GTX 1070 vs. RTX 2060 Super vs. Radeon 5700 XT

[Ziklitschli]

Well, yes. That is the entire point of upgrading to a 2080Ti. To play the latest and greatest games. If I wanted to stick to old games I wouldn't have upgraded.

I don't need any kind of SSAA to cut performance by 30% to 50% at 4k for minimum visual differences that the more efficient AA methods offer.

You're going to tell me downloading NVinspector to turn on an ancient, performing killing AA method is going to be a better option? Maybe if I dropped all the graphic settings down to console peasant levels, but I'm not KAC.

Ok then, why not disable downgrades like camera motion blur and depth of field (which can be really blury with TAAs heh) or CA (which actualy has the perf cost heh) to be able to turn on sgssaa x2. Or, example Deus Ex HR, in that game the super high end contact hardening shadows option made the shadow draw only like 10m or sth and disabling it would have not only improved IQ in motion but also gave enough headroom for x1.5 at least (not saying sg because msaa itself is insanely expensive in that game).

In modern games half the graphics menu is to be disabled anyway, super vignettes, lens dirts, chromatic vomit etc.

Yes I'm telling you that 5 sec download and 3 seconds unrar can bring you much better IQ in some games, not all ofc as that depends on engine, compatibility flag and nature of the graphics presented ofc but still, why the f not. It's not as relevant as it once was if you're not into replaying older games (where you could actualy downsample from 8k and maybe even add sth on top, Dead Space? anyway) but in one game in few you'll get vastly superior IQ to the TAA and sharpen mix. Unless ofc you believe in miracles like a technique that is almost free performance wise being remotly comparable to sth that cuts 30% to 50% of perf.

Again, it's not ancient, it's just not for the masses and out of fashion atm. The new ones on the other hand are patchworks for the worst disadvantage of deffered renders - incompability with proper AA techniques.

Any solution in X game that elliminates jaggies and shimmering that maintains texture clarity at 4k. Sometimes that would be SMAA 2TX, sometimes TXAA or TAA with a slight sharpening filter.

Right now I'm playing Red Dead Redemption 2 with High settings at 4k, TAA and Nvidia's freestyle sharpening tool (which is now just as good as Radeon Image Sharpening) to offset any blurriness.

Yes TAA is good at resolving aliasing, the price is as I said blur and ghosting that you have to then sharpen. No sharpening is artifact free, and that filter, as I've just read, costs performance, a little but still sounds a bit backwards heh.

The end results is a fantastic picture quality with zero jaggies, zero shimmering, and perfect pixel texture quality as if no AA was used.

On 65' 4k? How far do you sit from that screen?

In Wildlands, with TAA and slightest sharpen (like 10% or sth when the defaut was I think 50 or sth) the drop in quality from sharpening was visible on 24" qhd screen, 40" full hd screen supersampled x4 and 43" 4k screen, sitting slightly below 2m away from the TVs (recommended distance) and over 1m from the monitor (too far). Granted, this tool might be much superior but again, no miracles.

The ingame 2x SSAA option was perfect enough. There's nothing else that would make it "insanely" better. Highest setting at 4k, no shimmering, no jaggies, razor sharp texture clarity. Don't need any higher levels of AA or different AA methods to make Serious Sam 3 look any better on my 65" 4k screen.

That's the only "old" game I've played on my 2080Ti. The newer games just don't have the performance to spare for AA that cuts performance by 30% or more, and frankly, the modern AA options do just fine.

You must have had msaa turned on as well in the menu, 2x2 alone will not eliminate jaggies to perfection like you describe it on 65" 4k, it has the pixel pitch of, simplest to describe, 32.5" 1080p screen.

Ofc, sitting far enough will eliminate all aliasing in the world heh. Or, you're just not that much sensitive to IQ, or particularly to aliasing, shimmer etc. I mean, not long ago you (at least afair it was you) were claiming that DLSS is almost (90% or sth) like native 4k and here we have this guys claiming that even this nV sharpen filter beats it at 0,7 of 4k res, even in Metro:

https://www.techspot.com/review/1903-dlss-vs-freestyle-vs-ris/

Not saying this to fire you up, just maybe that's it and good for you if so, I'd be a happier and wealthier man like that, though playing with a worse IQ heh. Anyway, why not just try and have another tool at your disposal, not every new game leaves no headroom with 2080TI at 4k.

