Article background image
Counter-Strike 2

21 Jan 24

Guides

https://cdn.sanity.io/images/ccckgjf9/production/074159ceab9cb77866e6e3925f509ea33646b498-500x500.png?q=50&auto=format

Burair

16:9 vs. 4:3 for CS2 - A Detailed Comparison

Choosing a resolution for CS2 is as crucial as finding the perfect sensitivity. There are only two major aspect ratios you can choose from – 16:9 or 4:3. In this piece, we will compare both these aspect ratios and talk about what the pros prefer.

Every CS player comes across this dilemma of choosing between 4:3 or 16:3 resolutions. Do you go for better graphical fidelity or the competitive advantage? Well, the overall consensus of the community favored 4:3 in CS: GO. Most of the pros preferred going for 4:3 over 16:9. But let’s face it, most of us aren’t aiming to be pros. Plus, there are some differences between CS: GO and CS2. So is stretched worth it in CS2?

Fret not, as in this little piece we will compare both resolutions and help you decide what's better for you. However, before we get into the actual comparisons, we first need to understand some basic terms.

Resolution and Aspect Ratio

To put it simply, resolution refers to the number of pixels on your monitor. It is usually written as Width x Height. For example, 1920x1080 means 1920px in width and 1080px in height. There are 1920 rows of pixels going from left to right, and 1080 from top to bottom.

Multiply 1920 by 1080 and you get somewhat over 2 million pixels. This also explains why most pros run lower resolutions. The lower the resolution the lower the number of pixels your GPU needs to render which in turn gives you better performance.

Aspect Ratio on the other hand refers to the ratio between the width and height of your resolution. Let's refer to 1920x1080, if we divide both we get 16:9 this ratio is called the aspect ratio. You can notice that in 16:9 the ratio of width is larger than height - this is why 16:9 is known as widescreen.

You can use the same method to get the aspect ratio of any resolution. The most popular aspect ratios are 16:9, 4:3, 5:4, and 16:10. Since 16:9 and 16:10 are pretty similar we will be mainly focusing on 16:9. Same for 4:3 and 5:4 they are quite identical too.

16:9 Vs 4:3 - The Comparison

As we mentioned, 16:9 and 16:10 are pretty similar, and the same for 4:3 and 5:4. For this comparison, we will be mainly focusing on 16:9 and 4:3.

16:9 is the most popular aspect ratio out there. It's natively run by most monitors, tablets, and laptops. If you haven’t changed your settings much, you are probably running 16:9 as well. But how does it perform when it comes to CS2? The key advantages of using 16:9 are increased FOV, better visuals, and an overall pleasant gaming experience.

On the other hand, 4:3 does not have any of these advantages. Yet, a good portion of pros still prefer it. That’s because there is a major competitive advantage that pros seem to love. But that’s not enough information to make the switch. So, let's understand what this advantage is by looking at some images.

1280 x 960 Stretched | 4:3

1920 x 1080 Native | 16:9

Just by looking, we can understand the main difference between these two aspect ratios. 4:3 stretches the display across your screen which makes enemy models wider. This helps significantly when it comes to aiming. Additionally, since most 4:3 are lower resolutions you have the added benefit of performance. But, with the wider models, there is also the massively decreased FOV.

In the 16:9 screenshot, you can see three enemies but in the 4:3 you can only barely see two. This is a significant decrease in FOV. This sometimes results in funny moments in tournaments when the audience can see the enemy, but the player cannot.

This leads to the question, “Is the FOV sacrifice worth it?” Well, the answer depends on two things: your role and personal preference. If you play the AWPer role in your games, then 4:3 is the obvious choice because when you are zoomed in the decreased FOV doesn’t matter. However, having wider enemy models will help you. If you like playing 4:3 stick to it but if it does not feel comfortable switch back to 16:9.

Apart from the visual differences, there is also the placebo and nostalgic effect in 4:3. Most older CS games didn’t support 16:9. 4:3 was the only choice most players had, and they got comfortable with it. So even when the newer games offered 16:9, they stuck to 4:3. Seeing these older players prefer 4:3 led most newer players to try it too.

What Are the Resolutions the Pros Using?

You now know that a good percentage of pros prefer 4:3 but what resolutions do they use? Most well-known pros like m0NESY, s1mple, and device use 1280x960. It is a good balance between performance and visuals. It gives you the same advantages of 4:3 without making the game look that bad.

1024x768 is also another popular resolution used by pros like nexa, apEX, stavn, and more. Keep in mind this resolution does make the game look pretty bad and pixelated. But it prioritizes performance to give you good fps.

Even though most pros prefer 4:3, there are still a good amount of pros that use native 16:9 resolutions. Pros like rain, jkf, blameF, and jabbi still run 1920x1080. You can also use 1600x900 or 1280x720; they are the same aspect ratio but have fewer pixels.

You can go ahead and try all of these resolutions. Keep in mind finding the perfect one will take a bit of trial and error. You can also check our guide on how to set up stretched res in CS2.

Final Verdict

Now that you know the difference between 4:3 and 16:9, how do you choose? Well, it boils down to personal preference and your goals. If you play CS2 more casually then we recommend sticking to native 16:9. The game does not look like a potato and the gaming experience is worthwhile. However, if you are going towards a more competitive route then we recommend trying out 4:3.

At the end of the day, it comes down to personal preference. No matter your goal you should stick to what's comfortable to you. Even with all its advantages if 4:3 is not working out for you its fine you can use 16:9.

Related articles