1080p vs 1440p

[M_antonio3319]

Is a 27 inch 1440p that much better than a 24 inch 1080p? I will get 2 gtx 980 and want to get the best performance.

 

[redgarl]

If you don't plan to go 4k, stick with GTX 970 SLI... even there, it's overkill.

You can run at 1440p with a single GTX 980 also, but I prefer dual GPU setup so my 970 SLI is what I recommend.

 

[M_antonio3319]

But is 1440p worth the lower frame rate?

 

[VincentP]

Absolutely.
A 27 inch monitor is grainy at 1920x1080.
1920x1080 is good from 20.5 inches to 24 inches.
2560x1440 is good from 27 to 32 inches.

If you are on a 60 Hz monitor, the second GTX 980 is unnecessary.
The Asus ROG PG278Q is your best bet if looking for 144 Hz.

 

[mrmez]

That answer will vary with everyone you ask. For office work I'll never give up my 5k 27".

I still think you get the fastest single card. A 980 should be great at 1440.

 

[11sphere92]

Well u know the higher resolution is better if you look it more near from the computer. I mean if it won't be that much different Image quality if you don't really observe it. But yes, the resolution is bigger.

 

[CK7]

In terms of pure resolution, a 24" 1920x1080 gives you about 92 pixels per square inch, while a 27" 2550x1440 gives you 108 ppi.

Personally, I'm going to go with Dell's 25" U2515 1440 (123ppi) with my next monitor upgrade, because I prefer pixel density over pure size.

 

[i7Baby]

Screen size - work out how far from the screen you want to sit. Then determine best screen size. If you sit back from it then a bigger screen is fine.
Resoultion. 24 in - 1080p is fine. 27in then go for 1440p. 32in - 4K.

The higher the res, the more graphics card power you'll need to keep up the fps you want. See http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-r9-295x2-crossfire-performance,3808-4.html

 

[chenw]

Edit: misread, sorry, thought you were getting 1, not 2 980's.

2 980's is enough for 1440p under almost all circumstances. SLI 970 is preferable over a single 980 on 1440p, but sli 980 would be over sli 970's

 

[VincentP]

In terms of pure resolution, a 24" 1920x1080 gives you about 92 pixels per square inch, while a 27" 2550x1440 gives you 108 ppi.

Personally, I'm going to go with Dell's 25" U2515 1440 (123ppi) with my next monitor upgrade, because I prefer pixel density over pure size.

PPI is pixels per inch. This is a 1D measurement (not per square inch).
CRT monitors were typically about 85 PPI.
A 24 inch monitor at 1920x1080 is 92 PPI, which is about what we expect in a modern monitor.
A 27 inch monitor at 1920x1080 is only 82 PPI and this looks grainy.
It would be easy to think higher is better, but only if your applications scale font size well.
A 27 inch monitor at 2560x1440 is 109 PPI and this looks great, but it is about as high as I would go for pixel density by choice.
I have a laptop with a 17 inch screen at 1920x1080 (130 PPI) and I find it difficult to read without font scaling.
A 28 inch 4K monitor is 158 PPI and it would be unusable without font scaling.

As I said above:
1920x1080 is good from 20.5 inches to 24 inches.
2560x1440 is good from 27 to 32 inches.

If you are on a 60 Hz monitor, the second GTX 980 is unnecessary.
The Asus ROG PG278Q is your best bet if looking for 144 Hz.

 

[loki1944]

I have both a ASUS VG278HE 27 inch 1920x1080p 144Hz monitor and an Asus PB278Q 59Hz 27 inch 2560x1440 monitor. To me the difference between the two is pretty negligible in terms of image quality, with AA on the 1920x1080p the difference is not huge. The Asus 1080p looks much better than my HP 23Xi 1920x1080p IPS monitor.

 

[M_antonio3319]

But if I sit pretty close to my monitor, isn't the swift a better option?

 

[loki1944]

But if I sit pretty close to my monitor, isn't the swift a better option?

I sit real close to mine too, frankly I find the Swift a bit overpriced and there are a LOT of QC issues with that monitor (google it). Now I am able to use DSR on my 1080p monitor to run 3840x2160 on it as well. For me the performance hit isn't worth it for most games, but some people swear by QHD on up, so it's a preference thing to a degree. I'd say if you can, see the QHD in action for yourself and decide if it looks that much better than HD.

 

[chenw]

QC issue with the monitor may not be represented accurately with Swift though, it's both an expensive monitor and it made several breakthroughs with it (First TN with true 8bit, first 1440p with 144hz, first native G-Sync), so any issues with it will most likely be expressed by the people experiencing it, and those who do buy it tend to know more about monitors to be vocal on the net.

A $300 monitor may have same QC, or worse QC issues, but they may not be posted more on the net.

 

[loki1944]

QC issue with the monitor may not be represented accurately with Swift though, it's both an expensive monitor and it made several breakthroughs with it (First TN with true 8bit, first 1440p with 144hz, first native G-Sync), so any issues with it will most likely be expressed by the people experiencing it, and those who do buy it tend to know more about monitors to be vocal on the net.

A $300 monitor may have same QC, or worse QC issues, but they may not be posted more on the net.

For all the hype the Swift got 1/4 people giving it 3/5 or below rating on newegg is not what I consider a good thing at all. It already has more negative reviews than my Asus VG278HE, which has been out almost 3 years now. 28% chance of a dud is a lot to ride your coin on, those are the kind of odds I save for the silicon lottery.

 

[M_antonio3319]

So should I buy the swift?

 

[Snookslayer]

Single card for 1440p 60z... GTX 970 or R9 290X or no difference?

 

[loki1944]

Difference may come in more when you hit over that 3.5GB of VRAM since the 970 has that 1/2 GB of Vram running super slow, not so much of an issue at 1080p I wouldn't think right now, but with future titles and 1440p I think the 290X is a better bet. Or get the 295X2, it's more than some 980s, but less than others and way more powerful: http://pcpartpicker.com/part/xfx-video-card-r9295x8qfa.

 

[M_antonio3319]

I'm going to use 2 980s. That should make it great for 1440 right? I am going to go with the swift

 

[chenw]

Should have little to no issues with that setup. I personally found SLI 970's to run perfectly fine on swift, so a pair of 980s should be even better.

290x is better for the money if talking strictly by raw performances, but game support on AMD's part, from what I have seen, is poorer than nVidia's, for all that is worth. I found there were a few recent games that are playable on nVidia cards but not on AMD, and I have not seen any recent titles where it is the otherway round. There were games that did better with AMD cards, but not to the point where it is unplayable on nVidia.

 

[spat55]

If you want the extra screen size and more pixels then 1440p is worth it, I can't wait to upgrade to UHD 32"+

 

[chenw]

30" is my absolute threshold for a monitor for any resolution at the current distance I sit from my monitor, the 4k monitor I did have in mind for a little while was the Dell 24" P2415A. (For some really strange reason the 24" is cheaper than 27")

4k for me is a PPI monitor (not really for gaming, I don't like the way 4k requires SLI/Xfire to work for proper performance, but I am tempted to play games that 970's are capable of handling on 4k, such as say D3), so smaller the monitor the better 😀.