Guru3D.com Forums

Go Back   Guru3D.com Forums > Videocards > Videocards - NVIDIA Drivers Section
Videocards - NVIDIA Drivers Section In this section you can discuss everything ForceWare driver related. ForceWare (Detonator) drivers are for NVIDIA TNT, Quadro and all GeForce based videocards.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Downsampling: How to
Old
  (#1)
wasteomind
Master Guru
 
Videocard: eVGA gtx 680 sli
Processor: Intel Core i5 3570k @ 4.7
Mainboard: Asus P8Z77-V PRO
Memory: Corsair 8GB DDR3 2133
Soundcard: onboard / Logitec Z5500
PSU: Thermaltake TPX-1275M
Default Downsampling: How to - 06-17-2011, 02:17 | posts: 337 | Location: HOMELESS

EDIT: With newer drivers, adjusting timings may no longer be necessary in all cases to create down sampling resolutions. Attempt to create a custom resolution using the automatic setting first. If that doesn't work, then worry about adjusting timings.Some or most of this information is out of date. Newer drivers have a much easier time creating custom downsampling resolutions and this guide has not be updated to reflect that.

FOR NVIDIA USERS ONLY! Refer to a different guide for AMD/ATI downsampling as the process is different.

DISCLAIMER:
This won't be a perfect guide. It is kind of long, but only because I like to go into a much detail as I can.
I can not be held responsible for any damage caused by this procedure if things don't work out as expected. I only claim this works for me, and offer it as a reference for others.

INTRODUCTION


If you are anything like me, you hate games that don't support Anti-Aliasing. Some games have flags that can be enabled using a tool like Nvidia Inspector, but the flags aren't always exactly perfect. Some might cause glitches, while others cause things like shadows to not work on certain setting (Dead Space 2), others are so performance robbing at even 2x AA that it isn't even worth it to try (Brute forcing AA in a lot of UE3 games).

So I turned my attention to downsampling. This is a method to basically render the game at a higher resolution and scale it down to fix your screen. You can think of it like super sampling. but it doesn't need a compatibility flag, and it isn't effected by post processing effects that can glitch out.

Problem was, all the info about how to set this up was in German. I can't read or speak German so this made things a little difficult for me. Since there are no decent English references for this that I could find, I'll share my process, and show off some results.

While I only ended up with about 1.78 times the resolution, it does make a noticeable difference in games that don't support AA. An extra 1,612,800 pixels does help to take off the rough edges while in motion. It is close to 2x supersampling in titles that don't support it. It is better than nothing, and performance wise not bad at all for what I get. Depending on your monitor you can get much better results then me, feel free to share if you get this to work.

A quick example of my results:
THERE ARE MORE PICTURES IN THE SECOND POST Scroll down to see more!

Borderlands: In these screen shots, notice how reduced the aliasing is on the power lines, and on the steel supports holding up the water tower. In the far back you can notice how much clearer the gate looks, and how reduced the black aliased border on the rocks is.

1920x1080


2560x1440 downsampled to 1920x1080



GTA 4: *******s From Liberty City: In this shot it might be hard to notice in the still shot, but in motion it is a massive difference. Pay close attention to the amount of jagged edges on the ferris wheel and the power lines. They become hugely reduced. Also notice the fence in the lower right. The power lines and utility pole in the far background also benefit.

1920x1080


2560x1440 downsampled to 1920x1080




BEFORE WE BEGIN:


This will be demonstrated on Windows 7. I tried this on my Vista machine and met with some issues, which I will explain below. I do not know if this works on XP or Vista and for now will only be explaining it on Win7. If you try it on other OS's you do so at your own risk.

I recommend having a copy of video drivers downloaded and ready to install in case anything goes wrong. I had issues and had to reinstall on my Vista machine. On my Windows 7 machine I never had issues.

For this process I used the 275.33 Forceware Drivers. Others might work but the main necessity is to have working display scaling. I have had issues with scaling in the past. I use a 40inch Samsung LCD TV as a monitor, so the scaling is virtually non-existent in the display itself for most common resolutions. The last two drivers from Nivida, 275.27 and 275.33 have wonderful display scaling on the gpu working in them. I use it for this process, and you might want to as well depending on your display.



THE PROCESS:

So First things first, make sure your scaling options are set as so:



With that done we move on to creating the custom resolution. So go to your "Change Resolution" page in the Nvidia control panel. Press the Customize button highlighted in red in the picture below.



Next click "Create Custom Resolution" as shown in the picture below highlighted in red. NOTE: The resolutions listed in this box outlined in purple may be different on your computer. Don't worry about this it isn't important.



This opens the "Create Custom Resolution" window. The first thing you should do here is click the button to open up the timing options, as shown highlighted in red in the picture below.



The next step will be to change the Standard option from automatic to manual.

EDIT: With newer drivers, adjusting timings may no longer be necessary in all cases to create down sampling resolutions. Attempt to create a custom resolution using the automatic setting first. If that doesn't work, then worry about adjusting timings.

It is important to do this first, before changing anything else. In the picture below, you will see the option you need to change highlighted in red.

Notice the green box. These are your default settings. Write them down, memorize them, or screenshot them. Do whatever you need to just in case things go bad, or you need to start over.