 

[Ziklitschli]

Is that a glossy TV btw? The glass in some models helps a lot with aliasing.

 

[Exposed]

Ok then, why not disable downgrades like camera motion blur and depth of field (which can be really blury with TAAs heh) or CA (which actualy has the perf cost heh) to be able to turn on sgssaa x2.

I do turn off motion blur. And chromatic abberation. I hate those with a passion. Neither will free up any frames to offset a 30% to 50% performance loss at 4k resolution. And what you got against depth of field? It's a cool ass effect in cool ass games, yo.

In modern games half the graphics menu is to be disabled anyway, super vignettes, lens dirts, chromatic vomit etc.

Those effects are negligble and personal preference, with barely an impact on performance.

Yes I'm telling you that 5 sec download and 3 seconds unrar can bring you much better IQ in some games, not all ofc as that depends on engine, compatibility flag and nature of the graphics presented ofc but still, why the f not.

That's fine and dandy, but I'm also telling you you don't need Nv inspector to enable SSAA, and certainly downloading NV inspector just to enable an SSAA variation that is barely negligle from standard at the resolution most of us play (1440p and higher) just doesnt make much sense for most. Maybe at 1080p then the SSAA modes become more important, but I can't see anyone playing at 1440p, 1440p widescreen, or 4k caring about that.

Yes TAA is good at resolving aliasing, the price is as I said blur and ghosting that you have to then sharpen. No sharpening is artifact free, and that filter, as I've just read, costs performance, a little but still sounds a bit backwards heh.

By nature TAA will blur but that is easily resolved with a sharpening filter. TAA will do a better job at removing jaggies and shimmering than plain old SSAA, and without the large performance cost. TAA works best at high resolution.

What is this ghosting you are referring to? I've never witnessed any kind of ghosting in any game I used TAA with. That includes Far Cry 5 and more recently Red Dead Redemption 2.

On 65' 4k? How far do you sit from that screen?

4 - 5 feet.

In Wildlands, with TAA and slightest sharpen (like 10% or sth when the defaut was I think 50 or sth) the drop in quality from sharpening was visible on 24" qhd screen, 40" full hd screen supersampled x4 and 43" 4k screen, sitting slightly below 2m away from the TVs (recommended distance) and over 1m from the monitor (too far). Granted, this tool might be much superior but again, no miracles.

There's no artifacting with Freestyle (or RIS) if you stay within reasonable limits (up to 50% sharpening).

You never tried Freestyle? Then you must watch Hardware Unboxed latest video on Freestyle/RIS. If you own a Nvidia GPU the tool is a must if you downscale.

You must have had msaa turned on as well in the menu, 2x2 alone will not eliminate jaggies to perfection like you describe it on 65" 4k

Do you have a 4k screen? Then turn on 2x SSAA in Serious Sam 3 at that resolution and let me know how that looks to you. Was perfect for me, better than the default MSAA and FXAA options. SSAA works very well in this game and I didnt need to download NV Inspector to use it.

has the pixel pitch of, simplest to describe, 32.5" 1080p screen.


Ofc, sitting far enough will eliminate all aliasing in the world heh. Or, you're just not that much sensitive to IQ, or particularly to aliasing, shimmer etc.

If you're trying to say that by pixel pitch alone that a 65 inch 4k screen has the same visual fidelity as a 32" 1080p screen then I'm afraid you've discredited your entire argument, because that's absurd. Plenty of others here with a big screen at 4k that will tell you otherwise. I myself have a 27 inch 1080p office screen and my 65" 4k LG has far better pixel clarity at 4-5 feet running the same game. My favorite example is Witcher 3 gwent cards. So much more razor sharp details in the card backgrounds that you can see at 4k that is simply not visible at 1080p.

I mean, not long ago you (at least afair it was you) were claiming that DLSS is almost (90% or sth) like native 4k and here we have this guys claiming that even this nV sharpen filter beats it at 0,7 of 4k res, even in Metro:

https://www.techspot.com/review/1903-dlss-vs-freestyle-vs-ris/

And I still maintain that, because it's pretty much true as countless 4k comparisons have shown with Metro. Whether or not Freestyle beats it is another argument, but that just goes to show the Freestyle / RIS methods aren't just sharpening the picture like the sharpening wheel on your monitor, it's an algorithmic method that is efficient and effective, which is why its good to use it when downsampling. Doesn't beat native 4k though, I'll always maintain that.

