Tom's Hardware > Forum > Graphic & Displays > Nvidia > Question - Gaming Resolution

Question - Gaming Resolution

Forum Graphic & Displays : Nvidia - Question - Gaming Resolution

Tom's Hardware: Over 1.4 million members in 6 different countries available to answer all your high-tech questions. Sign up now! Its free!
Ask the community Add a reply
Word :    Username :           
 
slick3   08-01-2009 at 12:14:43 PM

Okay so i was playing prototype on my 20 inch monitor with a Geforce 9800 GT at 1440X900 at maximum settings the other day.

I decided to lower the resolution to 1280 X 720 for some extra performance but instead my FPS decreased by 2. I then tried the max resolution which is 1680 X 1050 and my FPS increased by 1 compared to when i was using 1440 X 900.

So then i did some benchmarks ,

Cs Source :

1440 X 900 = 115.52

1680 X 1050 = 119.12

Passmark :

1440 X 900 = 29.4

1680 X 1050 = 44.1

Can someone please tell me what is going on , why is my FPS increasing when it should decrease, and its like that with every other game ....

PC spec :
Windows 7 Ultimate
3GB DDR2
Geforce 9800GT
AMD X3 8450
500GB HDD

Add a reply
Sponsored Links
Register or log in to remove.
strangestranger   08-01-2009 at 12:53:00 PM

Could just be a cpu limitation. At 2.1 it ain't the fastest and seeing the CSS fps it looks about right.

What fps do you get in prototype?

------------------------------ I'm a git, deal with it.

Antec 1200,PC Power & Cooling 750,Gigabyte DS4-x48,Intel Q9550@3.4 W/Xigmatek S1283,8GB OCZ DDR2 800,ATI 4870X2,X-FI>CA 640C amp>Tannoy R300/Senn 595's
 Reply to strangestranger
slick3   08-01-2009 at 01:31:09 PM

Well it depends , but i always get above 40 FPS at max settings

Reply to slick3
pat mcgroin   08-01-2009 at 03:42:46 PM

I would think that it is because @1280x720 the card is doing less work due to the lower pixel count.
And I could be wrong here but at 1690x1050 (the native 20 inch resolution) the monitor is taking over the scaling duties and freeing up the video card a bit. Its generally best to run at the native resolution for this reason.

Reply to pat mcgroin
strangestranger   08-01-2009 at 03:48:54 PM

That doesn't make sense, a gpu has a fixed amount of power, the less pixels to process the more frames per second it can output. Every review done shows that the lower the resolution, then the faster the fps.

The second point I am not sure of as the OP has not mentioned if he has any monitor or gpu scaling at work.

------------------------------ I'm a git, deal with it.

Antec 1200,PC Power & Cooling 750,Gigabyte DS4-x48,Intel Q9550@3.4 W/Xigmatek S1283,8GB OCZ DDR2 800,ATI 4870X2,X-FI>CA 640C amp>Tannoy R300/Senn 595's
 Reply to strangestranger
pat mcgroin   08-01-2009 at 06:52:02 PM

Oops your right. I misread the original post.
I thought it said increased at 1280.
Please disregard.

Reply to pat mcgroin
jaydeejohn   08-01-2009 at 07:22:01 PM

Id go with the game benches, which could just be margin of error, and youve reached your cards or cpus max output.

------------------------------ I went drifting, thru the capitols of tin, where men cant walk and cant freely talk, and sons turn their fathers in
 Reply to jaydeejohn
slick3   08-01-2009 at 11:11:31 PM

But if i reached my cpu's max output , how come i get more fps when playing at 1680 x 1050 than 1440 x 900, shouldn't the fps be the same .....

Reply to slick3
strangestranger   08-01-2009 at 11:40:50 PM

I thought that was what you said was happening?

If you want more fps then something needs to be overclocked.

Do you get the same fps when you turn down the gfx settings as well as the resolution?

------------------------------ I'm a git, deal with it.