Now on to the more complicated stuff. Notice the "Pixel Clock" reading highlighted in yellow in the picture below. This becomes very important. This setting is the key to all this. You must make sure this number remains lower than 165 Mhz. If that means you end up with 164.9999 MHz that is fine as long as it works. I believe the reason for this is down to either the capabilities of standard DVI cables, or a limitation of Windows 7. I think Dual link DVI can support higher, but it is outside the scope of my explanation.



Moving on, also notice the area in blue. This will be our first variable. Before we touch that we must raise the Vertical lines option highlighted in red by 1. We do this so Windows treats your custom resolution as a new one, and not spit back an error saying the resolution already exists. SO in the picture it says 1080, I would make this 1081. If you have 1920x1200 you should make it sat 1201, and so on.

Once that is done, press the test button to make sure it works. If it does work, the screen should flicker for a moment, then come back with a dialogue box that asks you if you want to save the settings in whatever resolution settings you entered. The test passed, so just say no, we don't want to save that yet, it was just a test. If it fails, the screen will go black and stay black. At this point just press escape to get back to a working resolution. DO NOT spam esc. Only press it once. If you press it twice, you will have to start all over again because it will close the window you are working in.

Please note the section in blue above!!!
This testing step will be repeated many many times as you try to find your settings. It is important to know that if the test passes, you must choose NOT to save. Saving at any point during this process will close the window and screw up the custom settings. You will have to delete it and start over if you save. Only save when told to.

Now of note, if this step fails, there isn't much more I can suggest at the moment because I haven't the experience to remedy it. As I mentioned at the beginning of the guide, I had issues on Vista trying this process. This was the step it failed. I would only get the top half of the screen, while the bottom was completely black.

On my windows 7 machine it worked fine.

So if the test passes, the next step is to lower the number in the blue field for vertical total pixels. You should do this very slowly. I recommend 1 increment at a time. Then press test and see if you still pass. If you pass DO NOT SAVE then repeat this step until you fail with a black screen. If you fail this from the start is probably already as low as it can possibly go.



WARNING: On my vista machine lowing this number caused the screen to lock up. Rebooting the machine would load to black screen I had to boot into safe mode and uninstall the video drivers then reinstall them to fix this issue.

Once you do this enough times, you should eventually get a black screen when testing. Press esc to get rid of the black screen then raise the number back up by one. On my machine my stock vertical total pixels was 1125. I was able to lower this to 1102 before I got a black screen on the test.

Notice that every time you lower the number in blue (total vertical pixels), the number in yellow (pixel clock) automatically lowers as well. This is a good thing. It will give you leeway to move the total horizontal pixels in the next step while maintaining a pixel clock lower the 165 MHz. More on that later.

One more thing to note here, every time you lower the vertical pixels labeled in blue, you might notice the screen getting blurrier, or brighter, or both when you press test. This is normal, as you as basically taking the monitor out of spec with timings. At this point we are just trying to find out how much room we have to work.

Now on to the next picture below. The next step is to raise the Horizontal total pixels (highlighted in red below) a little a at a time until the Pixel Clock (highlighted in green below) reads just under 165.000Mhz. I was able to go up to 2448 on mine. Your setting might vary. Once you have that set, you should be able to test it. If it passes you are in good shape. If it fails and goes black screen press esc, and try lowering it until you no longer get a black screen when testing.



Once that is all done, you should be able to set your Horizontal Pixels in the section of the top of the window under the "Display mode (as reported by Windows) heading to the same as the number below from the previous step. When you test this, if it is successful, you'll get a image that is stretched horizontally, and doesn't fill the height of the screen.



If it passes then good we now have some room to work. You have two choices here:

Go for the highest resolution you can that maintains aspect ratio (you'll need to do some math here, I'll explain some basic math at the end of the post to help)

Or

Lower your settings to the next closest common resolution that is the same aspect ratio of your monitor. This is a list of common resolutions: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_common_resolutions


Now it is important to note the settings at the bottom of the window in the timing section. You don't want to change these once they are tested and you know they are working, because now we will be moving to the top of the window to choose our resolution for downsampling.

My Total pixel setting ended up being 2448. When choosing a resolution that works with it, you have a little wiggle room. I was able to adjust my downsampling resolution about 150 -200 pixels over the total horizontal pixels before testing it gave me a black screen. This ended up being about 2569 horizontal pixels. Rather than going as big as possible I decided to back off a bit to the next common resolution that was 16:9 which happened to be 2560x1440. So you change the resolution height in the other field (the one you raised by 1 earlier on) So I changed 1081 to 1440.

Once you have your downsample resolution, test it. If it passes, at this point save it. You are pretty much done. If it fails, try something lower until you get something that works.



You should then have a custom resolution list that has your new resolution as shown below. Make sure you leave your desktop resolution as your native. If all went well, from now on when you load up games you should have the new resolution available. When you select it, it will downscaled to fix your screen. Great for games that don't support AA, or for people using video cards vastly more powerful than the monitor native resolution they are using can take advantage of.





BLURRING AND OVERBRIGHT:


If your custom resolution appears very blurry or extremely washed out/overbright it is likely caused by your vertical total pixels being set too low. I noted before the lowest my monitor could go was 1103 from a starting point of 1125. I could lower it to 1118 before I started to notice the image getting effected badly. In the end, once I knew my target resolution, I ended up setting it to 1123. This is something you will really need to play around with to get to your liking. It took me a about 40 minutes of back and forth to get something I liked. You will need to raise the total verticle pixels, while lowering the total horizontal pixels little by little to maintain the 165MHz pixel clock limit. It is all trial and error here.


