I feel that in 4K. Trying to keep up with the supporting hardware can be stressful when your "monster rig" from a few years ago starts to slip. I have a 3090, so the only "reasonable" upgrade is a 4090. Everything else is cut down in some way.
The 7900xtx is as good as the 4090 when playing Call Of Duty Modern Warfare 2. And some other games are about the same performance. But the 4090 has some games that do a lot better on the 4090. So I play only MW2 so for me the upgrade to 7900xtx is a nobrainen.
@@edgarvos3588 I like the 7900XTX, but there are two big problems: 1. I do render work in DazStudio. It uses Nvidia Iray and takes advantage of the RT cores. An AMD card would break my workflow. 2. I do like DLSS and good RTX implementations. Right now FSR2 is very meh and AMD is dragging ass with any major updates to boost its visual quality. The main reason the AMD/Starfield exclusivity deal is spicy on the internet right now.
Well, even 1440p is not easy to "run", let alone 4K. For 1440p/60 you realistically need either RTX 4070 Ti or 7900 XT. Otherwise you have to reduce settings in moden games already. If that happens, then I would not even bother with higher res screen. I personally managed to get 4070 Ti and still using it with 1080p screen. The thing is, I can use DLDSR or DSR to render games at higher than native monitor's res. So I always choose to render games at either 1440p, 1620p or 4K, depending on a game and how demanding it is. And I can say for sure that 4K renderer looks so much better on a 1080p screen! There is no way back to native 1080p renderer. And even 1440p renderer looks better than 1080p - texture quality/filtering and AA are a lot better! No way I return back to 1080p renderer anytime soon. 4070 Ti will be able to run games at 1440p for a long time. After than I will use 1440p+DLSS "Q" for some time, which still looks better than native 1080p.
Yeh think Will at boosted media used to do that a lot more but he found racing in his very expensive sim rig was still way way cheaper than his racing car he used outdoors 😅
THEORY: If you expeirenced 1440p and regret it, you can try this: Give yourself a break for a while, then playing at 720p (I know terrible), but after some time you can switch back to 1080p so then you will see the improvement again and feel how sharp the image is. (May or may not work)
Can confirm that this exact thing happened to me when I realized the monitor I was using was 1440p and I decided to upgrade my graphics card and then had to upgrade my processor, then my motherboard bricked itself so I had to buy a new motherboard and then I needed faster ram because I was at a too much of a ram bottle neck. And then my case was a hot box so I had to upgrade that... so I can say that I basically overhauled my entire computer because of the 1440p monitor
Modern games actually require more CPU usage because of all the objects, movement etc. There was a video i saw yesterday about this issue and that even high end gaming CPU's like the 5800X3D are not stressing out the GPU potential.@@hansschnee4623
@@hansschnee4623 Refresh rate of the monitor was not specified and it may also have VRR. After the GPU upgrade, which is also unspecified, even at a higher resolution the, also unspecified, CPU could have possibly been a bottleneck
i grew up with 640x480. seeing pixels really doesn't bother me, especially for games. i confess i've been using 1440p monitors since 2011 though. i only get annoyed with 1080p when i'm doing graphic design work or anything involving text. i think there's a significant generational factor in play; if you grew up looking at CRTs your values are different.
Funny you mention CRT's. I found the jump to those pixelated LCD monitors jarring. In the beginning, I saw every pixel, and every movement on screen left pixelated traces. After about 3 weeks, the eyes somehow adapted. I guess the brain tried to make reasonable images of what it saw. I wonder whether you could experience the same when going back to 1080p from a higher resolution permanently.
@@Turjan_Miir What you just described was actually me when I was a kid. My dad bought his very first LCD monitor I didn't like the look when it was first turned on. Everything was crazy blurry when I played NFSU2 with it for the first time. After a few weeks of using it, my eyes just got used to the monitor.
Yeah that’s true I grew up on ps2 and I can jump back and forth pretty easy still these days I don’t mind aliasing in older games either seems fitting for some reason
Grew up with a 24" CRT that I kept around for AGES. Partially because you'll pull muscles everywhere on your body trying to move it. It was a medical-grade monitor I think my dad got from equipment liquidation from a local hospital or something. It could go up to 2048x1536 (Albeit at 30Hz), which was fine for slower games like RPGs. But then for faster games like UT2004, I could drop it down to 640x480@300Hz or 800x600@240Hz. And the thing is, low resolutions just look so much better on a CRT. Like there's a reason 640x480 lasted so long. Especially things like pixel art which really take advantage of the slightly-overlapping pixels. But yeah I upgraded it to the original ROG Swift once G-Sync monitors were a thing. 1440 is such a good sweet spot. Appearance looks closer to 4k than to 1080. But performance is closer to 1080 than to 4k. And for me, once you are at retina, the advantage beyond that is all about AA.
One little upside of 1440p many people forget about is the added real estate for apps if you use 100% scaling. Needs some getting used to, but in complex professional software like editing tools, gasme engines, etc., this can be super useful. Also good for having 4 windows open at once
That right there is why I'd suggest 1440p to basically anyone. I had a bit of temporary "Maybe I shouldn't have done this..." regret when going to my 1440p monitor, but then I started noticing the difference in screen real estate when using programs, web browsing, etc. Especially when moving them between the 1440p monitor and my secondary 1080p monitor... That alone is why I'll never go back to 1080p, and I say that even as someone who uses their computer primarily for gaming. And sure 4k would move that needled again, but it is simply FAR too detrimental when it comes to gaming performance. All for a difference you can barely see when looking for it on typical monitor sizes, but a difference you really just wont notice while distracted by actually playing games.
First thing I noticed was my workflow got insanely efficient, using the 1080p even as a second monitor feels limited compared to working on just my 1440p monitor.
I'm using a 4070 super now, and still playing on 1080P 144Hz. I like just setting everything to ultra and getting around 120-144 FPS for all games. If I upgraded to 1440P, I would see a drop in framerate, and for games in the near future I would need to start dialing back the settings. I don't want to do that.
what, thats absolut not true 4070 super is a 1440p card and it depends on which cpu you have, if you have a bad cpu means a cpu bottleneck sure you have a drop on 1440p but if you have a cpu that dont bottleneck you, you have more from your 4070super in 1440p
I upgraded to 1440p in 2019 and it's been great for me. What you are saying here is basically the reason why I didn't go for 4K. The GPU requirements grow more when going 1440p->4K than when going 1080p ->1440p. So I would have to spend much more on a GPU and possibly even upgrade more often to maintain 4K, whereas 1440p is reasonably easy to maintain.
I went for 4k recently and I just use FSR to upscale from 1440p to 4k in demanding games. The picture quality is better and the performance is like I would run it at 1440p.
