ALL WIDE displays i've seen have scalers to do 4:3, use that. Best solution. nvidia scaling shouldn't add input lag, atleast not all drivers, but they produce much more blurry picture than built in scaler.

go to nvedia options and put scaling over gpu ..that has less input lag. mouse feels retarded at 16:9 ... also for some reason when i try 16:9 its so hard to look at timer +weaponbar + whats happening on the screen ..its like u check how much lg ammo u have and suddenly a green keel jumps over u ...

Wait wot!? pros are still using low res even if it adds input lag?

not if u scale over gpu .. and even if it did ...16:9 stupid slow mousefeeling and not being able to see hud + timer + other shit unless ur monitor is 10m away ..id rather have 4:3 and some input lag which i dont notice .. + on rmode 12 shits crystal clear =D

Noctis confirmed that it is placebo habbit behaviour. Move along.

Not really placebo if it makes things easier on the eyes which 4:3 does.

What really matter is mostly the resolution and not really the aspect ratio to be honest.

thats personal.

it really makes no difference at all. you see less with 4:3, more with 16:9, and thats all there is to it. if you have issues hitting people because you switched to widescreen, ur prolly focussing on a placebo instead of playing like normal.

nice name!

if dont wanna lag make black bars at hud

This is what I do, and its great

i find you can lessen your fov with widescreen. this is the best reason to make the adjustment.

lower resolution has less lag cause modern lcd diplays do post processing of the image that adds lag

no.

sadly yes, in a crt the signal is analog and is not processed. in lcd in most cases the signal needs to be processed because it switches to digital even if it goes through vga it needs to get switched to digital signal inside the monitor

why are you playing on a TV?

im not playing on tv, it just feels less lagy using lower res on lcd. i had lcd that could do 320x200 felt the smoothest

Not saying ur wrong but there's been so many threads like these and this is the first time this has been brought up. source?

What about the time needed to scale the input source to the monitor's native resolution? Is it less than the time you save on "post processing" at lower resolutions?

If "post processing" is something simple like gamma adjustments, do monitors really first post process the image, and then fill the display matrix? It would make more sense to do both things in one pass: receive pixel, process pixel, output pixel. This is faster because there is only one loop and the entire frame doesn't need to be stored in memory.

However, if the above is true, then it means that "post processing" would be done after scaling, so there would be no reduced post processing time at lower resolutions.

These thoughts are just a speculation; you are very welcome to prove me wrong. But until then I am more inclined to believe that the LCD's native resolution has the smallest input lag.

try decent lcd before talk shit

you dont understand, the signal is converted because vga is not a direct analog to analog output like the vinil record. the lcd processes the signal, higher resolution will take more time to get processed.

in nvidia drivers, set scaling to:
no scaling - display.

in ql, use a custom resolution:
r_mode -1
r_customwidth 1440
r_customheight 1080

that's what i do.

This is by far the best thing to do when you want 4/3 on a widescreen monitor. No lag and perfect sharpness.

identical to merely choosing a non native res and letting GPU scale it.

What? There is no scaling happening so no it's not "identical".

weirdly this isn't working for me, the res looks right, but quake appears on the left of the screen. In the back I can see my desktop, and it only goes at 60hz.

All the default 4:3 resolutions work fine.

It's because your monitor doesn't natively support 1440x1080. You have to go into the nvidia control panel and create a custom resolution that's 1440x1080 @ the refresh rate you want.

NVIDIA Control Panel > +Display > Change resolution > Customize... > Create Custom Resolution... > Horizontal pixels: 1440 > Vertical lines: 1080 > Refresh rate (Hz): 60/120/144 > Test > etc, etc

Hehe yeah I just figured that out, thanks!

NICE! always wanted a 4:3 resolution that doesnt need scaling

didn't work :'(

If i set custom 1440x1080 res in win but keep using 800x600 ingame would it give me input lag?

Ah got it working, I needed to add the resolution as a custom resolution in nvidia settings, thanks!

This is what I do as well, best for my poor 4:3 eyes

most top players have switched to widescreen now

you can put 1440x1080 as a custom res in the nvidia control panel

most games don't support it, quake live does though

Why did widescreen become the standard anyway? I've always felt it was complete shit. I started using 1440x1080 even in windows.

