2080 actually. 

4k on a 43" native 4k tv about 3ft away.  all settings maxed except for my preference of motion blur and bloom off.  vram usage is of no concern of mine 😜