@@27Zangle I got the 6750xt coming from UPS today. I'll get a 4K monitor but game at 1440p when possible for better game play and power efficiency. Then in 3 years, maybe cards will come out at the same price point, power efficiency and be twice as fast and will easily do 4K. Better to spend $350 now and get double the speed for another $350 later than spend $800 now for 4K now (Could get a 7900XT for that much and I think it could pull off 4K but it is big and runs a little hotter than the 6750).
@@mattwils9863 I've got to look into FSR. I don't know what that is. @mokurai8233 above notes he runs his at 1440 but has his monitor do the upscaling to 4K.
Imo, getting a 1440p monitor is a fantastic upgrade, and one that I never regretted. Despite the higher costs for hardware, the extra clarity and sharpness is literally game changing. The overall experience is just so much better than 1080p, and I don't think I could ever go back to trying to ignore the pixels.
no thanks I'll stay playing csgo at 500fps+ stable with my benq 1080p 240hz DYAC monitor and still lowering my res to 1280x900 4:3 stretched Competitive gaming over casual gaming
@@azder4140I mean if you’re content playing a game with incredibly bad graphics that came out a million years ago it’s fine to stay at that resolution anyway. I prefer beauty in my games over Russian guys shouting abuse. But to each their own.
I think moving to 165hz was a much bigger problem for me. Before I was always aiming for 60fps. Chasing 165fps 1440p on a 1060 was simply not happening. My new 6700xt is working great though. I'm overall happy with the move.
@@Dregomz02Yeah I actually played a game yesterday at 120hz and felt like I was getting 60fps after using 240hz for so long. Also 60 looks like 30 and 30 looks like 15...
@@Dregomz02Yes, this was my problem 1440p 240hz ultragear monitor.. Now I'm spending my time trying to get ultra and 240hz in all games,Oohh and my monitor self overclocks as well if I want to push it too 260hz(why I would I don't know) But I Once left PC gaming and now I remember why!.. It's because you're always chasing your tail. There's always something greater and better out there and once you get the bug it's never ending (The gaming then became second place once upon a time but not now)
@@TheAtkinson118 It's just fomo. Once you get over it you will feel just fine getting the most out of what you have and can afford. And hey, you can always buy a console. It's not the end of the world. This gen is pretty good. Last gen was pretty good. Even PS3 and Xbox 360 are good for a lot of games.
@@Trick-Framed ooh I Totally agree with the FOMO aspect that's what drives the whole industry. I actually went to consoles from PC for a while and your right they are good, especially this generation as they do provide a good option on a budget,and the PS5 really does have some fantastic games. What I can't stand about them is as soon as you want to go to say 120fps the quality for me really suffers.. Games like Apex still don't Have 120fps(I don't play this game anymore but I used to be addicted too it) So the reason I had to come back to PC was- I could have Xbox game pass on pc if I want it. So many PS5 game's are on PC now and more are coming that are supposed to be Exclusives! I'm not limited to FPS or Resolution on PC The indi scene is great on PC there's been some great games just in the last month (not that I'm playing all of them but the options are there) Mouse and keyboard always for me but controller if you wish. The sales are amazing all the time and then there's the places you can buy game key's from. I really can't see a reason to own a Console Apart from- The initial price of a PC can be expensive, especially if you're young and I accept that. Cheating in online game Now that's a problem!! But the CRONUS ZEN has ruined console gaming, but some people are just to blind to see it,and companies won't deal with it. (Although I believe Call of duty have put something in place) But once you are set-up on PC there's no turning back..but it can drag you down many Rabbit hole's!
what allowed me to go from 1440p down to 1080p again was getting a monitor with 240hz + ULMB. the small difference i felt from a worse resolution was largely offset from everything looking so much smoother.
I did the same and yeah i noticed the lag and faster response plus the 240hz 1080p 27 panel had better colours for the same price as the 144 1440p 27. Many people don't have in account panel quality.
OLED is even smoother still by a magnitude, a 120Hz OLED is basically on par with a 200Hz+ ULMB LCD. And 240Hz OLEDs--- You'd need a 360-500Hz LCD to compete!
@@rustyshackleford4117At 120 to 200 fps ulmb gives way better motion clarity then oled. A 240hz oled gives similar clarity to 144hz with ulmb. You can compare with ufo tests to easily see the difference.
@@Onisak25 lmfao nope. Nobody is still using that ancient tech for gaming. You forget that any computer with steam installed is taking the hardware. So a ton of those computers don't actually play any games. They just had steam installed at some point. Most gamers are on 1440p now and are using at least an rtx 3060 or better.
I feel this, it gets so expensive, being into PCs is a hedonistic treadmill of spending that's very difficult to get off. Sometimes you have to just appreciate what you've got tho, being able to game in 1440p or 4k at these frame rates was unimaginable when I first started getting into this hobby. I was gassed when I could get Star Wars Jedi Academy to run at 1024x768 hahaha.
Yup, that’s what I’m realizing lately. Watching all these PC videos, and I’m just like, damn, this is real hedonism. Where the only thing you’re doing is just entertaining yourself and focusing on interesting equipment. I suppose it’s a teeter-totter with the fact that tech is so integral to human progression, and being able to do more cool things is fundamentally worthwhile and engaging Between that and focusing more and more on various “sports”, it’s really making me think I should make some fundamental changes to how I’m living day to day. I think I would naturally go for more of a public, be involved in the community and make positive changes kind of role. I guess growing up it has just felt more and more like an absolute mess of stupidity and aggression when you want really just to aide people and do good things and see good things happen. Still figuring it out definitely. Haven’t had enough exposure I think. As well as developing better mindsets and attitudes. Anyway, just appreciated your comment and it mentioned the hedonism involved, and for me personally it acted as an outlet for me to write this tangential comment. Cheers y’all
yeah the changes are so incremental too, yet that difference of a few fps is used to justify both the asking price from the manufacturer and the false sense of satisfaction from the customer for an often unnecessary purchase. @@_______________00
I upgraded from 1080p to 4k and it brought a tear to my eye ..... when i saw the bill :)) jokes aside, though, the texture quality and detail in scenes gets a noticeable increase, while aliasing decreases in most games. Texture and object pop-in is more noticeable, though, depending on the game. 1080p is still perfectly fine if the game is good though
I play retro consoles on a regular basis, so going back and forth among resolutions on screens of varying sizes isn't that big of a deal for me. What really ruined me is high refresh rate and high framerate in games, specially in modern ones. I have a really hard time playing games that are below 60 FPS. I guess that i can play anything at 30 FPS as long as the framerate and frame pacing are consistent and stable but anything that's poorly optimized and poor performing, I tend to avoid it.
