is 2715x1527 resolution essentially 2k?

so i have been on cloud 9 with my ASUS STRIX GTX1070 and my recent purchase of my Reference Nvidia GTX1080 FE...

ever since i saw the option of DSR and its shorthand descrip in the nvcpl i have been utilizing it on these two pascal cards because they can handle it very well (i have a general knowledge of what DSR does and i do understand)... but..i have confusion with the terminology and technical info on the stuff thats involved here

my question is, when i select the checkboxes for 2x, 3x, and 4xDSR, does that mean the corresponding resolutons are 2k, 3k, and 4k? or is that something different that im mistaking...Also can someone please explain what 2715x1527 resolution is, is it in fact 2k or 3k??? i cannot seem to find anything about this particular resolution and what category it fits under.

here is a video of me playing DOOM at said resolution (2715x1527) with eveything maxed out using vulkan api:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R2uH1pTa90U

also:
i see all these people talking about 1440p and im curious as to why i dont have an option for 1440p in my settings.

 

The 2x, 3x, and 4x refer to the DSR upscaling ratio. Since you are mutliplying it in 2 dimensions, you have to square root the upscaling ratio to get the multiple of that dimension.

Picture (pun intened) this:

x <-- original

xx <-- a picture twice as big. One dimension is distorted, same if in vertical

sqrt2 = 1.4142 (4sf)

1.4142 * 1920 = 2715
1.4142 * 1080 = 1527

Hence, the resolution of 2715x1527

This is NOT real resolution, it is upsampled from 1920x1080 using the 2x scaling by the graphics card, then downsampled back to the display resolution. By doing this it is in effect a type of antialiasing, so it is typically used in lieu of antialiasing, or antialiasing is otherwise set to a basic level.

There is a performance impact, but the idea is the performance impact is less using DSR than using the equivalent quality antialiasing setting.

 

You're confused here

The DSR is actually the rendering resolution, then it downsamples to display resolution. This is why it's so demanding - if you use a DSR res of 4K on a 1080p display, your cards actually have to render 4K.

Reduced aliasing is a side-effect of rendering at a higher resolution and then downsampling that into pixels that can't fully reproduce that resolution -- the result is effectively averaged out, smoothing out jaggies.

For this reason DSR has another benefit -- it increases detail with textures. The game is actually rendering greater detail, and even though that is approximated when downsampled, the result is a more detailed image seen through a lower resolution than the image rendered at that low resolution.

Incidentally -- if you can do 4X DSR, turn off the smoothing option entirely (set it to 0), otherwise you're wasting some of that detail as 4X downsamples cleanly in each dimension. Anything less and setting smoothing to around 17% can reduce the odd artifacts that occur when you try an downsample to a resolution that isn't a clean divisible.

 

DSR ratios are multipliers (1x your native res, 2x your native res, etc.) If you have a 4K monitor, 4x DSR gives you an 8K resolution.

2K, 3K, etc refer to the horizontal dimension of the resolution. 2000 pixels is referred to as 2K.

These things are not standardized. Some vendors use 2048x1080 as being "2K", others mean 2560x1440. The latter though is actually 2.6K...

In fact, 1080p (1920x1080) is actually pretty much 2K. Just 80 pixels short of 2000. But we already call it "FullHD", so no one calls it 2K.

The only "K" that seems to almost universally refer to the same resolution is 4K. Pretty much everyone understands it refers to 3840x2160. It's almost 4000 pixels horizontally. Technically, it's "3.8K", but that's close enough to get called 4K.

 

Quite right, I should have said it's not the real display resolution, it's just the rendering resolution.

The 2x, 3x, 4x don't refer to 'K' resolution, it refers to what I mentioned in the last post in that the image is 2x, 3x, and 4x bigger

1920x1080 with DSR of:
2x: sqrt2*1920 x sqrt2*1080 = 2715x1527
3x: sqrt3*1920 x sqrt3*1080 = 3325x1870
4x: sqrt4*1920 x sqrt4*1080 = 3840x2160
...
10x: sqrt10*1920 x sqrt10*1080 = 6071 x 3415

I calculated it for 10x to show it doesn't make 10K resolution.

Including the decimal points as a result of sqrt 10:
6071*3415 (whole numbers is 20,732,465 pixels):

1920*1080 = 2,073,600 pixels
by sqrt10: 20,736,600
Therefore, 6071*3415 (if you included the decimal points) is exactly 10x bigger, but would only be 6K resolution versus 2K of 1920.

 

2K is 1080p.
2K = 2000 = horizontal resolution of a 16:9 ratio screen. The closest one to 2000px horizontal is 1920x1080.

 

I like DSR idea, And I would probably use permently to get 1440p IF i could fiqure out to how to do that with out it making mess out text, Parts of the text are light other parts are dark, turn off clear type or even configure different never fixed that.

Ingame it not issue, but when used on desktop or everything else it obvious.