THE MATH:

I mentioned math above. The math is kinda simple. The first step is figuring out your aspect ratio. The most common are 4:3, 16:9, and 16:10.

You can find your aspect ratio easily by looking up your resolution on this list http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_common_resolutions The columns listed SAR are your aspect ratio in two different formats. ratio and numeric.

4:3 is 1.33333
16:9 is 1.777778
16:10 is 1.6

This is important when finding the highest resolution you can use while maintaining aspect ratio. For example. 1920x1080 is 16:9 or 1.777778. Take the horizontal resolution 1920 and divide it by the numeric aspect ratio 1.77778. This will give you a very close approximation of the height you need to set.

1920/1.7777778 = 1079.99999865

Roughly 1080. Just round up. You can also do this backwards to double check your work. 1920 divided by 1080 = 1.777777777777778

So for instance, lets say your maximum horizontal resolution ends up being 2997. This is a very high, non-common resolution. You have a monitor that is native 1920x1200 so it is a 16:10 or 1.6 ratio. To keep this aspect we do the following math:

2997 divided by 1.6 = 1873.125

So round down we get 1873 for our vertical resolution. The resolution ends up being 2997x1873. Check this backwards by dividing horizontal by vertical and you get the following:

2997/1873 = 1.600106780565937

roughly 1.6 rounded so good work.

REFRESH RATE CAN HELP:

There is also another way to gain some wiggle room for higher resolutions. If your monitor supports lower refresh rates, you can lower the refresh rate to reduce the pixel clock and gain more horizontal total pixels. I was unable to do this with my monitor, but there is no reason it won't work on others. Refresh rate and a poor vertical total pixel adjustment room were my limiting factors.

While I only ended up with about 1.78 times the resolution, it does make a noticeable difference in games that don't support AA. An extra 1,612,800 pixels does help to take off the rough edges while in motion. It close to 2x supersampling in titles that don't support it. It is better than nothing, and performance wise not bad at all for what I get.

Last edited by wasteomind; 08-09-2013 at 23:53.
   
Reply With Quote
 
Old
  (#2)
wasteomind
Master Guru
 
Videocard: eVGA gtx 680 sli
Processor: Intel Core i5 3570k @ 4.7
Mainboard: Asus P8Z77-V PRO
Memory: Corsair 8GB DDR3 2133
Soundcard: onboard / Logitec Z5500
PSU: Thermaltake TPX-1275M
Default 06-17-2011, 02:19 | posts: 337 | Location: HOMELESS

Post reserved if needed.

If anything in the guide is unclear, or doesn't work let me know. I'll double check and try to make things clearer.

Let me know if this helps any of you.

Some more screen shots: To really see the effect this process has in the screenshots below, you must look at these images full size so make sure to click them and look closely. If you just look at them sized to your browser window, you lose the finer details due to the resizing.

The Last Remnant: UE3 game that suffers terrible FPS drop when forcing AA. Maintains 60 fps solid using this, with much cleaner edges. Note Rush's hair, the trees behind him, and the Remnant in the background. The edges are much cleaner using downsampling.

1920x1080


2560x1440 downsampled to 1920x1080



Dead Space 2: No great AA option exists for this game without compromise. Downsampling this game allows you to keep the shadows and not have weird white outlines. Notice in these shots the reduced aliasing on all edges. The first set of shots it is apparent on the debris hanging in front of Issac.

1920x1080



2560x1440 downsampled to 1920x1080



In the shots below, notice how reduced the aliasing is on all the hand rails, on the walls below, on the power lines hanging overhead, even the outlines of the big square greenish lights on the platform across from Issac.

1920x1080



2560x1440 downsampled to 1920x1080




Crysis 2 While it is possible to force certain AA modes for this game, I figured I would show off what downsampling can do in conjunction with the extreme mode AA available in the game. In these first shots, notice how clean the wall to the left becomes. More importantly, notice how much more defined the fencing on the two upper levels becomes. In motion it is much more noticeable.

1920x1080


2560x1440 downsampled to 1920x1080



Main thing to notice in the follow shots is the little fence on top of the brick wall, and the fence on the ground near the garden behind it. They both become a lot more defined. Also the street lamps in the background.

1920x1080



2560x1440 downsampled to 1920x1080



Borderlands

Note how much cleaner the power lines become. Also the guardrail in front near the npc sitting on the bench. Look how clean that fencing on the far left of the building becomes.

1920x1080




2560x1440 downsampled to 1920x1080



In these shots, all the outlines of the buildings, steps, power lines, antennas, all clear up nicely.

