What are the laptop specs do i need to run 4048x4048 d3d internal resolution ?

[iakoboss7]

everything you said have nothing to do with what we are talking about...

[brosephjames]

I wasn't posting in response to any particular person.

But nobody in this thread has ever actually seen 4048x4048 I can promise you that. Unless they are bill gates.

[iakoboss7]

thats what i said. this has nothing to do with the topic of the thread you responded. yep i have seen it but in a smaller window in my pc thats why its called internal resolution and also has nothing to do with the screen. thats why you are off topic

[brosephjames]

what I'm saying is there's no point in using a high internal res. it's going to have to down sample the image to fit your display resolution. the best case scenerio of the technique to do this will be super sampling (which can improve perceived resolution in the same way AA would) or in some cases you can actually lose quality. A 1:1 match of your native resolution is the only thing that makes sense.

[iakoboss7]

yeah it makes sense but by using a bigger internal res you can still get a little better image quality, see pics.

1920x1200 with the res of 1920x1200
http://img691.imageshack.us/img691/8611/84142669.png

1920x1200 with the res of 4048x4048
http://img697.imageshack.us/img697/5999/85287418.png

edit: i agree that after using a res 4 times bigger than the game resolution i would go with some AA

edit2: also sorry maybe i didnt understand your 1st post

[Shadow Lady]

what I'm saying is there's no point in using a high internal res. it's going to have to down sample the image to fit your display resolution.

It's still sharper and more detailed image in some games and there's the AA effect of supersampling you describe. User preference really.

This is the difference between 1024x1024 and 4096x4096 in Grandia III, mind you 4096x4096 is very slow for me but at 2048x2048 it's already much sharper anyway and you can't get that kind of details with AA.

[Rezard]

@ iakoboss7's images:
Wow. Their virtually identical. Definitely a tiny difference (when observing the "pixelization" on his stomach). Am I the only one that see a bit of white appear behind the elbow? That isn't his other arm/sleave, or is it?

@ Shadow Lady's images:
Yeah, definitely "sharpest" 4096x4096, and slowest LOL. I totally agree with the use of 2048x2048 being sharp enough while remaining playable.

[Shadow Lady]

Huh? I hope you mean iakoboss7's pics cause it's definitely different on mine

[Rezard]

Huh? I hope you mean iakoboss7's pics cause it's definitely different on mine

LOL Yeah, sorry. I was in the process of posting when you posted.

[iakoboss7]

even i was surprised when i get them by the offset of just 1 pixel in movement lol still if you look in the overall picture the 4k x 4k is sharper also i used a 1920x1200 as a starter res so it was harder to spot the difference in the 2 photos. the fps i got where around 80 in the 1st pic (cpu bottleneck) and 22 in the 2nd but with an overall slowdown in windows also!!!