Assassin's Creed Unity 1080p/1200p vs 1440p/1536p(Stretched)

Ok folks, while I was playing Assassin's Creed Unity on my MSI GS60 I figured why not play with the resolutions a little bit, I'm not here asking about resolutions or better frame ratesas they are all playable in my GTX 970m , what I'm here for is the aspect Ratio. We all know that 1080p has 16:9 aspect ratio, 1200p has 16:10 and 1440p/1536p both have an aspect ratio of 4:3.

Long story short, I can't seem to tell the difference between 1080p and 1536p and i don't know if I'm being delusional but it feels like 1080p/1200p look slightly better than 1440p/1536p.

Even if it didn't really look betterI simply can't tell the difference, is it because of the aspect ratio of 4:3 ? at 1440p/1536p the picture comes out in a square shape, so I have to turn "Stretching" on make the picture fit the screen. Could that "Stretching" be the reason why I can't see much improvement ? Or I should probably use a bigger screen ? I'm open to your opinions people.

 

1920x1080 and 2560x1440 are 16:9

1920x1200 is 16:10

2048x1536 is 4:3

 

No sir, 2560x1440 has an aspect ratio of 4:3 not 16:9. Even if it did, this doesn't answer my question.
Kindly read the post carefully again and you will see what I'm aiming at.

 

Pull out a calculator

2560/1440 = 16/9 = 1.777 repeating

4/3 = 1.333 repeating

 

Thank you for clarifying, but again I haven't posted this thread to discuss whether 1440p had an aspect ratio of 16:9 or 4:3, the only reason why I'm stating that it's 4:3 is because it shows under the 4:3 aspect ratio in my graphic settings then disappears whenever I change the ratio.

I'm asking you kindly - again - to read the post again and fill me in with information that I'm actually looking for.

 

What is your native resolution?

 

3840x2160, I know it's better to play at my native res but it's literally impossible to play such a GPU demanding game on 4K res

 

Use 1920x1080 or 1280x720.

 

It looks better @1920x1080 because 4 display pixels are treated as one (1920x1080 is exactly 4 times smaller than your native res), where @2560x1440 comes the limitation of LCDs - can't draw half pixels and the picture looks bad, or at least not as good.

 

Additionally, 4K and 720p is 9:1.

 

Please elaborate on why should I use 1280x720 ? I can play on ultra high settings at 1536p at 30+ FPS with AA and soft shadows, so why would I do go down to 720p especially when my 4K screen is locked to 48hz ?

To make it all simple, my main concern is stretching, so will playing at 1536p with stretching enabled deliver better or worse quality than a lesser a would fit straight into my screen ?

 

Makes a lot of sense, thanks alot

 

Because 720p, like 1080p, is a whole number ratio of 4K (9:1) per my previous post, so you'll run into fewer artifacts caused by interpolation.

You want to go with a 16:9 resolution. 2048x1536 is 4:3 and upscaling it to fill a 16:9 screen stretches everything out horizontally, which is probably not what you want unless you're OK with everything looking fat and weird.

Your panel is locked at 48Hz? Can you get 60Hz at a non-native resolution or overclock the refresh rate? That would do more to improve your overall experience, gaming and otherwise.

 

Unfortunately, I can't overclock my panel, let alone getting a 60hz one. To my knowledge there aren't any panels that could deliver above 48hz at 4K resolution.
It seems that you think that I'm using an external screen, which I'm not. I own an MSI GS60 15.6' Laptop with GTX 970m. I would have no problem going above 48hz using an external but i can't do that on my laptop, same issue with my previous Lenovo Y50 4k. This probably why I don't see images fat and fuzzy when up scaling them, since we're talking about a 15.6' screen. So when I use 1536p, I can see only the a little bit of the upper and lower image missing, and stretching doesn't stretch by alot, but only fills in the missing upper and lower gaps.

Thanks for your feedback.

 

I know you're not using an external monitor and I wasn't implying that you are. I was simply asking if you can raise the refresh rate to 60Hz or higher if you run a sub-4K non-native resolution, or if the screen is locked to 48Hz across all available resolutions.

 

My bad then. Still unfortunately I cant go beyond 48hz no matter what I do, even at the lowest resolution possible, which is really a shame when having a GPU such as a high-end GTX 970m. This is exactly why most people tend to go for the FHD and 3K variants of my laptop, which allow a maximum of 60hz without overclocking,