1920x1080


2560x1440 downsampled to 1920x1080





Last edited by wasteomind; 06-20-2011 at 02:24.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#3)
IKnowJack
Master Guru
 
Videocard: GTX470
Processor: Q-Z80 OC@30000Ghz
Mainboard: Z80-xXx hot pink edtition
Memory: Perkie 32DD
Soundcard: hearing aid
PSU: Fukushima Nuclear Plant I
Default 06-17-2011, 16:31 | posts: 176 | Location: darkside of the moon

too much effort for very little gain..
and it wont work on all monitors..you got lucky playing around with the H/V size and Pixel Clock.. forcing a higher pixel clock can cause damage to the monitor and or produce out of sync messages..

one thing i think will help...
i have found using a 2nd monitor hooked up allows you to change things easier, without having to esc out of a black screen for every little change..the screen may go black..but you can have the settings on the 2nd monitor with a working res

i like this downsampling idea... if only setting up "higher" than supported resolutions in windows was easier
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#4)
wasteomind
Master Guru
 
Videocard: eVGA gtx 680 sli
Processor: Intel Core i5 3570k @ 4.7
Mainboard: Asus P8Z77-V PRO
Memory: Corsair 8GB DDR3 2133
Soundcard: onboard / Logitec Z5500
PSU: Thermaltake TPX-1275M
Default 06-17-2011, 17:16 | posts: 337 | Location: HOMELESS

It might seem like little gain, and as I stated your mileage may vary, but for me it was a massive improvement in some games with no hassle once it is setup. It is a much much more apparent and beneficial effect when the scene is in motion. Screenshots don't tell the whole story.

I've seen posts on forums about this method, and people asking how to do it so I figured I would share since there wasn't a good English reference. You can take from it what you want.

Also, you can use this resolution in games that support AA and get even more bang out of it. For people who have big systems limited by their monitor this can really shine.I use tri-sli gtx 280 @ 1920x1080. There is a lot of left over horse power in this system that can handle higher downsampled resolutions and applying AA over top of it as well.

It is a lot of effort I agree, but for me it was worth it to have better edges in games.

I like to think of it as basically overclocking my monitor because it inherently comes with the same risks.

Last edited by wasteomind; 06-17-2011 at 17:20.
   
Reply With Quote
 
Old
  (#5)
BetA
Ancient Guru
 
BetA's Avatar
 
Videocard: MSI GTX670 PEOC@1350Mhz
Processor: Q9550@3,8Ghz@Vendetta2
Mainboard: Asus P5Q Ket´s mBIOS :)
Memory: 4x2048 OCZ-REAPER 1080Mhz
Soundcard: CreativeX-FI X-tremeGamer
PSU: Corsair VX550W 550 Watt
Default 06-17-2011, 17:34 | posts: 3,750 | Location: outside the Box...

nice tutorial man..
A lot of people will be thankfull for this...

i allready know how to do this. i used a modded monitor driver that i made in powerstrip...

anyway, thx for this little tutorial..

greetz Beta
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#6)
Death_Lord
Master Guru
 
Death_Lord's Avatar
 
Videocard: AMD Radeon 6870
Processor: AMD Phenom II 4x 3.2ghz
Mainboard:
Memory: 4GB OCZ Fatal1ty DDR2
Soundcard:
PSU: SilverStone Strider 750W
Default 06-17-2011, 17:34 | posts: 692 | Location: Spain

I cant even see the difference, to me its the difference between a 23 inch 1080p resolution and a 24 inch 1080p resolution.
For GTA and Borderlands the best is to use MLAA, Lets hope nvidia gets its own MLAA soon, so Nvidia players will enjoy from it too
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#7)
wasteomind
Master Guru
 
Videocard: eVGA gtx 680 sli
Processor: Intel Core i5 3570k @ 4.7
Mainboard: Asus P8Z77-V PRO
Memory: Corsair 8GB DDR3 2133
Soundcard: onboard / Logitec Z5500
PSU: Thermaltake TPX-1275M
Default 06-17-2011, 18:07 | posts: 337 | Location: HOMELESS

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death_Lord View Post
I cant even see the difference, to me its the difference between a 23 inch 1080p resolution and a 24 inch 1080p resolution.
For GTA and Borderlands the best is to use MLAA, Lets hope nvidia gets its own MLAA soon, so Nvidia players will enjoy from it too
Yeah working MLAA of some sort, or FXAA with varying levels that actually works on D3D would be nice. Until then I'll stick to this method.

It isn't for everyone though.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#8)
nojas
Member Guru
 
Videocard: HD 7950 - MSI TF3
Processor: i5-750 @ 4ghz
Mainboard: Asus Sabertooth 55i
Memory: 8GB DDR3-1600
Soundcard:
PSU: 650w
Default 06-18-2011, 00:57 | posts: 52 | Location: UK

Thanks OP.

In GTA 4 I can keep above 40fps with a custom 1862x1170 resolution (near maxxed)

I use a 1440x900 monitor and the edge smoothing is worth it.

I wish I could upgrade the monitor, but space is very limited!
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#9)
Xanvast
Master Guru
 
Xanvast's Avatar
 
Videocard: GeForce GTX Titan 3 Way
Processor: Core i7 2600K @ 5Ghz
Mainboard: ASUS Maximus IV Extreme
Memory: A-DATA XPG PC17000
Soundcard: Xonar Essence One
PSU: Corsair AX1200
Default 06-19-2011, 00:28 | posts: 159 | Location: France