Yup this is my rule, 30 fps stable is my bare minimum, if you cant manage that im out. Otherwise Im going to be fine. Got a 1070 myself and am on the fence about a 4k monitor. Dont fiddle round with the newest things tho. I usually stick round 2018 backwards.
@@ag3ntgt unfortunately my father spoiled my ass decades ago Spending a hefty sum on a rig just for crisis Big old silver xps. Since then I've always done upgrades every 10 years. Usually with the system lasting the entire length. Most I'll have to upgrade is the card
@@Wpeoplee well thats fine. I just say 30 fps is fine because I also play Retro games fairly often and I subscribe to the idea that to a degree games were better back then. Honestly yes indie games fill that niche. But to me a lot of indie goes towards pixel art and I'm just awaiting the arrival of PS2 ish era indie games. Honestly the visual style holds up depending on the game
I upgraded to a 1440p monitor for my work, at the same size (21.5”) for the added clarity. I work in Engineering Consulting and being able to view 11x17” drawings without having to zoom in and out constantly to read text is fantastic.
yep, 1440p is good resolution for 22". Going up to 27" you should get 2160p (4K). Anyone mentioning "sweet spot" for 1440p at 27" is a compromise because the GPU can't drive the games. If you're not gaming, 27" needs 4K or greater resolution to look as sharp as possible.
I've a similar "issue" with gaming on 144 Hz. I was abroad for a year and was using my notebook for pretty much everything, including gaming, and it's got a 144 hz display. When I recently came back home and started using my desktop again (which is on 2 60 Hz monitors), I felt as if every game I played was on 45-50 fps (you know, that point where a game is running smooth but not butter-smooth), even though my average fps is at the 100s. I guess I ruined myself so I might be preparing for an upgrade on the desktop.
@@alexivanov7275I tried out a 360hz monitor at a friends house and honestly it's not worth it you won't ruin yourself don't worry. It's definitely smoother without a doubt but going back to 240hz was not a problem at all, reaching a big point of diminishing returns after that.
I upgraded from a 1080p to a 1440p build when I built my first pc on my own in 2019. Like you said it is really hard to go back to 1080p ( I learned this the hard way when I played some JRPGS that were stuck in this resolution). I can't say I regret the upgrade though, as I don't really play modern AAA titles anymore.
Any monitor size 27" or larger will look worse with fullscreen 1080 due to the pixel density. I have 1440 this size, so any game that can only 1080p take off fullscreen shrinks it a tad, but gives it the sharpness back.
I've never regretted going to 1440p. I already had a full PC upgrade on the cards so I was keen on moving up in resolution. Still stuck on finding a GPU deal (hopeful that a decently priced 6800 XT comes my way lol) but my 2070 Super is still going strong for now
I’m running at 1080 TI and I don’t plan on getting rid of it until I can buy a 4080 for $600 used… so god knows when that will be. I don’t play fps much so I am chilling, the 1080ti still runs spider man remastered an Elden’s ring at 100 plus fps 1440p medium/high settings. Apex run at 144 locked at 1440p low settings view distance high an that’s the most competitive game I play.
Your upgrades are totally worth it. There is nothing about it for you to regret. As you said, 1440p is the sweet spot. If you were trying to run in 4k, you'd probably be wasting a ton of money and not necessarily getting the proportional performance gains...
Yeah but his main issue (and a huge issue of mine) is that it’s very hard to go back to what you had before. You’re brain messes with you and you can’t stop thinking about how what you had before was so much better. For me, i went from 4k on console to 1440p on pc (that isn’t the issue), the issue is fps. I got 30-60 fps on console to high fps on most pc games but wheh I use Microsoft flight simulator and get sub 60 fps, jt ruins it and I can’t stand it.
@@4doorsmorewhorsits about how the price increases. Like for example 1-2x from 1080 to 1440 then 3-4x for 4k. And vram size matters for gpus for the simple reason as to keeping the textures and co less commonly by keeping them in vram. Less loading= less impact on performance.
@@norbertnagy5514 you don't get it... A GPU is limited by the speed at which the processor can handle whats in the VRAM. They ALWAYS put enough VRAM so it won't bottleneck the processor, do you really think a company would limit the performance of a GPU by not putting enough VRAM lol come on. You're talking like if putting 30GB of VRAM on a 4060 would increase its performance, and everything I said is for gaming not AI etc.
I agree with this video completely. After experiencing the sweetness of 1440p, I can never in my life go back to 1080p. Looking at a friend's Full HD monitor even for just a second makes me so sad and mad, I just want it to be over. Buying an affordable 1440p card is the hardest part of this whole experience. I am still running my 1080, which I plan on replacing for a used 2080 then a 6700 XT down the line when it get under 200€. Seeing how no new cards will launch in 2024, as there aren't even announcements for any of them, I doubt the prices will fall in at least a one more year if not longer. Maybe at around summer 2025. will I be able to get a good deal on one.
Only thing I would add to this is, I do not regret going from a 4k TV to a 1440p monitor. I do think at the distance I am to my monitor, that I'm not gonna miss the extra pixels because of how far away I was from the TV in the first place. Now, my setup has me a lot closer to my monitor where I would have been a good distance/looking at an odd angle to the TV.
Sounds like you have things backwards. The further away the screen, the less important the pixel density. The closer to your eyes, the more easy to see the individual pixels.
@@fakepants it's a bit different though if when you're using your screen, you're uncomfortable in the first place. JUST using my TV the way I had it set up, I was still pretty close, BUT I had to have my neck turned facing awkwardly up to look at my screen. Sure, I downgraded on pixel density, but I upgraded in comfortability :)
If you wanna be un-ruined, go in front of a CRT. You'll see how even the lowest amount of resolution can still look soo good and fluid, even at 30-60fps. We traded away a great deal of motion clarity by moving to LCD, oblivious of what we missed.
@@mryellow6918 Could've sworn images have depth in CRT, that not even OLED can recreate. I'm not sure what it is.. I don't think it's just a pixel response thing.
I regreted my CRT right after uprading it for a LCD tft panel... The eyestrain however I don't miss one bit, nor the room it took. I invested in two Q-led -6 years ago... what a blast, these made me very appreciative of the current level of monitors.
Depends old CRT using VGA where only solo but using the old RGB 5 plug twistlock connections on a 17" looked really good and I still have that old 17" monitor. Yes modern do give a better image my main monitor for probably last 5 6 years or more has been a Philips 42" curved 4k monitor so not ideal comparing them but my iiyama 27" 1080 I would say my 17"CRT held its own against that.