Not saying this to fire you up, just maybe that's it and good for you if so, I'd be a happier and wealthier man like that, though playing with a worse IQ heh. Anyway, why not just try and have another tool at your disposal, not every new game leaves no headroom with 2080TI at 4k.

I just don't see the value in Nv inspector anymore. at 4k there is much less need for AA. Certainly not enough to justify downloading Nv inspector, which I used to use religiously years ago. Not anymore. It doesn't offer anything that I can't access in the NV control panel thats worthwhile. If I want to use SSAA, I enabled it the control panel. There is zero incentive to use Nv inspector just to change the SSAA method when there will no visible difference, and I won't go any higher than 2x AA at 4k anyways.

For games that can't use SSAA for obvious performance reasons, like pretty much every new game released (sorry I don't play dead space anymore, already did 5 times before and even that was years ago), I use the ingame AA methods which have come a long way and very good at what they do. And even if they dont we have tools in the CP to use (scaling, sharpening, force most common and uncommon AA Modes, etc..)

 

[OverclockN']

If you're trying to say that by pixel pitch alone that a 65 inch 4k screen has the same visual fidelity as a 32" 1080p screen then I'm afraid you've discredited your entire argument, because that's absurd. Plenty of others here with a big screen at 4k that will tell you otherwise. I myself have a 27 inch 1080p office screen and my 65" 4k LG has far better pixel clarity at 4-5 feet running the same game. My favorite example is Witcher 3 gwent cards. So much more razor sharp details in the card backgrounds that you can see at 4k that is simply not visible at 1080p.

Agreed. Simply inputting numbers into a pixel density calculator doesn't tell the whole story. It's not that simple.

In my own case, I have a 49" Sony 900F 4k and had a 24" 1080P IPS monitor. When I first got the TV (on the wall in front of my desk), I had the 1080P monitor on my desk for a while. The monitor has a pixel density of 91.79 and dot pitch .2767. The 49" 4k tv has a pixel density of 89.91 and dot pitch .2825.

Just looking at raw numbers, you'd say it was virtually the same. But the difference in person was just staggering. The monitor was so bad I couldn't stand to look at it any more. I said the hell with dual screen completely and just use the raw real estate of the 4k tv for everything now. The monitor is collecting dust.

The tv is about 3 1/2ft from me. The monitor was 18"-24", somewhere in there at best guess.

If I had a TV your size, I could easily sit back another foot or two and maintain the same results. We aren't sitting 8-10ft+ away from these things like people in a lot of living rooms, and struggling to see the difference. It's immediately and blatantly obvious, and you never go back.

 

[Exposed]

Agreed. Simply inputting numbers into a pixel density calculator doesn't tell the whole story. It's not that simple.

In my own case, I have a 49" Sony 900F 4k and had a 24" 1080P IPS monitor. When I first got the TV (on the wall in front of my desk), I had the 1080P monitor on my desk for a while. The monitor has a pixel density of 91.79 and dot pitch .2767. The 49" 4k tv has a pixel density of 89.91 and dot pitch .2825.

Just looking at raw numbers, you'd say it was virtually the same. But the difference in person was just staggering. The monitor was so bad I couldn't stand to look at it any more. I said the hell with dual screen completely and just use the raw real estate of the 4k tv for everything now. The monitor is collecting dust.

The tv is about 3 1/2ft from me. The monitor was 18"-24", somewhere in there at best guess.

If I had a TV your size, I could easily sit back another foot or two and maintain the same results. We aren't sitting 8-10ft+ away from these things like people in a lot of living rooms, and struggling to see the difference. It's immediately and blatantly obvious, and you never go back.

Precisely, I never understood the pixel density argument when what you should be looking at is really resolution clarity. Yes, the former has an influence on the latter, but it is not the only factor.




This couldn't be more "clear" (pun intended) in this demonstration:

Regardless of what screen size, what pixel density, how far away or close you look at the left HD side, whatever you do it will never approach the clarity of that 4k image.

 

[SIrPauly]

The negatives of Taa are blur and ghosting artifacts but nvidia is working on improving upon these limitations:


https://news.developer.nvidia.com/understanding-the-need-for-adaptive-temporal-antialiasing/

 

[Ziklitschli]

Precisely, I never understood the pixel density argument when what you should be looking at is really resolution clarity. Yes, the former has an influence on the latter, but it is not the only factor.