Because 1080p/tv/media

For desktop use I find portrait more useful a lot of the time.

Why does noone game in portrait?

Hmm I never cared to try portrait even though my monitor can do it. I think with 2 or 3 monitors in portrait it could be good but then you have to worry about bezels and compatibility. I do switch to 1920x1080 for watching movies/tv but other than that I think widescreen is worse than 4:3.

Sorry I may have been too brief. The world has gone to widescreen because media is produced in this format - panel manufacturers make panels in this format. For desktop use? Maybe not so useful, but the proliferation everywhere of widescreen is why computers have them.

I commonly use a single screen in protrait, it is rare that I need something wider than 1080px. Two browser windows can stack nicely like this and still be useable vs 960px. The extra width makes them more usable for me.

From a gaming perspective I was alluding to playing ql on a single portrait screen. :P Multiscreen gaming is stupid.

From a gaming perspective I was alluding to playing ql on a single portrait screen. :P Multiscreen gaming is stupid.

but playing on portrait screen isn't stupid?!

you should try reading up on how human sees, not orientation of eyes. One of the reason you might find 4:3 better is the way you focus. humans can only focus on part of their vision, and in the shape of a cone. 4:3 is closer to a circle which makes it easier to have more of the screen in focus. Widescreen is an old movie theater 'scam' that got confused and made false just like 'eyes can only see 30fps' which is just as insane.

I know, that's what I'm saying. Who decided it should be the standard and every monitor now should be widescreen? Because to me it seems worse.

because 16:9 panels are cheaper to produce (both tv and monitors sharing displayparts). so when tv's with 16:9 became popular with the whole home cinema yadayada the pricefight within the lcd industrie made them tell everyone "16:9 is the new cool in computer monitors".. which it isnt. but its cheaper for them

Lots of bullshits in this topic and no proof.

I think I just realized why it might be beneficial to use 4:3 over wide screen.

I played on a CRT for years, and never had any problems moving around, then about 3 years ago I switched to a 120hz lcd. I saw no reason to not play wide screen so I did. Earlier this year I have been getting back into duel, and my movement has been SUCKING.

I am constantly hitting the sides of doorways etc. Anyway I have been running around in 4:3 now and my movement feels so much better, like the black bars on the side represent my "size" more accurately.

I think wide screen has been confusing what I thought the size of my model was, making me do sloppy movements to get through doors, like I can see the edge of a doorway making me think I can fit through, then I try go through and i hit the edge.

Anyway it's a theory, still trying it out, could be the 15 years of playing 4:3 helps me move.

I think it's just what you're used to.

Try fov 95 or lower with 16:9, feels great :)

Problem is that on 16:9 the horizontal fov becomes +16 but the vertical fov stays the same

So on fov 90 you have 106 vertical fov and still 74 vertical, which messes up your perception, with fov 100 you actually now have 116 horizontal, 81 vertical etc

So I bought benq 144hz 24 inch monitor and I like to use 4:3 resolution with black borders on both sides. I tried these
r_mode -1
r_customwidth 800
r_customheight 600
but my monitor stretches the picture. If I set the auto scaling off I just get a tiny box in the middle of my screen with black borders everywhere. I tried to create a custom resolution from my nvidia control panel but it just says that my monitor doesnt support that resolution. Any help?

r_mode 9?

you have to go to the ati/nvidia control panel and force scaling to aspect ratio

Just wonder if i use monitor scaler,(not scaling by GPU) would there be any difference in input lag depending from which resolution im doing scaling. What i mean is for example in first case i have native 1920x1080 widescreen res in windows and scale down things to make it 4:3 with my 800x600 res ingame, And in another case i use some other random res in win like lets say 1600x1200 and also scale down things to my 800x600 ingame. Would the amount of input lag be different between those?
My thought was that as LCDs work best on their native res inputlag wise, then if i want to do scaling via monitor it would take less time then scaling from non-native res. It felt like this for me but mb just placebo.

The best is to avoid scaling altogether, use the approach posted in #13 or set up black bars in the HUD if it doesn't work.

CRT >