High resolution hardware requirement?

[ffslqprst]

Aight so what im wondering is what hardware resolutions mostly depend on(sorry about the confusing thread title).

Im currently playing left 4 dead maxed out settings 4xAA 8xAF at 1280×720 and i never drop below 40fps. Now why i'm asking is because im playing with a gtx 260 (216), amd x2 7750be (2,7Ghz@3,12Ghz) and 4gb RAM@1066mhz and i'm buying a new 24" monitor that supports 1920x1080.
Correct me if i'm wrong but im pretty sure that my bottle neck is the processor. What im hoping for is that resolution is mostly graficcard dependable so that i can use higher resolutions without seeing much of a drop in performance.

Is this the case..? //Thanks in advance

[Darkness]

Aight so what im wondering is what hardware resolutions mostly depend on(sorry about the confusing thread title).

Im currently playing left 4 dead maxed out settings 4xAA 8xAF at 1280×720 and i never drop below 40fps. Now why i'm asking is because im playing with a gtx 260 (216), amd x2 7750be (2,7Ghz@3,12Ghz) and 4gb RAM@1066mhz and i'm buying a new 24" monitor that supports 1920x1080.
Correct me if i'm wrong but im pretty sure that my bottle neck is the processor. What im hoping for is that resolution is mostly graficcard dependable so that i can use higher resolutions without seeing much of a drop in performance.

Is this the case..? //Thanks in advance

Um, it depends. at 3.12 dual core, that shouldnt be bottlenecking you, although they are amd, so maybe its a difference in brand. I run intel 2x 3.16@3.16 and can run l4d in 1920x1080 with everything else max between 60 and 150 (with wait for vsync (which I usually have on since my monitor only has a refresh rate of 60 hz anyway) it is a constant 60). But I would think with a gtx260, you should be getting better than 40 fps at 1280x720 with those settings.

What OS are you running?

What are you running in the background?

[ffslqprst]

But I would think with a gtx260, you should be getting better than 40 fps at 1280x720 with those settings.


It has never droped below 40 fps for me yet though it's usualy around 60-70fps during intense moments like cresendos and finales. Can go up all the way to 200fps in saferooms n such.

If the game never drops below 25fps im happy.


What OS are you running?

What are you running in the background?

Windows vista 64-bit

I've usualt got Avast realtime protection running in the background but nothing else major.
Cpu usage is at 0% and memory around 30% before i start steam up.

[Darkness]

It has never droped below 40 fps for me yet though it's usualy around 60-70fps during intense moments like cresendos and finales. Can go up all the way to 200fps in saferooms n such.

If the game never drops below 25fps im happy.



Windows vista 64-bit

I've usualt got Avast realtime protection running in the background but nothing else major.
Cpu usage is at 0% and memory around 30% before i start steam up.

Whew, 30% is a bit impressive for nothing in background. Not even steam yet. But good, 64bit OS, just checking lol.

But in any case, so what is your average/usual FPS. not your minimum FPS. And do you use wait for vsync?

[ffslqprst]

But in any case, so what is your average/usual FPS. not your minimum FPS. And do you use wait for vsync?

It differs to much from map to map for me to say exactly but i guess average is around 70-120

I'm currently not using vsync, when i first started the game up with recommended settings i felt a mouse movement delay. Pretty minor delay but still enoying enough for me to want to do something about it. Figured it had something to do with the grafic settings but since my fps was glued to 60 it had to be vsync. Removed it n havent had a problem since, could be that i got used to the delay but i think vsync was the problem.

[Darkness]

It differs to much from map to map for me to say exactly but i guess average is around 70-120

I'm currently not using vsync, when i first started the game up with recommended settings i felt a mouse movement delay. Pretty minor delay but still enoying enough for me to want to do something about it. Figured it had something to do with the grafic settings but since my fps was glued to 60 it had to be vsync. Removed it n havent had a problem since, could be that i got used to the delay but i think vsync was the problem.

Meh, vsync just relieves needless stress on your GPU. Since most monitors only refresh at 60 Hz, any more frames than 60 will be unseen and thus your GPU putting out the work to create more than 60 is a total waste of its power/resources. But, meh, do what you gotta do lol.