Hey !
Really nice post.
I too saw the PCGH page on downsampling few months ago, and I found this really interesting.
I now play as much as I can on 2880x1800 (1920x1200 +50% > SSAAX2)
Here are some comparaison shots I made (all Crysis 2)

http://img4.hostingpics.net/pics/115...0719172466.jpg
http://img4.hostingpics.net/pics/430...0719173753.jpg

http://img4.hostingpics.net/pics/700...0719271725.jpg
http://img4.hostingpics.net/pics/138...0719272937.jpg

http://img4.hostingpics.net/pics/623...0719283408.jpg
http://img4.hostingpics.net/pics/674...0719284615.jpg

http://img4.hostingpics.net/pics/841...0719324466.jpg
http://img4.hostingpics.net/pics/120...0719325549.jpg

http://img4.hostingpics.net/pics/387...0719344940.jpg
http://img4.hostingpics.net/pics/189...0719350049.jpg

http://img4.hostingpics.net/pics/812...0719413107.jpg
http://img4.hostingpics.net/pics/737...0719414251.jpg

http://img4.hostingpics.net/pics/536...0719431025.jpg
http://img4.hostingpics.net/pics/999...0719432146.jpg

http://img4.hostingpics.net/pics/713...0719454965.jpg
http://img4.hostingpics.net/pics/234...0719460162.jpg

http://img4.hostingpics.net/pics/787...0719471644.jpg
http://img4.hostingpics.net/pics/315...0719472681.jpg

http://img4.hostingpics.net/pics/524...1001240059.jpg
http://img4.hostingpics.net/pics/964...1001241373.jpg

http://img4.hostingpics.net/pics/348...1001250153.jpg
http://img4.hostingpics.net/pics/895...1001251261.jpg

http://img4.hostingpics.net/pics/861...1001253754.jpg
http://img4.hostingpics.net/pics/247...1001254901.jpg

http://img4.hostingpics.net/pics/174...1001275418.jpg
http://img4.hostingpics.net/pics/541...1001280539.jpg

http://img4.hostingpics.net/pics/682...1001290337.jpg
http://img4.hostingpics.net/pics/740...1001291441.jpg

http://img4.hostingpics.net/pics/138...1001311743.jpg
http://img4.hostingpics.net/pics/870...1001311851.jpg

http://img4.hostingpics.net/pics/869...1001362583.jpg
http://img4.hostingpics.net/pics/128...1001362892.jpg

http://img4.hostingpics.net/pics/873...1001363192.jpg
http://img4.hostingpics.net/pics/492...1001364486.jpg
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#10)
wasteomind
Master Guru
 
Videocard: eVGA gtx 680 sli
Processor: Intel Core i5 3570k @ 4.7
Mainboard: Asus P8Z77-V PRO
Memory: Corsair 8GB DDR3 2133
Soundcard: onboard / Logitec Z5500
PSU: Thermaltake TPX-1275M
Default 06-19-2011, 02:07 | posts: 337 | Location: HOMELESS

The difference in some of those shots is pretty noticeable, especially the ones with grating like the catwalks on the billboard, or the fan screens on the roof air conditioners.

I wish I was able to hit that same resolution, but I fell just short. Your lucky.
   
Reply With Quote
 
Old
  (#11)
Pete J
Master Guru
 
Pete J's Avatar
 
Videocard: 3x 780 GTX @1113/7000MHz
Processor: i7 4930k @ 4200MHz
Mainboard: EVGA X79 Dark
Memory: 4x4GB 2400MHz Avexir Blue
Soundcard: X-Fi Titanium Fatal1ty
PSU: Thermaltake 1500W
Default 06-19-2011, 02:37 | posts: 174 | Location: Blighty

I've always wanted to downsample as it offers the most impressive anti-aliasing capabilities, but I do have questions:

1) Doesn't downsampling risk permanently killing your monitor? I have a nice 3007WFP-HC I bought for a bargain and can't just simply replace it if it goes tits up!

2) I thought the maximum output for a DVI-D port was 2560x1600? Could this be the limit you run into?

P.S. Thanks for the guide OP!

Last edited by Pete J; 06-19-2011 at 02:39.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#12)
Agonist
Maha Guru
 
Agonist's Avatar
 
Videocard: 2x7950 Eyefinity
Processor: i7 950 @ 4.1 HT H100
Mainboard: MSI X58A-GD45
Memory: Corsair XMS3 12GB 1600
Soundcard: XFI Extreme Audio + X-540
PSU: OCZ Fata1ty 1000w
Default 06-19-2011, 03:10 | posts: 1,028 | Location: Tennessee

I hope there is a method to do this with ATI. I have a 9800gtx I can try this with for fun. I really wanna do this method until I can afford a bigger monitor.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#13)
wasteomind
Master Guru
 
Videocard: eVGA gtx 680 sli
Processor: Intel Core i5 3570k @ 4.7
Mainboard: Asus P8Z77-V PRO
Memory: Corsair 8GB DDR3 2133
Soundcard: onboard / Logitec Z5500
PSU: Thermaltake TPX-1275M
Default 06-19-2011, 03:43 | posts: 337 | Location: HOMELESS

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete J View Post
I've always wanted to downsample as it offers the most impressive anti-aliasing capabilities, but I do have questions:

1) Doesn't downsampling risk permanently killing your monitor? I have a nice 3007WFP-HC I bought for a bargain and can't just simply replace it if it goes tits up!

2) I thought the maximum output for a DVI-D port was 2560x1600? Could this be the limit you run into?

P.S. Thanks for the guide OP!
1) There is a risk and I believe I mentioned it above. Changing the timings of the monitor can supposedly cause damage if done carelessly. While I have never seen or heard of this damage being done, I can only say tread lightly on this.

