Can you change my mind??? Monitor upgrade - 1080P to 1440P high refresh or 4k high refresh??

[phill]

And its just that simple

I game with a triple panel 1080P 60Hz screens and I've some lovely RTX 3070s/3080s and a 3090 and I think I need some new monitors as ever since my Dell 3008's went south over 10 years ago, heck probably more than..., I've stuck with the 1080P screens.

I was looking at a 4k 144Hz panel simply because of the res and I love the desktop sizes, but when talking to a few mates and such, they are using 1440P panels with a higher refresh rate. So I'm a little torn in a way bigger res or to not go bigger res...

So seeing the price difference between the two panels I've been looking at currently (links to follow) I'm curious what anyone else might suggest. Also with the fact that I'm considering to replace my 1080P panels for my gaming rig to these newer screens, which would be 3 at the moment, I'd also consider upgrading the 1080P panels that the girls rigs have as well later on down the line. I'd also consider a replacement for my little micro Dell Optiplex 3080 machine since trying to do all the WCG FAH and Rosetta stuff on a single 1080P drives me insane.. I borrowed a mates 4k panel (sadly 60Hz and a 42" monster) which was lovely but I sadly never really got much chance to game on it (broken leg issue!!) and I think it was just physically too damn big lol

1440P 144Hz Panel
4k 144Hz Panel

I think its time for a change for my eyes and my GPUs, so I await some feedback!!

 

[oxrufiioxo]

I prefer gaming on a 4k120hz screen but only on a large OLED if sticking with a traditional monitor I'd probably go 1440p 27/32 inch 165hz or greater. I have a similar LG monitor to the Dell you listed it's pretty responsive but contrast sucks.

 

[64K]

I voted 1440p or faster.

If you go for 4K then you are on a path to constantly upgrading the GPU. It's never ending. If you go 1440p then you can buy a card and it will last for possibly 4 years.

EDIT: I went from a 27 inch 1080p monitor to a 27 inch 1440p monitor and there was a big difference in visual quality in games.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

Well you already have the GPU grunt so I would suggest going 3 monitor and doing all the same size one middle 4k 120 and two side 1440p you would have it all then .

 

[DeathtoGnomes]

having 2 dells on either side of the Nixeus, the visual is like night and day. The Nix is 1440p/144Hz, the dells are 1080p/120hz.

 

[agent_x007]

27" 8k 120Hz+ OLED
I already own 4k 165Hz IPS - it's awesome going from 1200p, BUT contrast is... bad.

Basicly : Get OLED with high refresh that fits on your desk (resolution should be secondary to this).
No need to settle for anything less at this point I think.

 

[P4-630]

I voted for 1440p but then buy one 165Hz or up with G-Sync or one that works perfectly with G-Sync compatible....

What would be even nicer is a 4K high refresh monitor, a 4K high refresh if only it's at least G-Sync compatible or preferably G-Sync, I'd go with that!


I wouldn't buy a new monitor that doesn't have G-Sync or isn't proper G-Sync compatible...

 

[GerKNG]

was on the 4k train for a year.
it's mindblowing for the first 3-4 weeks... then you realize how extremely expensive it gets for such a "small" gain. (want to actually play at high refreshrates in native 4k? a 3090 Ti is not enough except when you drop settings... buy a 4090 soon!)

 

[InVasMani]

I'd recommend 3440 x 1440 with 120Hz or faster if you're looking for general impact while keeping value for dollar in mind. I do like the size and resolution on the 3440 x 1600p 37.5" displays overall though, but those are really price scalped to stupid levels currently they gotta came down to $500-$600 before I'd contemplate one of the former which you can find for about $400-$500. Gigabyte has a nice flat screen 3440 x 1440 for $400 that's probably what I'd get personally having looked about at different options. I'm not really feeling curved panels personally, but there tends to be more options for those.

 

[Bill_Bright]

I voted for you missed something.

Any monitor I buy must have a stand with height adjustment.

My desk surface is at a fixed height. The keyboard/mouse tray is at a fixed height. My chair height is adjustable but set according to the length of my legs to avoid strain on my lower back.

Therefore, to ensure a proper height for my monitors, thus minimizing strain on my upper back, neck and shoulders, the monitor stands must have height adjustment. Period.

 

[P4-630]

@The red spirit why if you own a 3090 would you settle with a 60Hz 1440p monitor!?.....

If you don't game at all, I would agree though a 60Hz monitor for Adobe Photoshop or whatever such usage, but then I went 4K for sure....


@phill you missed G-Sync, G-Sync compatible, if you own a high-end nvidia GPU you would surely want that...

 

[The red spirit]

@The red spirit why if you own a 3090 would you settle with a 60Hz 1440p monitor!?.....

If you don't game at all, I would agree though a 60Hz monitor for Adobe Photoshop or whatever such usage, but then I went 4K for sure....