This feels very similar to upgrading the refresh rate of your monitor. Since I've gone from 60hz to 165hz, looking at 60 FPS hurts. It felt like I was looking at it like it was 30 FPS, it felt laggy just because I was exposed to the god level of higher refresh rates. I have a GTX 1050 Ti, hopefully, I don't get tempted by a higher quality monitor, like 1440p+ and 240hz+ 😵💫
i tried 27" and didn't like it, too large and would make me dizzy in certain games, so i returned it and i'm stuck with 24" so probably stuck at 1080p too
When my old 1600*900 monitor died, I had a GTX 1050Ti. I bought a 1440p monitor and totally skipped on the 1080p. My jaw dropped how clear everything became! But at the same point, it was also clear that the 1050ti had to go! 😀
@@lehelzelenka207 close to the monitor because black bars will reduce the size of visible screen space in lower resolutions but will maintain the same ppi.
I went from 1080p to 4k. I don’t regret it at all. I bought a 4090/7700x system it runs great. But I have the money to blow on PC parts. People just have to be aware of what they are buying themselves into as you said.
You have money to blow on pc parts ... this is why you got a Ryzen 7 7700x and not a Ryzen 7 7800x3d or better even when the 3d was not out there was way better Ryzen Cpu's out there.
Tell me your running an OLED brother. PS: How can you review GPU pricing if you don't even know what those GPUs are actually used for?? I'm so confused with this video. I thought this guy does reviews on GPU releases and etc, has he said positive things about a 4090? And he's just upgrading to 1440p?
This is happening to me right now, upgraded to 1440p recently and my 3060Ti went from "This is overkill for me at 1080p" to "Huh I need a little bit more oomph at 1440p now". I will probably wait for AMD's 7700XT or 7800 to upgrade later. Right now i can make do with DLSS and whatnot.
Yep, agreed on 100% you said in this video. I live in Brazil and hardware costs a LOT more now (because my currency lost a lot of value compared to the dollar). That means if my PC broke I'd have to spend WAY too much to simply rebuild it, and it's a 2019 PC.
I will stay at 1080p until the next 5 years when probably an upgrade for my recent upgraded system might be a thing. I still don‘t feel like even current gen gpus that are affordable (not you 4080 and above) offer enough performance without upscaling to run games at a decent framerate without drawing 90000 watts of power. 1080p on a 24“ monitor is fine an sharp enought.
I had regretted going to 1440p before getting a better graphics card. Then again, the situation was that it was hard to get a decently priced card in 2021 than in 2022, however, upgrading made it harder for the computer to run games and Windows seem to hate to keep changing its resolution. I also use 2 monitors, so if the 1440p monitor changes resolution to 1080p, whatever I had on the 2nd monitor that's 1080p gets resized. I've upgraded from 1650S to 3070 in 2022 because I could not tolerate the performance I'm getting.
I feel you. I bought my 1440p 75 Hz monitor (not a competitive player) while i still had a gtx 1070. It was an okay experience, with fsr enabled in some games. But then a lot of heavy AAA title got released, and I really felt that lack of performance. I upgraded to a rtx 3070 as well, and now I have no issues whatsoever, even in games that don't have DLSS. The only problem that's getting talked about more and more is the VRAM size. Right now, 8gb is enough for ultra textures in TLoU or Resident Evil 4.
Frankly, for me the biggest reasons to get a 4K monitor -- which caused a struggle while gaming during a graphics card shortage -- were the times when the graphical performance would not matter, such as text or image editing. I guess with age comes the understanding that lets sacrifice gaming visuals to get a more pleasant view overall
I jumped to a 4k monitor before I could really power games at 4k. I was just fine with that. 4k on Desktop was awesome. Games at 1080p on the 4k monitor looked the same as on the 1080p monitor. Then later, I got new components (re: video card) that made use of it - and was feeling happy again.
Are you sure you don't see any degradation of picture quality when you games at 1080p on your 4k monitor? Because I'm afraid to upgrade my current 1080p when I saw how horrible the quality of 720p on 1080p monitor. This is when my old graphic card back then can't handle 60fps on 1080p so I had to play at 720p in order to get 60fps.
@@hammerfall6666 2160p is a whole pixel upscale for 1080p. Each 1080p pixel is a 2x2 of the 4k grid. So, looking at 1080p on a 4k is identical to looking at a 1080p screen.
@@hammerfall6666 I've used both. Usually play games full screen though. Nice thing about a big screen is being able to do many things at once on it when needed.
For me personally that point was seeing 4K running on a 27" monitor. The absolute Clarity of that resolution on a relatively small 27" screen was simply amazing. The only thing that keept me from staying with that 4K Display are the insane GPU prices you'd need to pay to get a GPU capable of running 4K at good Framerates. So I sold that screen again and instead went with a 34" curved Ultrawide monitor with a Resolution of 3440x1440. It's a lot easier to run that resolution compared to 4K and it looks "Good enough" but I still kinda miss that insane clarity from the 4K Screen.
I can't honestly tell the difference between a 4K TV demo and a 1080p TV demo at living room viewing distances. According to Vex's viewing calculator, you can't tell the diff between 1440p and 4K at 32".
I run a 43 inch 4k on a desktop. It is a bit of a deeper desk than some but still a typical desktop setup, and i love it IMO its perfect, but run a game at less than 4k at that size and distance and it is VERY noticable.
@@dgillies5420 make a good point about viewing distance and perception of pixels. You are right that you wouldnt be able to percieve the difference in pixels at those smaller sizes with higher resolutions but for gaming it will look better in the same way you can use super sampling to render at higher resolution than your monitors native and it will in fact look way better. But if you really want to see higher resolutions for what they are you must go up in size and i feel that the 40-43 inch is close to perfect for 4k at a typical dektop viewing distance. I feel like 8k will never really be widespread for desktop viewing as it just requires such a large screen to be at the perfect density toview its full potential that you wouldnt want to sit that close to it. Given the computational horsepower maybe supersampling 8k on a 4k screen in the future. Any 8k monitor smaller than say 55+ inch(estimate) is pointless and a scam IMO, well more like scamming ourselves if we dont know any better, or maybe some people plan on playing or wqtching with their nose pressed against the screen so they can see all those pixels lol
If you play at 4k downscaled to 1440p it's almost as good as native 4k. Almost no visible pixels at all. I actually do this so that I can get 4k image quality with the way higher refresh rate that my monitor can provide, which 4k still can't achieve.
I definitely needed to upgrade my PC going to 1440p, but with the added clarity and screen size, I don't mind one bit. I probably need to upgrade more often than others to keep my performance smooth, but I'm not too picky on graphics quality, I'll play on medium if I need to. It works for me, and that's all that matters. Great video showing the pros and cons in a neutral way!