This couldn't be more "clear" (pun intended) in this demonstration:

Regardless of what screen size, what pixel density, how far away or close you look at the left HD side, whatever you do it will never approach the clarity of that 4k image.

If you're trying to say that by pixel pitch alone that a 65 inch 4k screen has the same visual fidelity as a 32" 1080p screen then I'm afraid you've discredited your entire argument, because that's absurd. Plenty of others here with a big screen at 4k that will tell you otherwise. I myself have a 27 inch 1080p office screen and my 65" 4k LG has far better pixel clarity at 4-5 feet running the same game. My favorite example is Witcher 3 gwent cards. So much more razor sharp details in the card backgrounds that you can see at 4k that is simply not visible at 1080p.

This has nothing to do with what I wrote though. I didn't say a word about clarity or detail where 4k is obviously miles ahead, I told you specifically about eliminating jaggies. And yes that is exactly dependent on pixel pitch and the distance to the screen.

And no, while I don't have a 4k screen, I've tested smaller 4k ones than yours at similar distance and ogssaa x2 + x2 is not that effective even on geometry to alone solve the aliasing to perfection as you describe, looks good but surely not perfect.

What is this ghosting you are referring to? I've never witnessed any kind of ghosting in any game I used TAA with. That includes Far Cry 5 and more recently Red Dead Redemption 2.

TAA ghosting, I don't have the game but just a quick google shows me multiple threads about TAA ghosting in RDR 2, like this one:

https://steamcommunity.com/app/1174180/discussions/0/1735506744732817533/

and a screenshot, can't check what it really shows though on a phone

https://www.reddit.com/r/RDR2/comments/dxfq3g/ghosting_captured_on_pc_screenshot_is_this_caused/

Sure it's mostly steam or reddit heh but the effect plagues most games with TAA, especially the plain one.

Here's a pic showing it in BFV, not sure what platform but surely none fixes TAA in multiplatforms for the PC heh.

https://www.reddit.com/r/BattlefieldV/comments/ad7ogb/what_is_this_horrible_ghosting_effect_when/

It's a low quality AA solution, I really respect how good it is at resolving aliasing but the issues are glaring atm.

And what you got against depth of field? It's a cool ass effect in cool ass games, yo.

It's the least disgusting one heh. But indeed, in some games I leave it on, either when it's obviously the part of art direction and not just slapped on or it's used to hide an ugly background. But I veer towards turning it off because there are a lot of blurring factors in nowadays graphics and in the end I'm not into concussed and drunken myopia simulators.

 

[Ziklitschli]

The negatives of Taa are blur and ghosting artifacts but nvidia is working on improving upon these limitations:


https://news.developer.nvidia.com/understanding-the-need-for-adaptive-temporal-antialiasing/

Naughty Dog already did it for Uncharted 4, to a point ofc but we shouldn't let perfection be the enemy of good anyway.

RTX driven, improved TAA sounds great, exactly what I hoped they will use it for, fingers crossed and hope it's a general use toggle in the end.

This was a good summary imo and seems that sadly most devs just slap it on instead of working on it properly:

https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/gametech/anti-ghosting-with-temporal-anti-aliasing/

 

[Exposed]

This has nothing to do with what I wrote though. I didn't say a word about clarity or detail where 4k is obviously miles ahead, I told you specifically about eliminating jaggies. And yes that is exactly dependent on pixel pitch and the distance to the screen.

There is no amount of spin that will make 32" 1080p screen remotely equivalent to a 65" 4k screen. Not even in terms of jaggies. You have two people here with essentially that same setup (myself and Overclockin), our eyes do not deceive us. Jaggies are more apparent on the smaller screen with 1080p than it is on the bigger 4k screen, regardless of pixel density. You can't sweep resolution clarity under the rug like that.

And no, while I don't have a 4k screen, I've tested smaller 4k ones than yours at similar distance and ogssaa x2 + x2 is not that effective even on geometry to alone solve the aliasing to perfection as you describe, looks good but surely not perfect.

I don't know what you mean by "perfect". Nothing's perfect. What I see for myself is more than good enough. Now, it also depends on the game, but anyone here with a 4k screen (regardless of size) will tell you the demand for AA is less. There's no need for 8x AA at 4k, or even 4x AA. Whatever game I run, I run with what AA modes are available to get that "perfect" picture quality (to me), and to me that means elliminating glaring jaggies, glaring shimmering, etc..