Antec 1200,PC Power & Cooling 750,Gigabyte DS4-x48,Intel Q9550@3.4 W/Xigmatek S1283,8GB OCZ DDR2 800,ATI 4870X2,X-FI>CA 640C amp>Tannoy R300/Senn 595's
 Reply to strangestranger
jitpublisher   08-01-2009 at 11:51:02 PM

Wow, like 10 posts because you cannot figure out a 2 or 1 FPS difference when you change your resolution. I think we all need to get out of the house and go do something.........

Message quoted 1 times
Reply to jitpublisher
Zenthar   08-02-2009 at 12:16:45 AM

jitpublisher wrote :

Wow, like 10 posts because you cannot figure out a 2 or 1 FPS difference when you change your resolution. I think we all need to get out of the house and go do something.........

I would agree for the CS Source benchmark, but his Passmark score has a difference of ~50% (30 vs 44).

Have you tried to run each test multiple times? You never know if something might have started in the background and messed up the test.

Reply to Zenthar
jaydeejohn   08-02-2009 at 12:59:01 AM

I always say, if its close to what others do, and Im happy with the results Im getting playing games, whats does bungholio marks really mean?
If something in his system is maxed out, he will run the same fps, and 2-4 fps of 114 fps is within the margin of error, even for the pros

------------------------------ I went drifting, thru the capitols of tin, where men cant walk and cant freely talk, and sons turn their fathers in
 Reply to jaydeejohn
geofelt   08-02-2009 at 02:27:42 AM

Just to speculate, I think there may be two factors at work.
1) If the vga card is strong enough that the cpu becomes the limiting factor, then you will not see much difference changing resolutions.
2) The closer the game resolution is to the native resolution, then there is less work needed to adjust the output.

Reply to geofelt
Zenthar   08-02-2009 at 02:34:38 AM

When outputting to a LCD (no clue if it applies to old CRTs as well), what part of the computer does the "resolution corrections" between the configures resolution and the LCD's native resolution? CPU, video card, LCD?

Reply to Zenthar
jaydeejohn   08-02-2009 at 06:10:02 AM

OK, I'll say this. Drivers are tweaked at/for certain resolutions. How many benches from a review where its shows the same card on the same setup against other cards same cards same setup, where it doesnt scale properly from 1 res to another? Especially on just released cards, with brand new drivers. Usually the reveiwer leaves us with something like "for some reason, this card doesnt scale as well at blank res, as it did in the lower and higher res" and never really addresses this.
If somethings maxed out, then the most common res was the one most tweaked, and would show possibly this small variation, which is 16x10 as the highest by a small margin. So to me its a driver issue


Message edited by jaydeejohn on 08-02-2009 at 06:11:18 AM
------------------------------ I went drifting, thru the capitols of tin, where men cant walk and cant freely talk, and sons turn their fathers in
 Reply to jaydeejohn
jaydeejohn   08-02-2009 at 06:24:52 AM

From PassMark:
Different Video Card Device Drivers & settings
"Different versions of Video Card drivers can also have an large impact on the result. In some cases some of the PC's might have had configuration issues leasing to sub-optimal results."
http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/graph_notes.html
Im assuming leasing is a spelling error and is meant "leading"


Message edited by jaydeejohn on 08-02-2009 at 06:26:44 AM
------------------------------ I went drifting, thru the capitols of tin, where men cant walk and cant freely talk, and sons turn their fathers in
 Reply to jaydeejohn
Ask the community Add a reply
Tom's Hardware > Forum > Graphic & Displays > Nvidia > Question - Gaming Resolution
Go to:

There are 908 identified and unidentified users. To see the list of identified users, Click here.

Forum map
Bestofmedia Forum ©
2000-2009 Bestofmedia Group
Page generated in 0.610 seconds
Sponsored links
  • Ask the community now
  • Publish
Ad
Related Topics
See all relatives topics
They won a badge
Join us in greeting them
How do I win badges?