5 ms·
No it's not. 2560x1440 has terrible PPI on larger screens. Either way with a 4k monitor you don't technically need to game at 4k as most intensive games offer D
by kcb 2y ago
No it's not. 2560x1440 has terrible PPI on larger screens. Either way with a 4k monitor you don't technically need to game at 4k as most intensive games offer DLSS anyway.
- snvzz 2y agoAnd FSR, which is cross gpu vendor.
- SirMaster 2y agoNot anymore. FSR4 is AMD only, and only the new RDNA4 GPUs.
- snvzz 2y agoI have seen AMD's PR materials for RDNA4, and as far as I can tell, they do not say anywhere anything like that. People read too much into "designed for RDNA4".
- SirMaster 2y agohttps://cdn.videocardz.com/1/2025/01/AMD-FSR4-9070.jpg https://cdn.videocardz.com/1/2025/01/AMD-FSR4-9070.jpg Why would they write that on their marketing slides?
- snvzz 2y agoBecause it only works on these cards right now. Further elaborated by their GPU marketing people on interviews. To summarize "RDNA4 for now" and "we're looking into supporting older...".
- perching_aix 2y agoWhat matters is the PPD, not the PPI, otherwise it's an unsound comparison.
- kcb 2y agoToo much personal preference with PPD. When I upgraded to a 32" monitor from a 27" one i didn't push my display through my wall, it sat in the same position.
- perching_aix 2y agoNot entirely clear on what you mean, but if you refuse to reposition your display or yourself after hopping between diagonal sizes and resolutions, I'd say it's a bit disingenuous to blame or praise either afterwards. Considering you seem to know what PPD is, I think you should be able to appreciate the how and why.