For me it would be complete no brainer, because I already have that. If I had excessive funds, maybe I would think about 1440 120Hz, but it's a trap, because then your PC will have to have CPU and GPU capable of that. Considering that you would want to use ray tracing too, 3090 may not last all that long with that resolution and fps target, something will have to give eventually. And it is already not enough for full 120 fps with RT without DLSS. I'm probably the only one here, who strongly dislikes DLSS or FSR, so using it isn't a solution. I tried FSR and it was utter crap even at maximum quality. Basically a fancy way of saying that yeah I can't run this at native res, but I won't admit it. And despite AMD's claims that there is some sharpening in it, I found that being not true or too weak. DLSS may be better, but FSR ruined all those upscaling tricks for me. Also AMD still haven't fixed RIS and I have no idea if nV has anything like RIS. Also I think that most 1440p or 4K monitors are too big. I use 1440p 24 inch monitor and it is the maximum size I would tolerate and PPI boost over 1080p 22 incher is nice. I would never consider sacrificing PPI, that's just dumb. I have seen 4K monitors at 25 inches, I guess they are nice, but then RTX 3090 or faster isn't optional and even then their lifespan at that resolution and RT is quite limited as is. 1440p 120 Hz would be the most optimal solution perhaps, but I think that once you see higher refresh rate, you simply can't just go back to lower one and that will be needed with RT effects. And getting something like 3090 or better and not gaming at high-ultra is just pointless to me, also using DLSS with it is pointless too.

 

[P4-630]

but I think that once you see higher refresh rate, you simply can't just go back to lower one and that will be needed with RT effects.

For that we have G-Sync and G-Sync compatible if you got fps drops.

 

[ThrashZone]

Hi,
Not sure why you'd bother with anything under 4k and as high hz as you can afford :/
Not like you're on a budget

 

[Nater]

There's so many variables. Budget. Games played. Video card used. How long are you planning before GPU upgrades, etc.

I love my 34"/IPS/1440p/144Hz Ultrawide. I'll never use another 1080p screen again.

Have a 28" 4K and 32" 4K at work, although low refresh. PPI is too tight on the 28, wasted resolution. 30-32" at 4K is the sweet spot for desktop gaming for my eyes.

Dream monitor right now is a 5k2k 40" 120Hz+ Ultrawide. If the current models out now were higher refresh I'd already have one, and have no qualms going broke on something like a 4090.

 

[neatfeatguy]

I've played games on 1080p for years, even across ultrawide 1080p resolution (5760x1080) and the monitors were 60hz. After going to a 1440p 165hz (I limit it to 120) monitor with Freesync, the smooth gameplay is amazing. I do miss the ultrawide resolution at times for certain games, but having a 32" monitor at 1440p is more enjoyable for me over having a 24" 1080p (or multiple 24" 1080p screens).

 

[The red spirit]

For that we have G-Sync and G-Sync compatible if you got fps drops.

It's not about dips, RTX 3090 can't output 120 fps at 1440p Ultra with RT on. Control is a good example of that, it only reaches a bit above 60 fps and that's BFGPU. Pretty pathetic for overpriced aluminum toaster. You either settle with this or use DLSS, but playing with DLSS is more like running game at 1080p, so not happening with 3090. You are better off adjusting other settings to high.

 

[cvaldes]

There are several displays in my house and I find myself sitting in front of a different one depending on the activity/content.

There's a 55" 4K@120Hz OLED television and I find myself using for gaming where I can use a gamepad since that setup isn't particularly comfortable for keyboard/mouse usage. As a television I also use it for watching movies, TV shows, live sports, and other traditional TV-based content; I never watch movies on my computer monitors. Two consoles (Super NES Classic and Nintendo Switch) are plugged into this TV. This TV is G-Sync compatible and has pretty good HDR performance. As an OLED, some of its performance characteristics blow doors on any TN/VA/IPS panel.

There's also a Dell 32" 1440p@165Hz monitor (discontinued model S3220DGF) with FreeSync Premium. I use this for PC games that are better suited to keyboard/mouse input or use headphones (I despise headphones though). Its HDR is rather unremarkable compared to the LG OLED television; the LG TV also handles VRR better than this Dell. Dell's current replacement model doesn't even have HDR. Pixel density on a 32" 2560x1440p monitor is pretty low (like 93 ppi) so I don't use this monitor for productivity or reading.

There's also an LG 27" 4K@60Hz IPS monitor (fixed refresh rate). I never game on this display, it's for productivity and general use with a desktop Windows PC and a Mac. Both computers are configured to display the desktop UI at 1920x1080p so the text is really, really crisp something my tired old eyes appreciate. When I replaced my old Dell 24" 1080p monitor with this 4K monitor about four years ago, I kicked myself for not upgrading several years earlier.

Gaming comments: I play a lot of older games in addition to some new titles so often graphics card performance isn't an issue. I find that upscaling technologies like DLSS aren't really worth it for 1080p output. They are sometimes useful for 1440p output, particularly if ray tracing is involved. DLSS is really useful for 4K output since you have more pixels to start with. For many titles, I find the highest graphics setting (Ultra, Extreme, whatever) and dial everything back one notch since usually the top setting doesn't really provide much more fidelity than the second tier unless I'm looking at still images under a magnifier (which doesn't happen during gameplay).

