Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
22 
Report this post
Dann, the cake was indeed a lie...
If you have a high end GPU though and get good FPS (120+ not 60) you can use DLAA for ultimate AA.
For best results you have to manually set DLSS to the latest version in the Nvidia app or a 3rd party app if you don't want that, DLSS Swapper is a good app.
And like said above PC gamers have been aiming higher than 60 FPS for quite some time.
And then some stuff is demanding, Cyberpunk 2077 fully juiced needs DLSS on at 1440P on my 5090 which is as good as it gets, some of the RTX remix stuff is crazy demanding also and needs DLSS for better frames.
And also remember on consoles they often have some graphical settings that are the same as low on PC and even lower than low at times.
The point of upscale is to gain performance, and try keep most, or nearly close to native image, depending how far being pushed for upscale that can affect the image, and performance these are your trade off.
Frame gen another thing is which add latency this introduces ghosting, while having native image, it add fake frames in place to keeping the image, depending how much on latency goes up may get ghosting.
DLSS has been heavy focus because it all about AI with Nvidia and market share so their goal make sure upscale & frame gen keep getting improved to be good as native, or better, which they have prove on their tech demos, and such, as well they created Reflex which is to combat against latency increase.
FSR getting better as well, but now following in Nvidia footsteps with FSR4.
1440p 21:9 or wider @ 120+ Hz all day every day
These 4K trendy folks today think that sub $500 4K TV looks good? Hmm and with a frame time that's through the roof
A GOOD 4K TV is like $2000
A "decent" one...
https://www.amazon.com/Hisense-75-Inch-Mini-LED-Google-75U7N/dp/B0CY4QVYCS/
Not amazing but just a budget "decent" looking one if you win the QC lottery.
The 85" is far worse in quality vs the 75" and has more concerning QC issues.
And the model # matters a lot. Not every 75" is the better model compared to the one I linked.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTbSK0EZpys
My friend is so mad he assumed it would be on par with the 75" and can't return it and no one is willing to pay more than $300 for it.
He's had it for 1 month.
It's brighter, far more dimming zones (3500 to 5000 depending on size vs 200 to 500), does 4k 144 and 1440p 288Hz with VRR and is cheaper than the hisense offering last I checked.
Im currently waiting on the 85 or 98 inch model to release here (I'm also very tempted to import the c9k from France lol).
It's even beats oled with brightness and refresh rate while thousands of local dimming zones really helps it play catch up on the blacks.
Really though, screens are subjective and should be approached based on a per use case scenario, but, for my requirements as a giant gaming and movie screen, the tcl c8k looks to be a winner.
They also have the C7k that is cheaper.
The c9k is what I really want 5000 local dimming zones!
Regardless of upscaling and frame gen, more raw power will always lead to a better experience as the higher the base res and frame rate before such tools are applied the better the final results.
8ms response time...