Hell yeah for exemple my rig is a i7-8700k+3060ti+32gb ram i play on a 1440p monitor with 144hz most game will run in medium at 144fps and even them 1440p in low setting will look x10 better them 1080p in ultra setting + before buying a monitor go look on forum wich one you will think as the better color palet it doesnt sound important but it make a huge difference not one screen is the same. In my opinion the best monitor for a good price is the asus rog 144hz at 2k res around 400buck as the best color palet their the samsung odysse too but cost more and is kinda the same as the asus one
One of the things people seem to forget when upgrading to 1440p or 4k is that regular pictures you might find & download from the internet will look a lot smaller at theses higher resolutions. Lets say your a single male with a hardy collection of err lets call them models or anime girls, with a resolution upgrade all those pic's you lovingly downloaded previously will no longer fill the screen like they used too, now sure most picture viewing software can enlarge the pictures but when enlarged many pic's will now look grainy & ruin your viewing experience & associated pleasures. In other words your honking big por_ collection could be forever ruined with a high res monitor. I know at this point many will be gasping in horror at this prospect & others that wont give a fuc_ but its just something to remember if your a considering an upgrade. LOL
You have a humble, practical, non-materialistic point of view with the world of PC gaming. And I more than appreciate that. It's very refreshing to see. Subscribed.
I upgraded from 1080p 23" to 4k 32". I have a 3080 and can handle it pretty well, but my upgrade was mostly intended for productivity and it was amazing for that, I manage a couple of projects and can see everything at the same time. And movies... Dune or Interstellar are mindblowing at 4k
There's no way I could ever go back to 1440p, let alone 1080p. If I'm playing an old 2D game in 640x480, fine I don't care I expect it look a certain way, but if the game is 3D rendered, 1080p might as well be a DOS game. I was playing at 1600x1200 back in the 90s.
You are 100% spot on. Just last month I wanted to replace my broken 1080p monitor to a 1440p one. Boy was I not ready. I realized my 1660 will absolutely choke in that resolution, so I decided to upgrade my rig. Went from r5 3600 with a 1660 to a r7 5700x with a 3070 (I know 3070 isn't the best at 1440p but it's enough for the games I'm playing). Oh and I also decided to buy a new case because it was kinda small, AND I ALSO bought a new cooler because the 5700x didn't come with a cooler :) (my 3600 was using a stock cooler) So yeah I spend way more than I thought it should be, at least I'm happy to see those glorious detailed images 😆
@@IND12222 tell me with a straight face, the 3070 can play 1440p high settings in games such as TLOU, the new Star Wars, Cyberpunk etc. Yes I'm aware in old games the 3070 is still a beast , but in new games the VRAM are lacking *cough* 8gb *cough* . For the future 1440p gaming with 3070 is looking grim.
@@reasondro hmmm 🤔 , yeah like 8 gb will behind in future games but for now 3070 playing all games in 1440p high setting. Also in future tho we can do some twerk in graphics so we can enjoy 1440p with 3070 in future too.
@@IND12222 I mean I guess, stuff like DLSS will help for sure, but it will always be different than the native resolution. Let's just hope future games doesn't need a lot of vram to achieve beautiful imagery. RDR2 is a good example for that, gorgeous game with not so much of VRAM being needed.
I did the big brain thing and started at 1440p with a 3070ti. Just upgraded to a 7900xt and am very happy with it. Before I was having to use dlss ultra performance to get high fps. Now I only need fsr quality if I have ray tracing maxed out
I remember the jump from standard AV to HDMI like it was yesterday. Then the jump from 720p to 1080. I went from 1080 to 1440 in like 2014 and felt like hot shit. Now after a few years of 4k it feels like the jumps are becoming less noticeable. 4k to 8k is really not that different in person. Either that or my eyes are getting worse.
Lol, I’m also getting to that age where my eyes aren’t as good as they used to be. This is a good reason to stop caring about keeping up with the Jones’ of the PC world 😂😅 Love that
Can totally relate. From the first time I booted up fraps, I developed a new insatiable concern/obsession and tech inferiority complex that I had to throw money at to relieve. Once, I was really happy with 1080p 60hz and $200-300 GPUs... Now with 1440p 165hz Im looking at $500+ GPUs and it sucks! ...the brutal truth? Most of the absolute best games Ive played in the past 8 years, forced me to play upscaled 1080p @ 30fps cuz consoles be consoles. It was jarring at first, but im playing TotK rn and its incredible on my Nintendo potato. I could name a dozen more games that blew me away despite '1080p" 30fps... but 1440p 60fps+ is a massively better experience and sometimes I wish I were still blissfully ignorant.
absolutely never ever get a 1440p monitor to play 1080p games. because of the specific number of pixels a 1080p picture will always look sharper on a 1080p monitor than on a 1440p one. (ignoring upscaling and whatnot)
Another issue is the UI layout. A lot of older games tend to not scale practically with 1440p resolutions. Often the menus, HUDs, etc will be much smaller than it should practically be
1440p has a big advantage over 1080 on older titles as you can run games at 720p with 2x scaling. Sure, they will look like 720p games, but for older titles with simpler visuals, I think it isnt much of a downgrade.
This is why I purposefully went with 1080p for my new build. I haven't been spoiled by other resolutions, and can now crank up the graphics settings and still get ridiculously high fps for a much longer period of time.
Same for me but I switched to 4K from 1440p… I still think 1440p looks decent but there is quite a big difference that 4K has over 1440p that I personally notice… And I definitely can’t go back to 1080p, way too low of a res for me…
Do you know what i am doing... I have a 42 OLED Sony 120 Hz AS my Desktop Monitor and i Run Games in 1440p in it. The upsampling gives a real good experience, Close to native 4k.
@@kingroehle do you notice a degrade in quality when using 1440p on a 4k screen? I always thought content will look blurry and doesn't scale well when you're not in native resolution
@@sertaysakizoglu5553 He is full of crap. He will say it's fine because he spent a lot of money on it. But using a 42" 4k monitor as a desktop is already a bad call. It's too big, the edges look like crap and the PPI is low. It's the same as a 21" 1080p times 4. It's only 105 PPI. Even worse if you use is as a 1440p monitor. I have a 32" 144hz 4k monitor, i sit at 60cm and it's GIGASHARP. I can play at 1440p in window mode. The window is 27" and i keep the 137PPI. It is 30% more pixels per inch compared to a 4k TV. It's not oled so no ultra black but no burn in either.
The other Guy Here is talking Shit. Year i notice a Difference if i scale 1440p Up to 4k or If o watch in native 4k BUT upscalled 1440p Looks much much sharper than upscaling 1080p to 4K. I use an expensiv Sony OLED, costs around 1400 Euro when i bought IT, now about 1200. But what ist say ist that i dont feel it's wort spending 1000 extra Cash for a GPU that can handle 4k with Raytracing because the Difference IS Not that big that it is Worth the Money. Different TV's can handle upscaling different. I have a second Setup Here witch an BenQ 27 Inch 1440 p Monitor and i can Tell you that the big OLED Looks much better that the little 1440p Monitor, Runned at it's native Resolution.
