I have a nice 2560x1440 monitor. I also have a decent CPU (i4690k 4.0Ghz and the 970 gtx twin frozen 4gb GPU). So I'm hoping this would allow me to run these games well.
Not sure how best to set my resolution.
I want full screen. I also want the best possible resolution that my rig can handle.
Would I set the options to "fullscreen" and the window resolution at 2560x1440 and then the IR to windows multiple of 640?
Thx for the advice!
(11-14-2014, 04:32 AM)pleiades7 Wrote: [ -> ]I have a nice 2560x1440 monitor. I also have a decent CPU (i4690k 4.0Ghz and the 970 gtx twin frozen 4gb GPU). So I'm hoping this would allow me to run these games well.
Not sure how best to set my resolution.
I want full screen. I also want the best possible resolution that my rig can handle.
Would I set the options to "fullscreen" and the window resolution at 2560x1440 and then the IR to windows multiple of 640?
Thx for the advice!
Yes to all, that way you will get the optimal res for your monitor.
Wouldn't setting it to auto of 640 be equal to 4x IR? In that cause, would it be better to manually set the IR to 5x or 6x?
(11-14-2014, 05:00 AM)Link_to_the_past Wrote: [ -> ] (11-14-2014, 04:32 AM)pleiades7 Wrote: [ -> ]I have a nice 2560x1440 monitor. I also have a decent CPU (i4690k 4.0Ghz and the 970 gtx twin frozen 4gb GPU). So I'm hoping this would allow me to run these games well.
Not sure how best to set my resolution.
I want full screen. I also want the best possible resolution that my rig can handle.
Would I set the options to "fullscreen" and the window resolution at 2560x1440 and then the IR to windows multiple of 640?
Thx for the advice!
Yes to all, that way you will get the optimal res for your monitor.
That's what I thought. I noticed a little slowdown with the emu when I try to set it to 4xIR but the res for that is higher than my monitor allows. Tried to set it to auto (windowed) though I set the fullscreen setting to ON and the window resolution to 2560x1440 but I noticed a touch of slowdown and, truthfully, it didn't make sense to me to do that.
However, just to make sure, would setting the fullscreen to ON + the windowed resolution to 2560X1440 + the IR to Auto (windowed) yield the highest possible resolution?
Again, my only goal is to get as close to 2560x1440 as possible while squeezing out the highest possible Dolphin resolution WITHOUT introducing unnecessary slowdown.
You have a GTX 970, I'm surprised you're getting any slowdowns at 4x IR. I have a GTX 770M, and I can hit 3-4x IR depending on the game with different levels of AA/AF, which then gets down sampled to 1080p (looks awesome)
In Nvidia Control panel, make a profile for Dolphin, and make sure that it is set to use maximum performance. Then what I do is set the resolution to auto, use OpenGL (fastest for Nvidia), and set IR to 4x, AA to 16x, AF to 4x MSSA. You should easily be able to reach that on yours
(11-14-2014, 06:52 AM)KHg8m3r Wrote: [ -> ]what I do is set the resolution to auto, use OpenGL (fastest for Nvidia), and set IR to 4x, AA to 16x, AF to 4x MSSA. You should easily be able to reach that on yours
What I'd do is disable all unnecessary enhancements such as MSAA (too slow, glitchy and not very effective), AF (doesn't improve image quality at very hgh IRs and almost always introduces glitches) and Per-Pixel Lighting (makes graphics too artificial, too dark and generates 100 times more shaders, creating massive stuttering and grinding disk drives like crazy).
Then enable
8xIR by setting 'EFBScale = 11' in the .ini and enjoy almost perfect supersampled Beyond Full HD graphics with almost zero performance impact. 8xIR is like 4xIR + 4xSSAA, only slightly better.
You have a beast of a GPU. If a mid-range GPU such as the Radeon HD7850 / R270 can run smoothly at 7xIR, your GPU is more than capable of running Dolphn at 8xIR.
"Direct3D always produces a bit sharper graphics than OpenGL"
Source Plz
Quote:"The Direct3D backend produces a bit sharper graphics than OpenGL***"
*** on ATI/AMD GPUs
Kirbypuff you can get up to 8x IR in gpu demanding games like mario galaxy with no slowdowns compared to 1x? For example 80 fps at 1x and 80 fps at 8x? Because if that is not the case a game that is closely playable will suffer and become unplayable. Making the above a bad suggestion. If a game that runs at 200+ fps at 1x falls a bit above 60 at 8x, that doesn't mean that a game that plays at about 60 at 1x will not fall below 60 either, because it will.
(11-14-2014, 08:34 AM)kirbypuff Wrote: [ -> ]Quote:"The Direct3D backend produces a bit sharper graphics than OpenGL***"
*** on ATI/AMD GPUs
Source?