Dumb question about textures

[IGotBored]

As I said this is a dumb question but Is there a major noticeable difference between 2K, 4K, and 8K texture? Like I know that 2K<4K<8K but is it worth it to go over 2K? Every time i thought about putting in 4K or 8K i feel like my skyrim and computer will just explode ?

My pc specs are: Ryzen 5 1600, GTX 1080, and 8GB of ram

[Guest]

IMO anything above 2k is not needed for normal gameplay. For screenshot sessions you could benefit from the 4k, even 8k textures for skins/gear. You could do a test to see if your pc can handle bigger textures, just download and use some of those cpu/gpu monitors (like this one, I don't know if its good, never used it, just linking as an example) then check the vram usage during normal gameplay and if you do notice or not the quality improvement.

[myuhinny]

All having higher textures do is add more strain to your game and computer. Most people disable the skyrim texture packs that are installed that come with the game as they are not needed. 

 

It is best to use lower textures except for screenshots.

[IGotBored]

3 hours ago, myuhinny said:

All having higher textures do is add more strain to your game and computer. Most people disable the skyrim texture packs that are installed that come with the game as they are not needed. 

 

It is best to use lower textures except for screenshots.

 

3 hours ago, Sternum said:

IMO anything above 2k is not needed for normal gameplay. For screenshot sessions you could benefit from the 4k, even 8k textures for skins/gear. You could do a test to see if your pc can handle bigger textures, just download and use some of those cpu/gpu monitors (like this one, I don't know if its good, never used it, just linking as an example) then check the vram usage during normal gameplay and if you do notice or not the quality improvement.

Thanks!

[ZeroListGram]

Depends on your priorities.

 

I downgraded from 2k-4k to mostly 2k with 1k on things you won't easily notice anyway. If you want to actually play the game (and by that I mean in a way that actually poses some challenge (Req--khmmm-khmm--uiem), I guarantee that you won't notice a difference between 2k and 4k, at least not on the generic 1920x1080 resolution.

 

Maintaining good FPS worth a thousand times more to your gaming experience than having a few extra details that you will miss anyway if you play the game in any serious manner.

 

The power you spare on the textures is much better spent on a better ENB, which will make 99% of the difference in your game.

[yatol]

5 hours ago, Southwarth said:

I guarantee that you won't notice a difference between 2k and 4k, at least not on the generic 1920x1080 resolution.

really?

you can't notice a difference there?

https://imgur.com/a/CJCHK

you can see on screen 2 i did nothing to the 1k texture, it only look better on one wall

1k is a little small for those huge walls, but it's a seamless texture, bigger uv map is better than bigger texture for fps

 

an armor that use one 4k texture use less ram than one armor that use 5 2k textures

 

when i was playing with a gtx 570 1280 mb



now



that took some time to upgrade the textures

if there was no difference, i wouldn't have bother

first screen armor is 2k maybe





that's 3 1k textures



the black texture it's my uv map that suck

the texture suck too



original was 2k, this is 2 1k textures



 



bigger texture don't mean better texture

[Guest]

52 minutes ago, yatol said:

really?

you can't notice a difference there?

Don't get things out of context.

[ZeroListGram]

2 hours ago, yatol said:

really?

you can't notice a difference there?

https://imgur.com/a/CJCHK

you can see on screen 2 i did nothing to the 1k texture, it only look better on one wall

1k is a little small for those huge walls, but it's a seamless texture, bigger uv map is better than bigger texture for fps

 

an armor that use one 4k texture use less ram than one armor that use 5 2k textures

 

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

when i was playing with a gtx 570 1280 mb



now



that took some time to upgrade the textures

if there was no difference, i wouldn't have bother

first screen armor is 2k maybe





that's 3 1k textures



the black texture it's my uv map that suck

the texture suck too



original was 2k, this is 2 1k textures



 



bigger texture don't mean better texture
 

 

 

 

I'm sorry, I have a hard time understanding what you've wrote. If you implied that not all textures are made equal, and some lower resolution textures can be better than higher resolution ones, then we are in agreement on that. Things other than resolution are also factors.

 

However, my point was that if you play any decently challenging game (with my definitions that would be Requiem DiD on Skyrim), even on 1080p, you will not notice dramatic difference between 2k and 4k, especially when you're trying to dodge attacks to avoid permanent death... you will have other things to worry about than the resolution (or normals, or UV, etc) of your textures. This is not to say that the graphics of a game are not important; but there is a point after which you get heavily diminishing returns.

 

You get a much better bang for your buck if you run a better ENB than if you upgrade from 2k-1k to 2k-4k.

[Grey Cloud]

To me there are two issues here. One is visual and the other is resource usage.

[yatol]

3 hours ago, Southwarth said:

 

However, my point was that if you play any decently challenging game (with my definitions that would be Requiem DiD on Skyrim), even on 1080p, you will not notice dramatic difference between 2k and 4k

strange

i had a lot of time to look around when i was walking to regen my stamina

and it was worse at high levels during combats, i was running out of stamina because of all those npcs add by requiem, that weren't able to damage me (where's the challenge? drinking stamina potion to be able to damage those npcs?)

 

avoiding 4k textures with his gtx 1080 is supposed to do what for his performances?

 

also had 60 fps with my gtx 570 1280 mb, wasn't expecting much from interiors

still 15-20 fps in cities?

 

there's more npc in tows, and they eat some fps

there's more lights, and the biggest ones eat more fps than the smaller ones

clipping between houses and grounds have an impact on fps, and there's a lot of clipping in towns

the useless civil wars checks doesn't matter, it's just longer to enter the town

 

there's some choice if your fps suck, and it don't look like the texture resolution is one of the priorities