Wow. Did i just invent the wheel

Discussion in 'OS X Mavericks (10.9)' started by -BigMac-, May 29, 2014.

  1. -BigMac-, May 29, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: May 29, 2014

    -BigMac- Suspended

    -BigMac-

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2011
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    #1
    Hi Guys.

    Playing around with SwitchResX today.

    It can be used to set custom resolutions, so technically you can make HIDPI resolutions at will, of any resolution.

    What i just tried sort of blew my mind though.

    I set it to 5120x2880. my screen is 2560x1440 natively. so 4x the resolution.

    After the reboot i enabled HI-DPI 1440p.

    What followed scared me.

    It actually looks smoother.

    WHAT. NATIVE RESOLUTION, looks SMOOTHER.

    WHAT.

    Am i tripping balls or what???

    heres 2 screenshots of the 2 different settings. one retina native. one normal native.

    [​IMG]

    full resolution: http://i.imgur.com/g7NTQwN.png
    PROVEN.

    Well done, you all have retina enhanced native resolutions now. youre welcome xx
     
  2. MartinAppleGuy macrumors 68020

    MartinAppleGuy

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2013
    #2
    Take an off screen image.
     
  3. GoCubsGo macrumors Nehalem

    GoCubsGo

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2005
    #3
    Native resolution looks smoother? Unless I don't get what you're saying (in such an eloquent way), I would say Captain Obvious is Obvious.

    As for tripping balls, you should keep your balls out of this and no, you did not and never will invent the wheel. You know the wheel exists today…in all its circular glory.
     
  4. -BigMac- thread starter Suspended

    -BigMac-

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2011
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    #4
    using an iPhone 5s.

    can still see the difference off screen. with your eyes it is much more visible than the 5s picks up

    full resolution: http://i.imgur.com/hcZnzsG.jpg

    [​IMG]
     
  5. GoCubsGo macrumors Nehalem

    GoCubsGo

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2005
    #5
    I'm a fan of how you can so excitedly pat yourself on the back in the succession of three posts.
     
  6. pmau macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2010
    #6
    Sure. It has more logical pixels to render in more detail. After the rendering, it's scaled down again and looks smooth because the color values are averaged from the big logical resolution you rendered on.

    But think about the performance impact. Everything is rendered in a big textured that is scaled at 60fps.
     
  7. -BigMac- thread starter Suspended

    -BigMac-

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2011
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    #7
    no i dont think you do know what i am saying, sorry.

    The resolution is getting processed at 4x the native res, once scaled back to native resolution, it looks clearer than normal native resolution.
     
  8. GoCubsGo macrumors Nehalem

    GoCubsGo

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2005
    #8
    Oh I understand what you're saying. I'm patting myself on the back for being so god damn brilliant too. Don't worry.

    I think the off screen image is a better representation and pmau is right. Well done pmau!
     
  9. -BigMac- thread starter Suspended

    -BigMac-

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2011
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    #9
    Haha thanks for your understanding.

    The performance hit seems to be obvious on my 15" 2013 retina macbook pro, even with the lid closed, the external is using a lot of resources to scale the image, but so far I've only noticed it when moving windows around.
     
  10. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #10
    So I'm still not even sure what I'm looking at. A 5120x2880 scaled down resolution that looks nice?
     
  11. GoCubsGo macrumors Nehalem

    GoCubsGo

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2005
    #11
    But that is the point. You're having issues with performance so why would you want to run that resolution? I don't think the point was to not let you run the resolution, it is just that it is not ideal and that is something you are proving as you struggle with moving windows around; a basic task that the machine could handle if you bump down the resolution to true native. I think the "improvement" you see is because of the reason pmau says.
     
  12. -BigMac- thread starter Suspended

    -BigMac-

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2011
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    #12
    a 5120x2880 resolution, scaled down to 2560x1440, to make a clearer picture. its the same technique as retina displays use, but ofcourse it is limited by the pixels in this case. but it results in clearer image through the way of processing and scaling

    ----------

    by saying 'struggling', i completely expressed the experience of these settings wrong.

    It is not a struggle, it doesnt lag, you can do everything at 100%. only difference noticeable is when moving a window quickly across the whole screen, it may stutter one fps. thats all :)

    under the hood, ofcourse, the cpu is working harder than usual. but it isnt noticeable per say.
     
  13. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #13
    So are you getting the screen real estate of a 2560x1440 display?
     
  14. -BigMac- thread starter Suspended

    -BigMac-

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2011
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    #14
    yep. at a seemingly "higher resolution" than if i used the normal 2560x1440 settings. think about it as extreme font smoothing, on absolutely everything, everything is clearer.

    ----------

    Why was this moved to Macbook Pro Threads?? it has to do with OSX, not Macbook Pros.
     
  15. MartinAppleGuy macrumors 68020

    MartinAppleGuy

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2013
  16. leman macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2008
    #16
    When you do that, you are essentially using a super-sampling anti-aliasing technique (SSAA). Games have been using this technique and it's approximations for over a decade now. I am slightly surprised though that it would produce a noticeable difference for desktop rendering...
     
  17. -BigMac- thread starter Suspended

    -BigMac-

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2011
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    #17
    this is exactly what i was surprised about..

    Thought i might try it for fun, and what do you know.. it works.

    Am i the first to write about this online? Surely a technique to produce 'retina scaling' on native resolution, would be enough to post on front page about?

    It can literally be done on any non-retina screen in the world..
     
  18. Intelligent macrumors 6502a

    Intelligent

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2013
    #18

    Tried it, didn't see any difference at all.
     
  19. h9826790 macrumors 604

    h9826790

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2014
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    #19
    I just try that in my old Mac Pro with the Apple Cinema Display (Not thunderbolt), The 1440p HiDPI looks a little burl to me (check the icons).

    Screen Shot 2014-05-30 at 0.09.22.jpg
     
  20. -BigMac- thread starter Suspended

    -BigMac-

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2011
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    #20
    take a screenshot of a part of your screen with it on, and a screenshot of a part of your screen with it off. open them up together, and cycle through them quickly.

    you WILL see the difference.

    Heres a screenshot i just took for you.

    http://i.imgur.com/ug7NRWr.png
    [​IMG]

    This is on a non-retina screen, and is scaled up, in reality, that detail is shown on an even tighter scale.

    Looks amazing.

    ----------

    thank you for your post,
    but both those images look blurred. It seems Macrumors, when uploading the picture, downscaled the image, so both of them are blurred.

    can you please upload the original screenshot to a website such as imur please?
     
  21. iPhil, May 29, 2014
    Last edited: May 29, 2014

    iPhil macrumors 68040

    iPhil

    #21
    Well the 5120*2880 isn't 4x resolution of 2560*1440 its only 2x.. :roll eyes:



    to be 4x resolution of 2560*1440 (2560*4 =10220 1440*4=5760 )

    4x resolution of 2560*1440 = 10220*5760
     
  22. -BigMac- thread starter Suspended

    -BigMac-

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2011
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    #22
    total pixel count is 4x :)
     
  23. dmccloud macrumors 6502a

    dmccloud

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Location:
    Anchorage, AK
    #23
    (2x horizontal res) x (2x vertical res) = 4x original resolution.
     
  24. roadbloc macrumors G3

    roadbloc

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Location:
    UK
  25. -BigMac- thread starter Suspended

    -BigMac-

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2011
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    #25
    100%, it will work on any monitor in the world, only requirement is that it runs a 'retina supporting' mac osx version, im not sure what version that is.. 10.9.X?
     

Share This Page