My own personal experience with it has only produced problems big enough to have to uninstall and reinstall drivers. Never any physical damage. Again I will state I treat this method as a type of "overclocking" for your monitor, and should be approached with the same care as overclocking any other type of hardware, like a CPU or Video card.

Others here have had success, and I haven't had any reports of catastrophic failure, so the risk vs reward is your decision in the end.

2) This is info pulled from wikipedia on the topic of DVI and DVI-D. I know wikipedia isn't the best reference site on the web, but this seems accurate enough to share.

Quote:
The DVI specification mandates a maximum pixel clock frequency of 165 MHz. With a single DVI link, the highest supported standard resolution is 2.75 megapixels (including blanking interval) at 60 Hz refresh. For practical purposes, this allows a maximum screen resolution at 60 Hz of 1,915 × 1,436 pixels (standard 4:3 ratio), 1,854 × 1,483 pixels (5:4 ratio), or 2,098 × 1,311 (widescreen 16:10 ratio).

To support display devices requiring higher video bandwidth, there is provision for a dual DVI link. A dual link doubles the number of TMDS pairs, effectively doubling video bandwidth at a given pixel clock frequency. The DVI specification mandates how the dual link may be used. All display modes that use a pixel clock below 165 MHz, and have at most 24 bits per pixel, are required to use single-link mode. All modes that require more than 24 bits per pixel, and/or 165 MHz pixel clock frequency must use dual-link mode. In dual-link mode, and in modes using 24 bits per pixel or less, the transmitter stripes pixel data across both links; each sequential video pixel is transmitted on alternate links. In modes with color depth greater than 24 bits per pixel, the second link carries the least significant bits of each pixel.
Then below it also notes DVI-D resolutions to include:

Quote:
WQUXGA (3,840 × 2,400) @ 33 Hz with GTF blanking (2 × 159 MHz)
Which is a higher resolution, though at a much lower refresh rate.

It the end it seems it isn't so much limited by hard and fast rules concerning resolutions I.E. 1920x1200 is max for non DVI-D. It has more to do with available bandwidth in the single transfer.

At least that is my understanding of it. Which is why this method works for achieving higher resolutions. Your only pushing the maximum amount of bandwidth through your DVI cable to the monitor. I think (I could be wrong) technically you are never exceeding the bandwidth to the monitor because the GPU is scaling the image down before it reaches the monitor.

Last edited by wasteomind; 06-19-2011 at 03:45.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#14)
Pete J
Master Guru
 
Pete J's Avatar
 
Videocard: 3x 780 GTX @1113/7000MHz
Processor: i7 4930k @ 4200MHz
Mainboard: EVGA X79 Dark
Memory: 4x4GB 2400MHz Avexir Blue
Soundcard: X-Fi Titanium Fatal1ty
PSU: Thermaltake 1500W
Default 06-19-2011, 03:56 | posts: 174 | Location: Blighty

^Cheers for the in-depth reply!

I had a closer look at the pics you provided, and it appears Nvidia may have changed the way it's done: specifically, apparently doing all the work on the GPU BEFORE sending it off to the monitor. Previously I believe the drivers actually modified the BIOS of the monitor, hence why there was the risk of bricking it. Just out of interest, did you get a pop up warning you that it could potentially ruin your monitor?

I'll give it a go in a while. I can't afford to break anything at the moment as I'm nearing the end of a big project, but I'll report back when I eventually get round to it.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#15)
wasteomind
Master Guru
 
Videocard: eVGA gtx 680 sli
Processor: Intel Core i5 3570k @ 4.7
Mainboard: Asus P8Z77-V PRO
Memory: Corsair 8GB DDR3 2133
Soundcard: onboard / Logitec Z5500
PSU: Thermaltake TPX-1275M
Default 06-19-2011, 04:19 | posts: 337 | Location: HOMELESS

I'm 100% sure this does not write anything to the EDID of the monitor. So no worries of bricking it there.

I believe the popup warning I got was only the first time I pressed the button to bring up the custom resolution window. There is a disclaimer by Nvidia that you could cause damage and yada yada yada. It is a pretty standard looking warning dialogue that comes up and requires you to press accept to proceed.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#16)
andressergio
Maha Guru
 
andressergio's Avatar
 
Videocard: 3x SLI GALAXY GTX780HOF
Processor: I4770K@48HT
Mainboard: ASUS M6E
Memory: 2x8GB TeamX 2666CL11
Soundcard:
PSU: Seasonic P-1000
Default 06-19-2011, 05:23 | posts: 848 | Location: Montevideo-Uruguay

thank you very much for this man i tested on dirt3 and grid and going to others now

i have a samsung P2770FH great colours and seems to like this res...anyting else i have to adjust after downsampling ?

i see that colours are much intense and kinda darker but looks really amazing, only game that made me stuttering is dirt2

cheers !
Sergio

Last edited by andressergio; 06-19-2011 at 05:59.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#17)
Psycho101
Master Guru
 
Videocard: GTX 460 SLI @ 850/4100
Processor: i5 760 @ 4.02GHz
Mainboard: Gigabyte P55A-UD4
Memory: 4Gb Mushkin Ridgeback
Soundcard: ASUS Xonar DS
PSU: Corsair HX750
Default 06-20-2011, 18:33 | posts: 216 | Location: England

Good guide, well written. Definitely better than trying to understand and make sense of a Google translation form German to English.

