Refresh rate vs Resolution, 21:9 vs 16:9, Curved vs Flat

[Cynical_Sarcasm]

I'm going to be getting a new monitor for a system I built recently as up to now I have been using a TV which is really hard to read off. The new monitor is going to be used for gaming, coding and going on social media (Reddit and Twitter mostly). What I'm looking to know is if it is better to go for a 4K@60Hz or a QHD/FullHD@144Hz, which is better between 21:9 and 16:9, and whether it is better to go for a curved screen or not. Also I don't know which of the TN, VA, and IPS is best.

 

[jimmyEatWord]

a monitor is always better than a TV . a tv is much cheaper but it gets your eyes tired and stuff .. it also doesn't have higher refresh rates than 60 hz . the FPS hack that some people talk about in games like call of duty is essentially a powerfull gpu with monitors producing high refresh rates and technologies such as gsync and freesync

 

[Hasse Gren]

If your GPU is powerful enough and you prefer quality before smoothness then go for 4K 60hz
Otherwise I would settle for an UW 3440x1440 or 2560x1080 cause they just look gorgeous. What games do you play?
TN panels have definitely a higher refresh rate than VA and IPS panels. I've never played with anything higher than 75hz but now I'm buying this monitor and we'll see what it will feel like when it's finally home
If you're a content producer then flat screens are the best choice but I assume you are not so I will recommend these monitors:
144hz 2560x1080 Gsync 34" UW https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/B014F9QHVC/ref=psdcmw_428652031_t1_B0112845IQ
3440x1080 100hz 34" UW
https://pcpartpicker.com/product/hLYWGX/samsung-c34f791-340-3440x1440-100hz-monitor-lc34f791wqnxza
There's also a $700 UW 1440p but only 75Hz (Curved, FreeSync):
https://pcpartpicker.com/product/3KL7YJ/acer-xr342ck-340-3440x1440-75hz-monitor-xr342ck-bmijpphz
If you require an Nvidia G-Sync monitor, you'd have to shell out more $$$ such as this:
https://pcpartpicker.com/product/m4bkcf/aoc-ag352ucg-350-3440x1440-100hz-monitor-ag352ucg
144hz 2560x1080 4ms
https://www.amazon.com/BenQ-XR3501-35-inch-Curved-Monitor/dp/B01047I0X2
This is my opinion so don't that this as a fact thoo

 

[nmb255]

IMO you want the best refresh rate for the best resolution. I think 60Hz is the bare minimum [actually I think it is too low]. Personally I would go with higher Hz over more pixels

Once your FPS is over your Hz there's a technical gap. Your monitor can't keep up with your GPU. I know there are people running games a 300+ FPS and yes there are claims that it's a "huge" advantage. The reality is that once you go beyond your monitors Hz, diminishing returns kick-in.

With that in mind it's also worth noting that in a couple of years you're more likely to have a new GPU than a new monitor. So when you buy a monitor you want it to be as future proof as possible.

Finally on resolution choice. 4k gives you exactly the same view of the game world as 1080. You just have more dots. Where Ultrawide gives you a larger view of the game world. At lesser dots than 4k of course. Not sure why? Well if you look a wall with a checker board on it in some imaginary game world. At 1080 you are going to see 16x9 squares. In 4k you will see the very same 16x9 squares, only with more detail. In UW you will see 21x9 of those squares. In better detail than 1080 (assuming 3340x1440) but not as much detail as 4k. So UW lets you see more of the game.

My choice would be [and was it's what I have] 3440x1440 with the best refresh rate possible.