Arma performance update on UHD with gtx 1080 (just want be sure the info is not misleading)

There is couple of settings in Arma which really eat the frames on UHD.

Grass - no grass vs low grass - 25 fps (before 10 fps difference)
Ambient occlusion (Shadows in corners and so) - 10 fps (did not notice difference before)
AA 2x vs 8x - difference about 10-20 fps
FXAA standard on vs off - about 10 fps

(FPS drops are very dependent on terrain. More complicated/full terrain the more the post process effect use the GPU and leads to FPS drop)

Distance view - 500m 60 fps - change to 1300m - only about 10-15 fps change (noticed the view distance is not big fps killer)

Buildings - I have stopped having feeling like, the houses are very small - they look big now, even inside it looks like there is 2x-3x more space then on the 27". Looks realistic.

Some textures - some textures looks "ugly" in Arma - it are especially windows in some houses and some roofs and in house walls.

Big vs small screen - generally - It looks now like I play with zoom about 1.5x all the time. Especially in spotting enemies in KOTH it gives me adventage as it s harder for others to spot me.

16:9 - Ultrawide would be probably better for gaming - as I do have to still look left and right. Not every game has the head on swivel. (and it looks like it would be nice in thouse cases have the 140Hz monitor) On the othe hand trees now look very tall, objects look tall and big the 2160 pixels in height and 52 cm screen + 2+2cm the frame, makes difference.

100 fsp - even with UHD and very downgraded settings is possible go on 100 fps - which is not problem at all if is person only piloting helis or jets (1500m WDistance)

60 fps - its hard to have stable 60 fps as infantery man. I had to downgraded a lot. The problem is as the terrain changes the fps go up +30 or down -30 along how the terrains si difficult for GPU.
It s not problem play KOTH 60 fps on 500m but once you need see 1800m as infantery the lost 15-20 fps is problem.

- so there is chooice between: FPS drops on 35 from 60 but very good settings. And good looking choice with fps around 70-90 with drops to 55.

AA - I have feeling like the AA is not so important anymore as you have on screen so many pixels that everything look good even without FXAA and AA above 2x. What is lost is the deepness in pictures. Like real life shadows in corners, trees, and so. Generally - I dont feel like the arma looks uglier but the enviroment on without HBAO/HDAO and FXAA is loosing depth.

Conclusion:
If there would be any good price 43" ultravide 100+HZ monitor, lets say 3860x1600/or so, It would be better choice for gaming for sure, with better FPS as 3860*2160 is more than 3860*1600.

It s not problem to play games on UHD on 60 fps, IF a person is willing go play with settings a lot.

Maybe is good choice too, before PC upgrade, to think what will be your next CPU or GPU. So you can have SLI or Crossfire on motherboard and you will buy older GPU for some price instead new one for double price. But it s needed to count the power source as it probably would be need above 750w (so the screen will not go black as lack of energy from source).

PS: I dont understand computers or GPUs on some good level so, it s are just my experiences what Im describing.