Hacker News Reader

Comment by throwawayffffas | Hacker News Reader

I got a r9 285 in 2020 something while the crypto frenzy was still eating up all the gpus. It was 6 years old, got it for like 60 bucks if I remember correctly, best purchase ever, I got to play gta V at 60fps again.

Try to remember back to 2015 the graphics were not that bad. 4k performance was poor but for 1080p 60fps on pretty much anything.

View on HN

4K is kind of pointless for gaming anyway, IMO. I've got a 32" 4K 165 Hz OLED screen and I much prefer 1080p at 165 Hz over 4K at <= 60 Hz and a pegged GPU. I don't really see pixels either way. 4K is nice for text, though!

Note: The GPU is an AMD 6800 XT, which is AFAIK more fiddly for AI upscaling. I'm not interested at all in frame generation, it does nothing for latency.

4k works great when combined with FSR. On a 9070 GPU the frametime cost of FSR 4 is around 2 msec so you can just render the game at 1080P, upscale to 4k.

I usually play like this, it gives a very sharp image at 120-180W with a barely audible fan.

Frankly it looks fine already and I have no appetite for dealing with that stuff on Linux. I do not like 720p on 1080p screens FWIW, so it's not like I don't care about image quality at all. I guess a 2x scaling has no ugly, irregular scaling artifacts and it helps that OLED pixels aren't perfect rectangles. Plus, of course, 1080 is more than 720.

FSR 4/DLSS/Xess is something else than a simple spatial image based scaler though.

If you haven't tried machine learning based upscalers do give it a try! The newest generation (DLSS 4.5/FSR 4.1) are in general preferred by users over a native image since they provide a far superior way of native AA.

AI based frame-gen is also very good. 4k/120 Hz (1080p/60 FPS rendered) is very doable on mid-range cards these days.

Yeah, IMO more people should do 1440p or 1080p, it's _way_ easier to drive and cheaper and it looks great for gaming.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com