The only surprise here is that you had not noticed this before. Only the 100% view (1:1 view) can be trusted.
When you zoom out, pixels have to be discarded in the preview display, when you zoom in, pixels have to be made up (invented). That's normal and expected behavior, especially with the gargantuan files you're describing. Unless I'm missing something or somehow misconstruing your post?
In my opinion, your screen shots look great. The reasonable differences shown are well within what can be expected.
The situation certainly could be better.
Unfortunately, Adobe does not allow us to choose the trade-off between quality and performance of zoomed display.
I've made a suggestion for improvement in thread http://forums.adobe.com/message/4647572?tstart=0#4647572
Please post your support.
"The only surprise here is that you had not noticed this before. Only the 100% view (1:1 view) can be trusted."
"I've noticed this issue since PS's document display engine was changed"
Station, you can't be serious. The disparity is not acceptable, IMO.
Here's yet another screencap, not giving any additional info really, just highlighting the difference better.
Top C has Layer Styles. Bottom C has been merged with a blank layer.
Conroy, I appreciate the proactiveness. I've made a reply in your thread, featuring the above image -BUT- why don't we escalate the suggestion to an actual user bug report/complaint that Adobe will actually see.
When you zoom out, pixels have to be discarded in the preview display, when you zoom in, pixels have to be made up (invented).
You're confusing the issue with simple raster interpolation. That's not what's being discussed here.
No need to get excited, Mathias. In my post I explicitly allowed for the possibility that I could be misconstruing your post. Apparently, that is the case.
Bowing out of the thread now.
why don't we escalate the suggestion to an actual user bug report/complaint that Adobe will actually see.
It's worked this way for years, though I haven't seen quite the example you've shown. The issue is that not all the Layer Styles work with partial pixel values, and an attempt to render them on an internal half-size or one quarter-size cache level image is by definition using integer values that are approximate.
Please see my note in Conroy's thread about things you can try configuring now.