I think if you are upgrading to a 1440p monitor you need to keep in mind the games you play and be ok with playing modern games at lower levels of detail or lower res or fps. I play lots of older games and less demanding indie games, so my gtx 1070 is still holding strong for most of the games I play. Stuff like halflife-2 still runs at 1440p 144hz which is insane. I don't typically play many 3d hyper realistic games so only upgrading my monitor gave so much value!
I’ve been gaming since the 90’s meaning I played videogames on a 576p CRT display for years. I’ve played across the whole spectrum of resolutions upwards from that. 8K is around the corner now and for the first time I can say, we’re reaching the point of overkill. For me personally 4K is the visual sweet spot, not 1440p. 1440p may be more interesting budget wise but visually speaking 4K does truly offer extra fidelity. Even on a 27” monitor.
I feel that. Recently after picking up the series x and trying out the quality modes where it renders at native 4k, it just made me devalue 1440p. Id say, 1440p is a bit of an upgrade coming from 1080p. Everything is clearer and the image is sharper. 4k on the other hand, at least in yakuza like a dragon looked like a different game entirely
I'm slowly upgrading my PC so the costs are balanced over many months which works really well for me as prices are continuing to go down, if everything goes right I will get a 1440p monitor in 3 months and pay it in 6 months.
I've upgraded to 1440p, 165Hz from 1080p, 75Hz in January at the same time I upgraded my GPU, and 1440p is great, sure, but it definitely has changed the way 1080p looks to me now.
I had a talk with Bing AI about the jump to 2k from 1080p, assuming your setup stays the same, your PC will work 77.8% harder due to the new pixel count. (under 2 million more then 1080p)
I'm running 1080p 165hz on a 4080. Some call that a waste, I call it super sharp. Using resolution scale to bump things up to 4k (or 1440p in more demanding games) makes the image so much cleaner than any AA technique could hope to achieve. RDR2 especially benefits from this so damn much, reduces the blur immensely. I plan on making the jump to 1440p and eventually 4k too, but desk space is a concern at the moment (I have a weirdly shaped one lmao), which is why I stuck with my 1080p high refresh panel for my current GPU upgrade.
I agree, resolution scale is such a good thing, and being able to play on a affordable display and play with high hz is just a great option, and also makes you save money tu purchase what really matters, the pc
I built my first gaming pc last year and man was 1440p a big change over gaming on my switch. You're absolutely right, its is certainly hard to go back to 1080p, but I've found a couple of games I don't mind turning the resolution back down for to get those extra frames
@@crumpetsNskin i actualy go back and forth on PC gmaes and switch games. . and for the record , when youa re running it on your TV the switches default setting it to render in 1080p , it only drops to 720p when going mobile or unless you tell it to output to 720p on tv in the settings. though in some games you'll want to do this (change the default TV output) for better frame rates (breath of the wild for instance)
@@DengueBurger I've only been playing docked for those few times it'll do 1080p, but omg, I can only imagine Zelda and Metroid in 1440p, or maybe even 4k. There's no reason the next console shouldn't have upscaling. Tbh, I'd love to see frame gen make it way over to switch too
I think its the same as having a 144hz monitor from 60hz, u cant just go back and u need to upgrade ur components to have a consistent 144fps to get that 144hz feeling and with that upgrade u also need a lot more money
@@IT_Farhandepends on game. I have a 144hz 1080p monitor and 6750xt. On fast paced games like Doom/CoD/Borderlands 3 I let my PC rip for that 144fps. On slower more atmospheric games, that are a little more demanding like now that I'm replaying Metro Exodus I prefer to cap my FPS at like 90, because it will stay at 90 no matter what, and that consistency feels better to me, also reduced noise from PC.
I have a very similar story. A month ago I was satisfied with my 1080p monitor and my 5700xt GPU, and figured I was good to go with that setup for another 2-3 years. Then a buddy told me how 1440p is so much better than 1080p. So I figured I’d get a 32” 1440p monitor since they’ve come down in price. Next thing you know, I decide to get a 6800xt to get better frame rates at 1440p. That required upgrading my power supply. I’m well on my way toward an entire new build just because a friend told me 1440p was a nice upgrade. And a month ago I was in blissful ignorance. My advice to anyone gaming at 1080p: if you’re not unhappy with it - stay with 1080p until you’re ready to do a new system build, if you get a 1440p monitor you’ll inevitably want a build that makes full use of it.
thnak you for the tip, i´m on a 1366x768 monitor and i was thinking to upgrade to a 1440p monitor, but since i have a 5700xt i guess i will get a 27" 1080p IPS monitor, since i cannot aford to upgrade my pc in the next 2 years
I feel this with FPS too, as you mentioned in the video. I've got a 144 hz 1440p curved monitor as my main monitor (it just happened to be curved and was on sale). It's crazy when 60 fps feels "laggy" to me now. I'm actually annoyed that my phone forces me to choose between 1440p and 120 hz. There is technically a way, but I'd have to modify my phone in debug and set the pixel to 1 less than what it detects, all just to enable both at the same time, and then have a battery that'll drain quickly. Either way, I don't really regret any of this. I always like improving when I can afford to. I can't wait for the day where 1440p and at least 120 hz becomes the new 1080p 60 hz. Waiting for prices for everything to go down in general.
I play some games at 60 fps to be smooth, because is the framedrops what feels the most laggy, i feel more laggy 240 fps with stutter to 120 than 120 locked with stutter to 100 and than 60 fps locked completely stable.
@@guille92h Yeah, that's true too. I've been relying on dynamic DLSS to target 144 FPS in games like Cyberpunk 2077. I wish I could run it natively, but my CPU is an older one now (i9-9820X). I think my graphics cars is still good (RTX 3080 Ti), but I hear the 4090 is much more powerful. Though until prices drop, there is no way I'm upgrading any time soon.
Thats how i feel with 360hz an 200hz i can see the lag difference night an day an some games just make me wanna get off if im not pushing more then 300 fps
I started playing in 4K60 since getting a new system plus upgrading monitor my size to a 32" 165Hz and I can't imagine ever going back to 1080p. It's amazing where things are now compared to the 1980's when I was playing on my Amiga or Atari ST. Like many I'm waiting for the next gen of GPU's and making do until then.
My experience with upscaling with Nvidia has been great. DLSS in Quality mode usually manages to make the game actually look better than native. My experience with FSR on the other hand is not as good as native. Also I jumped from 1080 to 3440x1440 while using a 2070 Super and yeah, it was rough. The 2070 Super definitely had a hard time keeping up with the new resolution but it could usually do it at around 60-70 fps within reason. Had to move on to a 3080 and that price was a hard one to take but I don't regret it. This monitor blows my 1080 away. It was worth it.