Comments like "Game X won't run at ____ fps at ____ resolution with ____ graphics card" truly are not useful because most PC gamers play more than one title. I really don't know why some commenters single out one title in a feeble attempt to prove whatever point they are trying to argue. It makes zero sense.

This is why many graphics card reviewers use a large test suite of games (15-20) to gauge overall card performance noting that some titles perform better or worse at some resolutions and GPU architectures.

Note: Control looks fabulous on my LG OLED television with ray tracing on and DLSS Quality enabled (with my 3080 Ti). I'm not getting 120 fps but the LG's VRR handles this smoothly. This title is quite enjoyable without massive framerates. I know some gamers gauge their gaming enjoyment by looking at the fps counter and they can only start having fun if the number reaches 60, 120, 165, 240, whatever. I do not.

Anyhow best of luck with your purchase decision.

 

[phill]

Apologies everyone, been AWOL from the thread!!

I voted 1440p or faster.

If you go for 4K then you are on a path to constantly upgrading the GPU. It's never ending. If you go 1440p then you can buy a card and it will last for possibly 4 years.

EDIT: I went from a 27 inch 1080p monitor to a 27 inch 1440p monitor and there was a big difference in visual quality in games.

I need to step up the res to at least a 1440P simply because of the data for the folding and crunching threads I do, drives me nuts having to zoom in/out on certain pages and then miss data or take 20 minutes cutting and pasting stuff to Excel every day lol I figure at least 1440P it would cut down my time doing it I know that the 4k screen was lovely to do it on, but that thing was just physically too big...

Well you already have the GPU grunt so I would suggest going 3 monitor and doing all the same size one middle 4k 120 and two side 1440p you would have it all then .

That would drive my CDO bonkers!! I think it would have to be 3 panels all the same on the desk for me...

@The red spirit why if you own a 3090 would you settle with a 60Hz 1440p monitor!?.....

If you don't game at all, I would agree though a 60Hz monitor for Adobe Photoshop or whatever such usage, but then I went 4K for sure....


@phill you missed G-Sync, G-Sync compatible, if you own a high-end nvidia GPU you would surely want that...

At the moment its just options to be honest.. I thought I'd try to cover as many bases as I could because I'm sure someone would asked, what about this res or that res if I hadn't!

I would have presumed/assumed that it would already be part of the screen to be honest when I bought it, when I'd finally settled on a monitor I'd like. Trouble with the UK is that you can't go buying something over a counter as there's nothing like Best Buy or Micro Center here which sucks so much its unreal.... I'd love to have something I could see before I buy, which is why I hate trying to find a monitor when I can't bloody see it before I buy it

I voted for you missed something.

Any monitor I buy must have a stand with height adjustment.

My desk surface is at a fixed height. The keyboard/mouse tray is at a fixed height. My chair height is adjustable but set according to the length of my legs to avoid strain on my lower back.

Therefore, to ensure a proper height for my monitors, thus minimizing strain on my upper back, neck and shoulders, the monitor stands must have height adjustment. Period.

Without a doubt, I believe the two I'd linked to do have that and importantly pivot as well... I've yet to use it, but it would just grind my gears that I couldn't as I'd know damn well I'd like to try it if I didn't have it... lol

was on the 4k train for a year.
it's mindblowing for the first 3-4 weeks... then you realize how extremely expensive it gets for such a "small" gain. (want to actually play at high refreshrates in native 4k? a 3090 Ti is not enough except when you drop settings... buy a 4090 soon!)

I'm guessing it would be even worse with a triple panel setup as well which is one of the reasons in a way, I'm looking more so towards the 1440P size. I think 4k would look amazing and be amazing more so than 1440P but when the screens cost triple the money for a decent one, having to buy three of them as well, kinda hurts the wallet and even more so if you want to buy a 4090 and a small nuclear power plant to power it Maybe a medium one if you want to get two in a rig just because.....

Hi,
Not sure why you'd bother with anything under 4k and as high hz as you can afford :/
Not like you're on a budget

I really don't know what you're trying to say!!


If anyone has any others ideas or options for screens, please post away!!

 

[Frick]

Also consider the size of things. I sort of regret getting a 32" 4K panel, as I have to scale the desktop and interfaces in games anyway to use comfortably, and sometimes the games suck at it. 1440p would work a lot better.

 

[Bill_Bright]

Without a doubt, I believe the two I'd linked to do have that

I was referring to your poll. However, you are indeed correct and the two you linked to do have height adjustment.

I should have acknowledged that.

 

[defaultluser]

just get a lg 4k 42 inch oled on clearance for $600 in 6 months, then call it a day

 

[mclaren85]

I have bought 2k 144Hz monitor last year at the very same price with 4k 60Hz. Can't tell how dissappointed I am now. Go for 4k, without question.

 

[P4-630]

I have bought 2k 144Hz monitor last year at the very same price with 4k 60Hz. Can't tell how dissappointed I am now.

You should have bought MSI monitors!!

 

[mclaren85]

You should have bought MSI monitors!!

I should, but they overpriced!