4K monitor opinion

[Kampfpilot_JG3]

hello

The game supports 2K resolution . Is anyone using 4 K monitor and the main question is is the visual and small details easier to spot such as enemy aircraft in the distance ? 

[Elem]

I've been using a 40" 4k monitor for about 5 years now. I would not go back to anything smaller, in fact I'm going to upgrade to a 43" soon. Crisp, clear, bright image really bring out the best that IL-2 has to offer.

[GregP]

I’ve been using a large 4K monitor for several years now and could never go back to 2K! I posted my results of JimTM’s spotting test mission here, might be a good comparison against what you currently see at 2K.

[40plus]

43" 4k monitor here. the game looks beautiful at that resolution/size.

I can't comment on spotting as I only use the monitor for Tank Crew. VR for flying.

[Kampfpilot_JG3]

thank you everyone for the extensive and useful information , so the limits of the game do not obstruct the 4k monitor from functioning correctly  . My 32 inch 2k curved is only 6 months old so i'll wait for the prices to come down and move on to 40 inch 4k you all recommend . Can't wait !!! 

[Mitthrawnuruodo]

14 minutes ago, dog1 said:

My 32 inch 2k curved is only 6 months old so i'll wait for the prices to come down and move on to 40 inch 4k you all recommend . Can't wait !!! 

 

Just make sure that your GPU is sufficiently strong first. That 4K monitor will have four times as many pixels as FHD, so the requirements are much higher. If you're not careful, you can end up with a true slideshow.

Edited July 14, 2020 by Mitthrawnuruodo

[40plus]

Mitthrawnuruodo makes a good point, strong GPU required. My good results with 4k are based on a 1080ti (full game detail settings). The other thing to note is that with 4k, unless you spend silly amounts of money you are usually limited to 60fps. If that's a thing you're concerned about.

[Kampfpilot_JG3]

MY GPU is a I 9700K 3.6 turbo to 4.6 . My FPS is 117 max  90 min average in combat box depending on how many players present . Tremendous lag when 80 plus players present in most missions  . i avoid peak hrs because of that . MY card is the 1060TI from last year .  32 RAMS . If the FPS is to drop to 60 with my present set up with a 4K monitor  the game becomes unplayable , that was ok for games of 20 years ago . What is the recommended GPU in this case and how many RAMs would be advisable to reach 115 FPS in built up areas ?     

[RedKestrel]

8 hours ago, dog1 said:

MY GPU is a I 9700K 3.6 turbo to 4.6 . My FPS is 117 max  90 min average in combat box depending on how many players present . Tremendous lag when 80 plus players present in most missions  . i avoid peak hrs because of that . MY card is the 1060TI from last year .  32 RAMS . If the FPS is to drop to 60 with my present set up with a 4K monitor  the game becomes unplayable , that was ok for games of 20 years ago . What is the recommended GPU in this case and how many RAMs would be advisable to reach 115 FPS in built up areas ?     

RAM probably won't make any difference. 

I think 1080ti or 2080ti is your only hope to get high frame rates on a 4k monitor with good settings. 

[JG7_X-Man]

9 hours ago, dog1 said:

MY GPU is a I 9700K 3.6 turbo to 4.6 . My FPS is 117 max  90 min average in combat box depending on how many players present . Tremendous lag when 80 plus players present in most missions  . i avoid peak hrs because of that . MY card is the 1060TI from last year .  32 RAMS . If the FPS is to drop to 60 with my present set up with a 4K monitor  the game becomes unplayable , that was ok for games of 20 years ago . What is the recommended GPU in this case and how many RAMs would be advisable to reach 115 FPS in built up areas ?     

 

This is the misconception of frame rates. The human eye sees 30 fps as a continuous (note that I did not say average) frame and the frames will appear seamless (i.e. no stutters/lag). So at a continuous 60 fps or 115 fps the human eye will see the same seamless frames. This is why we are told to set the fps to 60 in game. I will let the video editing gurus here explain more if any chime in.

 

Achieving higher average frame rates is more a marketing ploy to get you to replace your old equipment. Achieving higher average frame rates per second is what one should expect with any card upgrade. Most importantly, the human eye can differentiate  b/w fluctuating (average) frame rates, so even though you can achieve 115 fps, once it drops to 90 fps you might see a lag, and that defeats to purpose of setting fps target that high.

 

That said, searching for higher fps with he same picture quality is not the way to go. @RedKestrel had the right idea, you need to upgraded more than your monitor to get higher average fps in any game.

 

I run a 7700K OC'ed to 4.9GHZ and a GTX1080Ti 11 GB RAM 32 GB RAM @2000 MHz. I set IL-2 for 60 fps when with my 144 HMz capable monitor. Like I said above, continuous 60 fps vs 144 fps means nothing if I can't maintain an average 144 fps. My eye can't tell the difference anyway - so what's the gain?