Sorry but DLSS in Any Mode will 'Never' looks as good or better than Native under normal circumstances.... You can't take a 1080p or 1440 p image (for example) and AI upscale to 2160p and think it looks as good as native 2160p., not when you look close... I agree DLSS does a great job in helping people with older systems achieve the frame rate they are looking for, but it does come at a cost. Also, if you have a 3080 or 3080Ti as I do, you should almost never have to use DLSS, as just about every game will give you 60 to 100 FPS without it...
@@PeterJohnson76 I like to use some form of anti-aliasing but all forms have weird drawbacks, like shimmering or other terrible crap. DLSS basically gives you free anti-aliasing that is better than the native methods, and throws more fps at you as well rather than take it away. In my experience, as long as DLSS is in quality mode and not the other weaker modes, it's just as good or even better than native with a terrible anti-aliaser. And all of the anti-aliasing methods are terrible. Always have been. We've just learned to put up with it. It might be true that in some circumstances, when you really look close, that quality DLSS has flaws that native doesn't but games are moving fast enough that I'm not stopping to look at individual cracks in sidewalks or window sills. Also, on a 3080 it's true I can typically get 60-100 fps native but I have a 180Hz monitor and a 3080 can't do it. With DLSS it definitely can. The faster frame rate is absolutely worth it. Again, only on quality mode. If my only option were the balanced or performance then I probably wouldn't even bother. I didn't like the idea of DLSS when it first came out but I've changed my mind as it's improved. Not sure that I'm really all that enthused about frame generation though. That tech isn't looking too good to me.
4K is REALLY not worth it now. Wait until we have 2nm GPU devices (today AMD is selling 5nm; NVidia is selling 4nm). The power consumption of a 4K card is 400w or about 15c an hour and if you use your compute 500 hours a year that's an extra $50/yr in electricity costs on top of the hardware costs! Also, 8K TVs are in the process of being banned in most countries because they are POWER PIGS (400w+ vs. 100w) and really don't improve anyone lives ...
11 месяцев назад
As someone being fond of iPhone 4 and newer(back then) I realized it is so soothing and convenient to have a slightly higher resolution so I cant see pixels. I sticked to this ever since. Today I work on BenQ EX2780Q which is a qHD 144Hz 27" screen and I love it. A lot. Both for my photography(10-bit frc is okay) and gaming.
BenQ is probably the best monitor. It’s designed for editors, writers, and artist in mind. My older BenQ imo actually has way more quality brightness settings. Hopefully this is a personal fork and not a fork in quality.
I was just looking into this and was benchmarking my GTX 1070 on my 4k TV to see how it handles 1440p and 4k and realised that if I were to buy a 1440p display I will need to spend a good amount on a rtx 3080 or something similar. While I do need a better graphics card in the future, I can't really say that I would need it to run a higher resolution. Thanks for the video, it was insightful!
I had been dreaming for the day I would get a nice set up with a great monitor and PC specs. After going through college on a 24” 1080p 30fps, the day I made it all happen was surreal. And the 1440p was definitely the prize for the experience.
I play on a curved 4k 55" tv and i sit right in front of it like maybe 3 1/2 feet away from it. Its so immersive but my friends tell me they cant handle it and they gotta move the chair back to at least 5 feet away.
I remember the same thing happened to me back in 2019. I had a GTX 1070 and wanted to upgrade to 1440p. Bought a 1440p monitor and my 1070 was STRUGGLING lol. Bought a 2080 Ti a week later, and still running it to this day :)
Question: is a native 1080p image on a 1080p 27 inch monitor better than an upscaled 1080p image on a 1440p screen? I'm thinking of buying a 1440p monitor but I still want 1080p for power savings.
Absolutely. On fixed pixel displays, a native 1080 is gonna look better than a 1080p image upscaled to 1440p. I honestly think it looks nicer than a 1080p image upscaled with one of the temporal upsamplers to 1440p as well. Sorry this is so late btw.
@@Liquifiedpizzas Thanks anyways, I bought a 32inch 1440p and I'm unable to play at 1080p at all, it looks a lot worse than 1080p with FSR quality on a 1080p 27inch screen. I didn't see too much of a jump in wattage at 1440p with FSR quality so I'm using that since it looks almost as good as native 1440p.
I think the solution is to go all the way to 4k. Scaling artifacts become less of an issue at super high resolutions. 720p on a 1080p display looks absolutely disgusting. But 1440p on a 2160p display looks fine.
Your reasons are exactly what I felt when I first moved up. Suddenly in order to just play everything was a bit more expensive. My old hardware started chugging hard in games that it could easily handle at 1080. And 1440p was so much better than 1080p that I couldn't see myself willingly going down in resolution. Like you, I've actually warned people I know that if they don't want to be spending more on parts, they need to stay at 1080. They will regret the cost. Especially the people who don't game as much as I do.
I mean, I've been using a 1440p ultrawide for years, and I honestly don't have that much of a problem with it. But then, I think a lot of games look completely fine at medium settings with a lot of the 'nice to haves' turned down. I think it just comes down to your relative sensitivity to graphical fidelity. But at least for me, that's a losing proposition. Games are now being developed on graphics engines that do double duty in rendering farms for television and movies, their fidelity and detail can be cranked up arbitrarily limited only by what gamers will sacrifice to fit the game on their SSD.
@@FJAD94 As long as you adjust your graphic settings in each game, you should be able to play most games without issue. Just don't expect to run heavier games at high settings or higher. And expect some games to really stress your card. You can keep your 9700k, get a newer card and run 1440p at higher settings without stressing the new card.
@@faolon9343 oh thanks and then, is it advisable to go from playing at 1080P in high-ultra graphics to 1440P at medium? and, So, will playing at 60 fps on a 27 inch 240hz asus oled panel feel like playing at 80 on my VA 1080P 144hz panel?
@@FJAD94 FPS wise, basically yeah. Appearance-wise, you'll notice a few things being not as good as before, but for the most part it shouldn't be too much of an issue. Unless you're the type that needs everything to be perfect, then it'll bother you. If you're not, you probably wont even notice 99% of the time.
The best monitor 4K at 27 inches with ~160 PPI. Problem is that the cost would quickly jump to at least 2000$. 4K I wouldn't want more than 90FPS but still you need an extremely powerful GPU, even on medium settings.
crazy cuz 1080p to 4K is double the res but 4 times the pixels even 1440p is almost twice as many pixels therefore your PC is working twice as hard its wild how little resolution increase increases the pixels by so much
I upgraded to one of the first "true" 2160p monitors in 2013 and that's what I really regret 😂 I went back to 1440p and I am very happy with it. The decreased sharpness is barely noticable and games still run really well especially with DLSS quality which wasn't a thing back then. The 2160p one still serves as a secondary display for the web and videos 🙂
lmao ikr n the argument is so damn stupid. I feel like the people who whine about improvements in quality to a product just are begging for views. The thumbnail definitely makes it feel this way.