In recent games TXAA/TAA with a sharpening filter does an excellent job with minimal performance cost. Why would I want to run SSAA at 4k and suffer a huge performance penalty, when 4k at higher end settings is demanding enough as it is? Especially when newer AA modes does the job of removing jaggies and shimmering just fine?

TAA ghosting, I don't have the game but just a quick google shows me multiple threads about TAA ghosting in RDR 2, like this one:

https://steamcommunity.com/app/1174180/discussions/0/1735506744732817533/

and a screenshot, can't check what it really shows though on a phone

https://www.reddit.com/r/RDR2/comments/dxfq3g/ghosting_captured_on_pc_screenshot_is_this_caused/

Sure it's mostly steam or reddit heh but the effect plagues most games with TAA, especially the plain one.

Here's a pic showing it in BFV, not sure what platform but surely none fixes TAA in multiplatforms for the PC heh.

https://www.reddit.com/r/BattlefieldV/comments/ad7ogb/what_is_this_horrible_ghosting_effect_when/

It's a low quality AA solution, I really respect how good it is at resolving aliasing but the issues are glaring atm.

Sorry I just don't see it. I spent days upon days tweaking Red Dead Redemption 2 to find a perfect balance between peformance and visual quality, with and without TAA. Never have i noticed "ghosting" with TAA when switching back and forth with it on/off.

Many of those reddit users also are playing at a lower resolution, which may show this ghosting artifact more apparent. Also hard to take some of those posts at face value when they have motion blur on. Also one of those posts claimed ghosting is reduced the higher the resolution you go. So this sounds like console peasant problems to me (no offense).

Rather than a handful of reddit users, if you can give a more technical overview of TAA and ghosting from one of the upper tier sites like Digital Foundry or Hardware Unboxed, I can take a look.

It's the least disgusting one heh. But indeed, in some games I leave it on, either when it's obviously the part of art direction and not just slapped on or it's used to hide an ugly background. But I veer towards turning it off because there are a lot of blurring factors in nowadays graphics and in the end I'm not into concussed and drunken myopia simulators.

Freestyle sharpening removes TAA blur in RDR2 quite well. I got it to the point where texture clarity is as good with TAA off, with no artifacts and with all the benefits of removing aliasing/shimmering.

 

[OverclockN']

There is no amount of spin that will make 32" 1080p screen remotely equivalent to a 65" 4k screen. Not even in terms of jaggies. You have two people here with essentially that same setup (myself and Overclockin), our eyes do not deceive us. Jaggies are more apparent on the smaller screen with 1080p than it is on the bigger 4k screen, regardless of pixel density. You can't sweep resolution clarity under the rug like that.

Agreed. I needed 4x AA at 1080P to get my preferred visual quality. I can actually game at 4k with no AA, but I do prefer at least 2xAA to eliminate shimmering. The jaggies are acceptable though, where 1080P is intolerable to me.

 

[Treeckcold57]

Hey guys, long time no posting!


I've just recently upgraded from an Asus Strix 1070 to the Gigabyte 5700XT Gaming OC.
In most games, especially newer games, this thing is a beast!
Anything Vulkan it freaking shreds, and games like Star Wars, or Skyrim SE, it's at least twice as fast.


However, any old openGL game, like the newly release Wrath: Aeon of Ruin, this computer with 2700X and 5700XT is only about 58% as fast as my other rig which is an Intel 4770k @ 4.0Ghz and 980ti.


In one section of the Wrath hub the 5700XT is only getting 169 FPS (very consistent) but the 980ti system is hitting 270 FPS.


I've tried everything to get this to run better, I'm getting stuttering in the game in certain spots on this brand new rig. I've overclocked the RAM and tightened up the timings like crazy, no crashes or weirdness, but did nothing to inch that FPS above 169 FPS.


The 5700XT is barely doing anything, sitting at 350mhz most of the time.
CPU bounces one core from 25% to 95%.



Anyways, posted some screenshots here: https://imgur.com/gallery/QSVNHOu


What are you guys getting in this game?

For OpenGL on Windows, Nvidia GPUs run better, but on linux, AMD GPUs run much better due to a better OpenGL support on Linux. Because i know I already tested Wolfenstein New Order. It was huge difference. But other than OpenGL games. Everything else run great on AMD GPUs.

 

[SIrPauly]

I am glad to see or read some discussions on the flexibility of an image sharpening feature. This ability really can enhance mixed, hybrid, full scene modes of super sampled to txaa, dlss and taa; to low and high resolution gaming; to mid range and bleeding edge hardware; to older and newer games.