It seems that I get of pretty lightly when setting up Downscaling. All I do is simply set Horizontal Pixels and Vetrtical lines to the desired res eg 3360x2100, then make sure Advanced Timings is set to auto and click test.

Resolutions I have set as custom are 3360x2100 (works fine, can use full 60Hz), 2520x1575 and 2184x1365.

Maybe my monitor is more capable than average? I'm using a Dell 2209WA. This monitor is capable of a true 75Hz refresh (no skipped frames) at 1680x1050 native res. To get 75Hz I simply set a custom res leaving the values at native (1680x1050), change the Refresh Rate (Hz) section to 75 and in advanced timings, set CVT Reduced Blank. Monitor's OSD confirms 1680x1050 @ 75Hz and tests on websites I've seen (such as taking pictures with a high shutter speed camera etc) confirm no skipped frames.

It's a shame ATI users don't have something included in CCC that can do the same. I must admit though, if others have to go through all the steps mentioned in OP, lets hope nVidia decide to make the process a bit more user friendly in the future.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#18)
wasteomind
Master Guru
 
Videocard: eVGA gtx 680 sli
Processor: Intel Core i5 3570k @ 4.7
Mainboard: Asus P8Z77-V PRO
Memory: Corsair 8GB DDR3 2133
Soundcard: onboard / Logitec Z5500
PSU: Thermaltake TPX-1275M
Default 06-20-2011, 20:04 | posts: 337 | Location: HOMELESS

Definitely lucky with that monitor Pyscho101. If I try to do that on my Samsung I get instant black screen. Same with my Dell 2407wfp.

Though the Dell 2407wfp is the one connected to my Vista machine so I still need to do a lot of testing with it. As it stands now, I can't change any vertical settings on it without causing the lower half of the screen to go black.

Last edited by wasteomind; 06-20-2011 at 20:17.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#19)
Xanvast
Master Guru
 
Xanvast's Avatar
 
Videocard: GeForce GTX Titan 3 Way
Processor: Core i7 2600K @ 5Ghz
Mainboard: ASUS Maximus IV Extreme
Memory: A-DATA XPG PC17000
Soundcard: Xonar Essence One
PSU: Corsair AX1200
Default 06-20-2011, 20:42 | posts: 159 | Location: France

I have made some more comparaison shots of GTAIV

http://img11.hostingpics.net/pics/42...2021163378.jpg
http://img11.hostingpics.net/pics/84...2021170360.jpg

http://img11.hostingpics.net/pics/45...2021180535.jpg
http://img11.hostingpics.net/pics/88...2021181755.jpg

http://img11.hostingpics.net/pics/58...2021204381.jpg
http://img11.hostingpics.net/pics/72...2021205505.jpg

http://img11.hostingpics.net/pics/89...2021222420.jpg
http://img11.hostingpics.net/pics/74...2021223499.jpg

The game is so full of aliasing it is disgusting to watch, even at 2880x1800 it is more aliased than average. And the game performance is just unbelieveable, I saw 40fps (all maxed out) with both cards usage 99%...
I think something like 3840x2400 is needed to make the game clean looking.

Ps : despite numbers shown on pictures, the gameplay was not as comfortable as I'd expect

Last edited by Xanvast; 06-20-2011 at 20:45.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#20)
MfA
Maha Guru
 
MfA's Avatar
 
Videocard: GBT GTX4601GB@950/4600MHz
Processor: Q9650 @4.25GHz (8.5*500)
Mainboard: Gigabyte EP45-DS3P
Memory: 4GB DDR2 1000MHz 5-5-5-15
Soundcard: Logitech X-530 & ALC889A
PSU: Seasonic Platinum 1kW
Default 06-20-2011, 20:47 | posts: 971 | Location: Istanbul

Samsung 2333T

BF:BC2
3840x2160 @50Hz
http://i.min.us/iGaJC.png (10.9mb)
1920x1080
http://www.abload.de/img/bfbc2game_2011_06_19_25jxi.png

Metro2033
3840x2160 @50Hz

1920x1080


HL2
2560x1440 @60Hz

1920x1080


GTX 460 can handle few games at 2560x but 3840x is a no go lol.. equal to 2x2 OGSSAA..

Last edited by MfA; 06-20-2011 at 20:53.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#21)
andressergio
Maha Guru
 
andressergio's Avatar
 
Videocard: 3x SLI GALAXY GTX780HOF
Processor: I4770K@48HT
Mainboard: ASUS M6E
Memory: 2x8GB TeamX 2666CL11
Soundcard:
PSU: Seasonic P-1000
Default 06-20-2011, 22:33 | posts: 848 | Location: Montevideo-Uruguay

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete J View Post
^Cheers for the in-depth reply!

I had a closer look at the pics you provided, and it appears Nvidia may have changed the way it's done: specifically, apparently doing all the work on the GPU BEFORE sending it off to the monitor. Previously I believe the drivers actually modified the BIOS of the monitor, hence why there was the risk of bricking it. Just out of interest, did you get a pop up warning you that it could potentially ruin your monitor?

I'll give it a go in a while. I can't afford to break anything at the moment as I'm nearing the end of a big project, but I'll report back when I eventually get round to it.
i been testing and all works as a charm, only darker pic but more defined colors

cheers !
Sergio
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#22)
eiren
Member Guru
 
Videocard: GTX480 @ 890
Processor: Q9550 @ 4Ghz
Mainboard: Gigabyte GA-EP45-EXTREME
Memory: OCZ Blade Series 4GB
Soundcard:
PSU: Corsair HX850w
Default 06-22-2011, 20:41 | posts: 72 | Location: UK

Thanks for this!