I'm using 24" 1440p and it's goooooood. Btw used it with 1080p 17" laptop screen, and windows was the same size when dragging them. What a convinience@@jayceneal5273
I've been on a 1440p monitor for the last year and hadn't thought there was that big of a difference since I had never switched anything back to 1080p. I saw this video, got curious and switched it to 1080p and that shit was disgusting! It really does look a lot better at 1440p than 1080p. So much crisper detail lol. Anyway, good vid.
1080p on a 1440p monitor looks worse than in a native 1080p monitor because pixels don't match, also if you seat very close to a big monitor 1080p will look worse, 27 is maximum for 1080p.
I went from a 1080p 24" to a curved 3440x1440 34". I gave my old monitor to my father and when I visited him and saw the screen I couldn't believe it. I thought he was at 720p and the flat panel looked like it was bending backwards on the sides
Thats fish eye effect. When i gave up my ultrawide for a flat 27 1440P due to size reasons, it took months for me to get over that effect. Now I prefer the flat. Its not like the monitor is actually bending back
@@samserious1337 Curved is overrated. Had an Ultrawide for 2 years and switched back to flat. Due to better resolution at cheaper costs and games look shit with the curve.
@@jamesherman3750 I honestly think it looks way better with the curvature. It's easier for the eyes and no matter where I look it's like I'm watching it from the front and not the side
Depending on what games you play, you might actually be able to leverage modern upscaling techniques (FSR in particular, since we're talking about running older GPUs) to get playable framerates while not making the game look worse than 1080p native (because 1080p on a 1440p display definitely is worse than 1080p native). For example when I switched to a 1440p display, I was playing RDR2 on an RX580. All I did was enable FSR and cranked the sharpening slider. FSR looked quite bad at 1080p, but it looks very good at 1440p, so it wasn't an issue, and my FPS remained about the same (~60). And now that I have a 7900XTX I still play RDR2 with FSR, because FSR with cranked sharpening looks better than native+TAA, since TAA just blurs the image, and the sharpening from FSR fixes that, giving you the visuals of native+MSAA but with actually playable performance. But this of course doesn't apply to all games. For example in Starfield, unlike in RDR2, FSR is a downgrade over native. And the same is true for most games.
Never regret going 1440p. I was upgrading from 27" 1080p to qhd 32". Back then my gtx 1070 struggled to run single player games, but going 1080p windowed was always an option, it brings size of 24" fHD monitor. But I never actually used it. Combining ultra with some high and medium gives decent results native. But even with 1070 there was immediate result in competitive games. Going from 1080-75hz to 1440-144hz is day and night.
And on 1440p, you can always play at 1080 ultra wide with bars at the top and bottom... So a 1440p monitor doubles as a 1080p ultrawide if you just want that few extra frames
Really? I went from 1080P-75hz to 1440P-160hz and was completely underwhelmed. I wished I had saved the money and gone 1080P 144hz instead. To this day I still can't see a difference in refresh rate once things go above 90hz/fps in gameplay. What wasn't underwhelming though, was going ultrawide.
Thanks for the warning. I do plan on upgrading to something like 4k 240hz, maybe 1440p 240hz depending on options. But I am using a 1080p 42 Inch TV as a monitor, less than 3 ft away. I think I can deal with 1440p or 1080 on something like a a 1440p/4k 32inch monitor.
I'm fkn old and cheap. My eyes are getting worse. 1080p with freesync gets you a LOT of longevity out of your gear, and looks smooth on damn near everything.
I jumped in to a 1440p with my last 'beast rig' back in 2018/2019. The rig has now been retired and replaced by the next 'beast', but the 27" 1440p monitor still holds up as a perfect Desktop monitor for my needs. No regrets at all.
My situation is almost identical to yours lol. The only painful thing is seeing how my $600 1440p 165hz monitor from 2018 can now be had for less than half that price
I feel the same way about ultrawide displays. Been using ultrawide for 7 years and now 16:9 just seems like its lacking. It's also more taxing on your system but the benefits of the extra screen space outweigh any drawbacks
That's what I'm saying. Been running the neo g9 for a while now and the 32:9 experience is just insane. It really does make standard aspect ratios look obsolete in games.
I went from a 1080p monitor to a 1440p one and it’s great. Some games I’ll lower the resolution or use scalers but the desktop experience in general is worth the upgrade. Also, it looks great for ps5.
And this is one reason I went 4K even on a 23.5" monitor. It's stupidly good looking for general use, and if I ever end up straining a GPU further than it should go, I can drop to 1080p cleanly because it's exactly half the lines/columns.
@@SimonWoodburyForget About 3ft most days. It's a desktop monitor. I don't need 50 inches of fun that close up; I have a smol projector if I want to kick back on a bed and watch ceiling movies. As for the microscopic pixels, you're absolutely right, and that's the point. Plus it only cost about the same as a 1440p so eh, why not?
Good god, how do you even see anything lol? That's about twice the PPI that I'm getting at 32" on 1440p. My eyes would be murdering me. I just tested it quick with 50% scaling and yeah I think I'd quickly get a headache doing all that squinting xD.
@@reignman30 Same way anybody else does it. Makes it real easy at 4K too, just scale UI by 200% and job done. Errything readable, the same size as 1080p, only super round and nice. Honestly don't need to blow the budget on GPUs either. What with FSR, DLSS and just straight-up setting display to 1080p, it's just more options to play with. I spend more time working with text and playing videos than games on this machine as well, so having a monitor with literally microscopic pixels is a really good thing.
For me, the actual most important thing is the extra space - more code fits the screen. Sharper image is only a thing if you stay within same monitor size - I went from 22" FHD to 27" 1440p so it's about the same sharpness. If you only play games, then by all means, stay at FHD - it's pretty smart. If you use your PC for work though, you'll never regret the upgrade to 1440p.. Oh and you should get two monitors too ;)
@@youknowwho9724 Well, depends what you want to do with it.. If you only play old games or do office tasks, then it doesn't matter. If you like to play modern games (say last 7 years) on high fidelity, 1440p, then you definitely need an upgrade. I had the 6700XT and it was all peachy on 1080p (no dips under 60fps in any game) but going to 1440p, it could no longer do it (Warhammer 3 was dipping to 40fps on map, weirdly enough).. My wife also needed an upgrade for her 1080p PC (from RX 580) so I went with it and got 6800XT on sale and it's been about right level of performance - most games run at high FPS (I got 165Hz displays) and even the newest ones run at least 60fps at max or nearly max settings (had to lower some stuff in Last of Us).