 

[Ziklitschli]

There is no amount of spin that will make 32" 1080p screen remotely equivalent to a 65" 4k screen. Not even in terms of jaggies. You have two people here with essentially that same setup (myself and Overclockin), our eyes do not deceive us. Jaggies are more apparent on the smaller screen with 1080p than it is on the bigger 4k screen, regardless of pixel density. You can't sweep resolution clarity under the rug like that.

Jesus. So, having two screens next to each other, a 32.5' 1080p and 4k 65" - same pixel size, same distance - displaying a black cable line with a blue sky as a background, the latter has it less aliased why exactly? Because of "resolution clarity"? What precisely do you mean saying that and what does it even have to do with aliasing?

Let's ask nVidia then:

http://phrogz.net/tmp/ScreenDensity...sizeUnit:in,axis:diag,distance:31,distUnit:in

"The perceived 'visual density' of the screen, and thus the amount of anti-aliasing possibly needed to make computer graphics look convincing and smooth is dependent on the pixel density of the screen (the 'ppi) and the distance to the user's eyes".

Seems they sweep "resolution clarity" under the rug as well.

You have to increase resolution without linear increase in size to benefit from high res when it comes to anti-aliasing. No spin required, just basic logic.

As for technical overview and ghosting, I posted an extensive one from a dev in my post to SirPauly, above the one I'm addressing right now.

Not touching the rest of the post now, I'm in the mountains, soon to go up and can''t keep draining the battery, will read and adress when I'm back.

 

[Exposed]

Jesus. So, having two screens next to each other, a 32.5' 1080p and 4k 65" - same pixel size, same distance - displaying a black cable line with a blue sky as a background, the latter has it less aliased why exactly? Because of "resolution clarity"? What precisely do you mean saying that and what does it even have to do with aliasing?

Let's ask nVidia then:

http://phrogz.net/tmp/ScreenDensity...sizeUnit:in,axis:diag,distance:31,distUnit:in

"The perceived 'visual density' of the screen, and thus the amount of anti-aliasing possibly needed to make computer graphics look convincing and smooth is dependent on the pixel density of the screen (the 'ppi) and the distance to the user's eyes".

Seems they sweep "resolution clarity" under the rug as well.

You have to increase resolution without linear increase in size to benefit from high res when it comes to anti-aliasing. No spin required, just basic logic.

As for technical overview and ghosting, I posted an extensive one from a dev in my post to SirPauly, above the one I'm addressing right now.

Not touching the rest of the post now, I'm in the mountains, soon to go up and can''t keep draining the battery, will read and adress when I'm back.

Hey man, that website doesn't really support your case in real world scenarios we've been talking about.

Office PC: 27" 1080P at 2 feet away:

34.6 ppd is below 20/20 vision. You will likely need strong anti-aliasing to hide artifacts.


Gaming PC: 65" LG 4k at 5 feet away (max distance, I often sit closer depending if I'm slouching on the couch or sitting forward controller in hand):

76 ppd is above the 20/20 vision threshold of 60 ppd, but below the average vision of ~20/15. You will likely need moderate anti-aliasing.

Moderate anti-aliasing... like the 2x modes or light AA modes I've been talking about all along? At that distance there is still much more detail to see as well (resolution clarity).


Also, why is your argument now having two screens next to each other? Of course at 5 feet away you'll see less jaggies on a small screen. You won't see much of anything else either

Do you sit 5 feet away from your desktop PC?

Hey, wanna have the best anti-aliased effect? Load up your favorite mobile game and hold the screen 5 feet away from you (hope you have long arms). You will see almost no jaggies! And nothing much else either

 

[Ziklitschli]

Hey man, the key is the quote not the app.

You're arguing against common knowledge and basic logic.

The big irony here is how the very picture that you posted to show "resolution clarity", where you straight claim that "regardless of pixel density, muh clarity 4k", is showing exactly the effect of pixel density. See how the size of the pictures is the same but there is more pixels?

Also, what this picture shows, is how would a 32.5" 1080p compare to 32.5" 4k, or a 65" 1080p would compare to 65" 4k.

Nothing to do with how a 32.5" 1080p would compare to 65" 4k.

This couldn't be more "clear" (pun intended) in this demonstration:

Regardless of what screen size, what pixel density, how far away or close you look at the left HD side, whatever you do it will never approach the clarity of that 4k image.