 

I knew that the numbers in a resolution are the horizontal and vertical dimensions... that part that i had a problem with is how the categorization worked with the different resolutions in DSR...

Thanks for all the info! with all that you guys have said, i guess its safe to say that i shouldnt correlate a particular DSR resolution to a "k" bracket (like for example i always thought that anything in the 2000 and 2999 bracket was a "2k" resolution and anything from 3000-3999 was "3k" and so on and so forth....

lol


and to the guy who said that DSR is demanding... to be totally honest, i dont see how its anymore demanding that just increasing your resolution... from a hardware standpoint, i dont see how downscaling a high res can have a even a small perf hit.. the performance hit is Directly correlative to the resolution change.........


so this is what it im saying may look like in a diagram of how DSR resolutions effect performance

DSR activativated 2715x1527>downscaled to 1920x1080p>
_______^ ___________/_____________ ^
Performance hit here_/________NO performance hit here

and obviously as you guys said, DSR resolutions and the downscaling as a result, minimizes aliasing, so in turn you can offset the the negative Performance hit that the higher resolutions that DSR introduces by turning off any AA features in the game you are playing..


is this accurate?

 

That's not possible. Converting 1440p to 1080p will result in artifacts. 4K to 1080p works a bit better since that's a 2:1 pixel ratio and that means you can set the smoothness slider to 0%.

Cleartype still looks bad though, since downscaling messes up subpixel rendering.

 

yah 4k on 660gtx just isnt gona happen, If i could find 1440p monitor that border less frame, and 27' and TN,VA with Gsync that dont cost 2 arms and leg I would got new monitor.

 

Yeah, don't use it on the desktop. It's not the purpose.

You can try if you want. Use a lower smoothness value. Like 20% or less.

1.78x will get you closest to 1440p.

 

only reason why i wanted in on desktop is cause desktop res get changed reguarless of windowed/full screeen exlusive is used any time any program use higher res. and screw my icons up every time.

 

Something that always bothered me is I've seen 1440p commonly referred to as 2K, but shouldn't 1080p be considered 2K since 1080p is half the resolution of 4K?

 

http://www.softwareok.com/?seite=Freeware/DesktopOK

 

2K is not half the resolution of 4K, it's a quarter. The 2K etc refers to horizontal, not vertical, so 1920 in 1920x1080 is '2K' and 3840 in 3840x2160 is '4K'. Remember you have two dimensions. The 2K and 4K are just rough labels, 1440P using this label 'nonsense' would actually be 2.6K considering rounding like with 4K at 3840. The 2K, 4K, etc is just a result of marketing UHDTV TV's, it's much better just to use the vertical resolution like we have since HDTV to avoid confusion over unimportant poor marketing labels. Using 4k and 8k labels is okay for simplicity, it just shouldn't be applied to try to label other resolutions.

 

Why not just call a resolution what it is? 2560x1440 is 2560x1440. There, everyone understand this.

 

No one refers to 1920x1080 as 2K. The term is already inaccurate, as it refers to a resolution with 2560 pixels in one line, so why would you choose to redefine it in claiming that 2K is not half of 4K but a quarter?

2K (2560x1440) is around half 4K (3840x2160). 4K is 2.25x higher than 2K.

 

cause people are stupid and need things dumbed down for them? and need things shortened or abbreviated or there minds might explode? marketing pr would have no job other wise.

Im of the opinion society is getting lazy and IQ's are going places and it not up.

 

2K sounds 1/2 of 4K, whereas in reality it is 4/9 if 2K refers to 2560x1440. This argument becomes more valid with 8K, which sounds twice 4K, but is actually 4 times 4K.

It purely is just another way of describing the resolution, and it based on the horizontal not vertical resolution. Calling it 1080P, 1440P, 2160P, and 4320P sounds less good from a marketing perspective. The P is a bit superfluous as it referes to progressive scan which is pretty standard these days (1080i still exists though).

The difference is, 1080P, 1440P, 2160P is what the companies call the resolutions, the 2K, 4K, 8K is simply marketing and what sounds good. It probably should have actually been called 1K, 1.5K, 2K, and 4K to reflect the vertical resolutions of 1080P, 1440P, 2160P, and 4320P. Yes, they aren't exact but it doesn't need to be. However, 4K only sounds 4 times the resolution of 1K, whereas it is 16 times the resolution as it's got two dimensions.

Back to the OP's question, which refers to pixel multiplication and not dimensional multiplication, 2715x1527 is 2x DSR as I said earlier. Nothing to do with 2K, 4K etc, it's simply the product of sqrt2 multiplied by both dimensions.

 

No. 4K is 4000x2250. 2K is 2000x1125. Neither is accurate and neither exist in the real world. Thus what is called 4K is usually 3840x2160 and what can be called 2K should be 1920x1080. 2560x1440 is not 2K.