BenQ XL2411Z 1024x768 looks horrible in CS GO

[ftwknx]

Hey guys, I have a problem: my 1024x768 looks terrible in cs go (blurry and pixelated), but on desktop it looks decent. I tried lightboost and I got rid of the blur but it's still very pixelated and the colors aren't great anymore because of the blur reduction. I asked some guys and their 1024x768 isn't blurry even without lightboost.
What's wrong? I tried display scaling & gpu scaling, no change. 1280x1024 and 1280x960 both look great.

[lexlazootin]

'Blur' is super vague and can mean a lot of different things to different people. The more 'Motion blur' style of blur can be changed using the AMA settings (Should be set to high) in your monitor's on screen display.

And is it pixelated because you're using a lower resolution? lol

[Falkentyne]

How do you know you were using display scaling?
Just turning off GPU scaling in the video card direct3D panel does NOT mean that GPU scaling is off !

[ftwknx]

How do you know you were using display scaling?
Just turning off GPU scaling in the video card direct3D panel does NOT mean that GPU scaling is off !

How do I do that then?

'Blur' is super vague and can mean a lot of different things to different people. The more 'Motion blur' style of blur can be changed using the AMA settings (Should be set to high) in your monitor's on screen display.

And is it pixelated because you're using a lower resolution? lol

I don't care it's pixelated, I want it to be less blurry. Blur + pixelated models makes it unplayable.

[Falkentyne]

I don't know the options on the XL2411z as I have the XL2720Z, and the menus seem a bit different,
But go to the game at 1024x768, then open the OSD And go to the system tab and go to information or resolution.

If current resolution says 1920x1080, and optimal resolution says 1920x1080, then you are GPU scaled.
If current resolution says 1024x768, then you are display scaled.

If you are display scaled, you go to (OSD) picture advanced, and set "display mode" to 1:1, aspect or full screen. that's what display scaling means--the MONITOR (display) handles the scaling.

if you are GPU scaled, it means the VIDEO CARD handles the scaling (that's why the monitor reports 1920x1080--it means the 1024x768 resolution is SCALED DOWN from 1920x1080 (gpu scaled), instead of being sent a 1024x768 signal (display scaled). Then you use the video card control panel and set 1:1, aspect or full in the driver. The monitor scaling options will be ignored.

How GPU scaling and display scaling work:

Under DirectX 10+, I believe that all resolutions lower than native are always GPU scaled. If you "attempt" to select a display scaled resolution when GPU scaling is disabled in dx10, that refresh rate will be ignored and the next available refresh rate will be set. This limitation does not apply to the desktop.

Under DirectX 9-, custom resolutions entered in ToastyX CRU under standard and detailed resolutions will be display scaled at the defined refresh rates listed, and GPU scaled at the same resolution but different (non defined) refresh rates. So if you entered 1024x768@120hz in Standard resolutions, in ToastyX CRU, then 1024x768@120hz would be display scaled, while 1024x768@100hz would be GPU scaled. Also there are "established" resolutions too.

Note: it's virtually impossible to use "display scaling" in combination with a VT tweak. If you want to use a VT tweak and have it apply to low resolutions, enable forced GPU scaling.

[ftwknx]

It says 1920x1080 at both current resolution and optimal resolution (except the optimal is 120 hz and current 144), even if I set display mode from nvidia control panel.

However, if I set my freq to 120 instead of 144 it says current resolution 1024x768 and optimal 1920x1080. The game looks better than on gpu scaling though.

Oh and by the way, does gpu scaling (or display scaling) affect my fps in any way?

[Falkentyne]

Download ToastyX CRU. You'll see 1024x768@120hz listed in standard resolutions. There's your display scaling.

It's possible for 144hz to be display scaled but its' not easy, because the limit to creating a standard resolution refresh rate is 123hz in CRU. And 144hz will go out of range if you attempt using normal timings. You have to trick the scaler by using a lower Vertical Total and make a detailed resolution. I believe 1098 VT will work for 1024x768. Not sure about 800x600; I had some problems once (trying to help someone on this forum with silly resolutions...like 800x600..WHY in 2016 would anyone play CS at 800x600?) and had to use an even lower VT.

Input lag? I don't know.
A long time ago, there was a bug in the Nvidia drivers where GPU scaling added several frames of input lag at lower resolutions, and display scaling option was completely missing from the Nvidia drivers. I assume this was fixed by now.

On AMD, I detect nothing.

So, tl;dr:
use OSD "display mode" to set scaling options 1:1, Aspect, Full, if display scaled.
use Video card aspect settings in the Video card control panel to set scaling options if GPU Scaled.

[ftwknx]

Some people are used to 800x600 from cs 1.6 I guess, but that's a bad resolution in GO IMO. I'd go with 1024x768 lowest and maybe 1280x1024 highest (though some people also prefer 1680x1050 or even 1920x1080).
Whatever, ScreaM used to play 800x600 and he did good, so it's all about preference.

I guess I'll just stick with 1280x1024 at the moment since it looks good and I can run it on 144 Hz.
Thanks for help.

[lexlazootin]

I get it if you are a old player from 1.6 that can't change because you used it for literal YEARS, but using some low 4:3 res just because Scream did it once is pretty stupid.

You loose detail and FOV, if you've got the performance just don't do it.

[Falkentyne]

Pretty much. CS:Go has proper Hor+ scaling now, so there's zero benefit to using 4:3 in this game.
*ZERO*.

The ONLY 4:3 resolution you should even be THINKING of to use in CS:Go is 1440x1080, on a 1920x1080 monitor, if you can't handle current resolutions, nothing more. (this requires creating a detailed resolution).

or 1920x1440 if on a 2560x1440 monitor (Both are 4:3).

Why use this instead of crappy crap like 1024x768, which is complete ass today?
Because the vertical screen size matches the physical monitor perfectly, so you lose NO vertical space on the monitor.
You still keep your 4:3,
And you'll have black bars horizontally.

Just don't use "full screen" at that resolution--then it looks horrible.
use 1:1 or aspect (which are identical).

Note : if you are creating a *display scaled* 1440x1080 resolution, there's a minor "bug" in the Benq firmware which stops 1:1 and Aspect from working at certain refresh rates, because the Benq thinks that you are running at the native vertical size, so it disables 1:1 and aspect, as if you were at 1920x1080. At 120hz refresh rate, this can be avoided by using a 1125 Vertical Total (the default for 120hz is 144), since the VT is lower, the Monitor OSD will unlock 1:1 and aspect. The monitor internal scaler will identify the refresh rate as 120hz with VT 1125. If you were using VT 1144, 1:1 and aspect might be locked out.

For 100hz, it's virtually impossible. Default VT for 100hz @ 1080p is 1133, but lowering it causes the scaler to get confused and think it's at a different refresh rate, which could cause sync errors (stuttering, although I think this only affects blur reduction enabled), even if you are not using blur reduction. Lowering the VT to 1125 from 1133 isn't enough of a change, so 1:1 and aspect still don't seem to be available. Going lower causes erratic stuff to happen, like the refresh rate being reported as 75hz, and getting sync errors and stuttering as a result. I don't remember if I found a VT that made 100hz work properly display scaled at 1440x1080. I think I DID Find *one*, but the monitor reported 75hz and it looked like it was strobing slighitly blurred (without stuttering), but it was slightly distracting.

To avoid all this silly crap, enable GPU scaling and set the aspect settings from the video card.