But alright, you may or may not have a problem running 1920x1080 with the current setup. I am not that good with nvidia cards, havent had one in some time on a desktop, but seeing your frames now, you could probably do it. I tried it out once, lowerd my settings down to bare minimum (resolution, aa, etc) when I can run maximum. Frankly, I only went from 40-150 (on maximum) to like 100 to 200 on minimum. So it isnt that big a jump.

And as far as what is bottlenecking you depends on the game. FPS's are more GPU intensive where as RTS's are more CPU intensive. So odds are in an FPS your GPU is the bottleneck and in an RTS your CPU is the bottleneck.

[ffslqprst]

you're probably right, tried changing 4xAA and 8xAF to the best options and didn't really see any noticable decrease in fps.

But what i'm asking though is if resolutions size only affects gpu, cpu or both of them.

I know that AA and AF are gpu dependant so by maxing them out without seeing much of a performance decrease it's obvious that my processor is the weakest link.
Though if resolution size is cpu dependant i will have a hard time going from my current resolution to 1920x1080 without seeing a pretty nasty performance decrease. And that's kinda why i'm asking so i won't regret buying a large monitor.

[Darkness]

you're probably right, tried changing 4xAA and 8xAF to the best options and didn't really see any noticable decrease in fps.

But what i'm asking though is if resolutions size only affects gpu, cpu or both of them.

I know that AA and AF are gpu dependant so by maxing them out without seeing much of a performance decrease it's obvious that my processor is the weakest link.
Though if resolution size is cpu dependant i will have a hard time going from my current resolution to 1920x1080 without seeing a pretty nasty performance decrease. And that's kinda why i'm asking so i won't regret buying a large monitor.

I think it is both. Although, it is going to be pre-dominantly a GPU thing since the GPU now has to render much much more. Well, for FPS's (meaning first person shooters, not frames per second, forgot to clarify that above. And RTS being real-time strategy) it will be mainly a GPU thing.

[ffslqprst]

Don't worry i got the whole fps rts thing ;) but i've also heard that left 4 dead isn't that GPU dependant (compared to other first person shooters).
Anyhow i'm pretty sure that i've got some extra juice in my 260 that isn't being used so in that case going with higher resolutions should work as a charm.

Thank you for taking time to answer my questions, trying my 24" monitor on friday so i will just have to wait n see.

[Darkness]

Don't worry i got the whole fps rts thing ;) but i've also heard that left 4 dead isn't that GPU dependant (compared to other first person shooters).
Anyhow i'm pretty sure that i've got some extra juice in my 260 that isn't being used so in that case going with higher resolutions should work as a charm.

Thank you for taking time to answer my questions, trying my 24" monitor on friday so i will just have to wait n see.

Lol, yeah. Actually ive heard that Valve does a very good job at making the game very CPU un-intensive. So GPU wise is what is most limiting. And since you have a comparable speed processor (after OC), the only thing I can tell you comparing my rig is that your GPU is slightly under mine (I think). I have a ati 4870 512mb. So, if you cant run it playably at that res, its probly your GPU.

My specs are:
4 gig ram DDR3, 1333 mhz
dual core 3.16 ghz (not sure of model, not at my desktop to look up either)
ati 4870 512mb

I run: Max settings, max res, 21.5in screen (i think...) So we have same ram, same proc (more or less).

[ffslqprst]

What resolutions exactly would that be for a 21.5"? And what aa/af are you using?

[Darkness]

I run 1920x1080. I run 8x AA and 16x AF (or whichever has which. I always forget, one has an 8x max the other has a 16x max) I run the highest of all details (so high or very high as applicable). I run vsync just for the heck of it, although its the first thing to go if I see problems.

[ffslqprst]

Ah nice, should not be much of a problem for me then. Thanks again for taking time, looking forward to try my new monitor now :p

[Darkness]

Ah nice, should not be much of a problem for me then. Thanks again for taking time, looking forward to try my new monitor now :p

No problem, hope it all works out for you :)