In CS2, the shadow render distance is affected by the resolution. Here's 4:3 vs 16:9 comparison at the highest video settings. This was discovered by u/crisjame while he was watching a match of Falcons vs. LVG.

@CounterStrike Feel bad for zAKR. They were leading 8 to 9 and this happened

@CounterStrike Yup, this sucks.

Here's an image comparison if you aren't able to understand the difference in the video.

@CounterStrike so another reason to go native?

@CounterStrike I swear I found this exact issue while playing, but I thought I was tripping. I hope devs will fix this.

@CounterStrike So you're saying 4:3 has a shadow disadvantage 🥲 GG

@CounterStrike Yup, and it is very crucial at the pro level where million dollars on the line.

@CounterStrike I just can't play 16:9 anymore 😅

@CounterStrike another nerf for my potato pc 🥲

@CounterStrike I have a very good PC (9800X3D + RTX 5070) but I cant play on 16:9, it's too sluggish for me. It feels like VALORANT.

@ceeko_o @CounterStrike Wdym like Valorant. It runs 500 fps on native with ultra settings. And I'm not a fan of Valorant

@ceeko_o @CounterStrike The player model moves so slow, that's what I mean by VALORANT in 16:9.

@CounterStrike another day another weird cs2 bug discovered

@CounterStrike WAIT WHAT??? I thought they fixed it with the global shadow quality???

@CounterStrike Good thing I switch to 16:9 this year! lol RIP 4:3 Shadows! ☠️

@CounterStrike its insane that no one at volvo thought about just making everything playermodel related to be rendered nonstop no matter the settings, i dont think it would impact performance a lot in 5v5 and would make problems like this and occasional character pop-ins nonexistent

@CounterStrike Wtff!!!

@CounterStrike So 16x9 better ?

@CounterStrike 16:9 > 4:3

@CounterStrike this game is really shit xD

@CounterStrike I feel vindicates for staying on 16:9 now

@CounterStrike How does this compare with 16:10, same as 4:3?

@CounterStrike gotta be a bug right? such a disadvantage otherwise😅

@CounterStrike Does using shadow quality at medium or high change anything between the two resolution? (in the same spot shown in the screenshot)

@CounterStrike Nothing. Low/Med/High, all are same. Only thing making a change is distance between me and the opponent.

@CounterStrike Is it the same for all 4:3? 1440x1080 feels better

@CounterStrike @CounterStrike there is no reason why this should happen, fix it.

@CounterStrike please check 4:3 shadow settings: low, med, high and very high.... last time i heard very high was BUGGED.. this might have nothing to do with aspect ratio or resolution.

@CounterStrike Damn, that’s not good 🥺

@CounterStrike Valve, please fix! 😂

@CounterStrike Source 2 scales Cascade Shadow Maps based on horizontal FOV. While wider shadow rendering gives competitive info, those extra shadow draw calls heavily stress the CPU thread scheduler. Taming background bloat is crucial to prevent 1% low drops here.

@CounterStrike whoa, that's interesting. the impact of resolution on shadows could really change how we see the game.

@CounterStrike good find

@CounterStrike Yinede 4:3 den vazgeçmicem

@CounterStrike Read my post.

@CounterStrike And what about 1440x1080

@CounterStrike 1080p superior once again

@CounterStrike it also effects the render distance of some other stuff like the glasses from some windows in Inferno. At least it did when I noticed it some months ago.

@CounterStrike I actually discovered this over 2 years ago now and made a similar reddit post about it. I also submitted bug reports to valve, but it's never been addressed. Im glad it's getting talked about again, since it can directly disrupt competitive integrity.

@CounterStrike @kaeltweet

@CounterStrike I’m assuming cs doesn’t use a fixed world-space shadow distance. fewer pixels mean the shadow is too small to bother rendering so it gets dropped sooner. 4:3 renders like what 40% fewer pixels than 1080p, so I’m myb shadows cut off closer.

@CounterStrike @xsrvsk

@CounterStrike Can you invite me to the overwatch portal?