Been using it since you posted it, and has looked lovely. More often than not now, I can just turn off AA and it is all being supersampled by the downscaling... looks excellent.

It means you can have things effectively supersampled without the huge GPU overhead
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#23)
Noisiv
Ancient Guru
 
Videocard: GTX 460 HAWK Talon Attack
Processor: Q6600@3.5GHz
Mainboard: Gigabyte EP-43-DS3L
Memory: 4GB OCZ 5-4-4-4-12
Soundcard: Onboard Realtek ALC888
PSU: Silent Pro M700
Default 06-23-2011, 13:00 | posts: 2,991

Quote:
Originally Posted by eiren View Post
Thanks for this!

Been using it since you posted it, and has looked lovely. More often than not now, I can just turn off AA and it is all being supersampled by the downscaling... looks excellent.

It means you can have things effectively supersampled without the huge GPU overhead

Why would you prefer this over large array of normal AA modes? When they are available that is.

It's far from "supersampled without the huge GPU overhead". It's as brute force as it gets.

Me, of all the games I own, I'd use this in GTAIV only. I see it as possibly usable in couple more games: BFBC2, maybe Mafia 2 but not really
It would be weird to use this in HL2 for example, as there are tons of other preferable methods.

Most of UE3 games (dx9 ones) have no real AA, but do offer some AA,
and I'm just not comfortable with running my monitor out of spec, as too many things can go wrong. Also I have a hunch my Samsung wouldn't go very far.

2560x1440 over 1920x1080 just wouldn't cut it for me, if there are no other AA methods to begin with. And if there are...u get the picture.

All on all great article. I always thought you need to edit EDID or something. Though more educational then practical.
Except if you can double your native resolution, and don't mind the risk.
2x2 is nothing to sneeze at.


EDIT:

3840x2160 was a no-go. Had to hit hard reboot couple of times. Managed to corrupt some of my files and settings Settled for 3200x1800.
All in all cool thing if you have the GPU power / VRAM to spare


http://alturl.com/d7j38



http://alturl.com/mfenz

Last edited by Noisiv; 06-23-2011 at 15:23.
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#24)
andressergio
Maha Guru
 
andressergio's Avatar
 
Videocard: 3x SLI GALAXY GTX780HOF
Processor: I4770K@48HT
Mainboard: ASUS M6E
Memory: 2x8GB TeamX 2666CL11
Soundcard:
PSU: Seasonic P-1000
Default 06-23-2011, 15:44 | posts: 848 | Location: Montevideo-Uruguay

Quote:
Originally Posted by Noisiv View Post
Why would you prefer this over large array of normal AA modes? When they are available that is.

It's far from "supersampled without the huge GPU overhead". It's as brute force as it gets.

Me, of all the games I own, I'd use this in GTAIV only. I see it as possibly usable in couple more games: BFBC2, maybe Mafia 2 but not really
It would be weird to use this in HL2 for example, as there are tons of other preferable methods.

Most of UE3 games (dx9 ones) have no real AA, but do offer some AA,
and I'm just not comfortable with running my monitor out of spec, as too many things can go wrong. Also I have a hunch my Samsung wouldn't go very far.

2560x1440 over 1920x1080 just wouldn't cut it for me, if there are no other AA methods to begin with. And if there are...u get the picture.

All on all great article. I always thought you need to edit EDID or something. Though more educational then practical.
Except if you can double your native resolution, and don't mind the risk.
2x2 is nothing to sneeze at.


EDIT:

3840x2160 was a no-go. Had to hit hard reboot couple of times. Managed to corrupt some of my files and settings Settled for 3200x1800.
All in all cool thing if you have the GPU power / VRAM to spare


http://alturl.com/d7j38



http://alturl.com/mfenz
yes same for me but 3200x1800 is it for 16:9 or 16:10 ?
   
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#25)
Noisiv
Ancient Guru
 
Videocard: GTX 460 HAWK Talon Attack
Processor: Q6600@3.5GHz
Mainboard: Gigabyte EP-43-DS3L
Memory: 4GB OCZ 5-4-4-4-12
Soundcard: Onboard Realtek ALC888
PSU: Silent Pro M700
Default 06-23-2011, 16:22 | posts: 2,991

3200/1800 = 16/9


Quote:
Originally Posted by Death_Lord View Post
I cant even see the difference, to me its the difference between a 23 inch 1080p resolution and a 24 inch 1080p resolution.
The difference is the same as between playing at lower and higher resolution.
No more - no less.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Death_Lord View Post
For GTA and Borderlands the best is to use MLAA, Lets hope nvidia gets its own MLAA soon, so Nvidia players will enjoy from it too
Hahahha the jealousy of it.

Remember, the idea here is to enhance the picture quality, not blur the crap out of everything.

Last edited by Noisiv; 06-23-2011 at 16:32.
   
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBulletin Skin developed by: vBStyles.com
Copyright (c) 1995-2014, All Rights Reserved. The Guru of 3D, the Hardware Guru, and 3D Guru are trademarks owned by Hilbert Hagedoorn.