Question Time for 4k from 1440p ?

[envy14tpe]

I have been using 1440p 165Hz IPS monitor for nine years, and am considering 4k 160Hz IPS. Mostly for 4k videos, but some gaming. 99% for watching 4k content. Since kids, not much gaming time, but I'd like to have the option open. Do you think monitor technology has improved enough that I would notice a big difference in quality? Its about $350 for a gaming monitor. What would you buy to get 4k? Forget OLED, too expensive. But all other monitors I see seem to be "gaming". Curious to your opinions, much appreciated.

 

[bill001g]

You have to look at the physical size and the distance you sit from the monitor. Generally people go to at least 32 inch when they go to 4k. 27 in the pixels are a bit small unless you sit closer than normal.

The problem with 4k and gaming is not the monitor. Video is easy to get 4k at good frame rates since it is all prerendered stuff. It is the all the game image video processing that must be done by the GPU. It is fairly cheap to make a monitor that can do 4k at 120hz. For many games even a $2000 5090 can't run 4k at 120hz especially if you start turning up the quality and use things like ray tracing. The only way they get faster frame rates is by cheating and using some kind of frame generation.

The word "gaming" means nothing. Many times they just take a TV remove the tv tuner parts and call it a gaming monitor and charge more even though it has less parts. You need to read all the fine print. Just be careful a lot of the fine print is techno babble designed for people think if it sounds complex it must be a good thing. Only some features will actually be something you can see.

 

[envy14tpe]

You have to look at the physical size and the distance you sit from the monitor. Generally people go to at least 32 inch when they go to 4k. 27 in the pixels are a bit small unless you sit closer than normal.

The problem with 4k and gaming is not the monitor. Video is easy to get 4k at good frame rates since it is all prerendered stuff. It is the all the game image video processing that must be done by the GPU. It is fairly cheap to make a monitor that can do 4k at 120hz. For many games even a $2000 5090 can't run 4k at 120hz especially if you start turning up the quality and use things like ray tracing. The only way they get faster frame rates is by cheating and using some kind of frame generation.

The word "gaming" means nothing. Many times they just take a TV remove the tv tuner parts and call it a gaming monitor and charge more even though it has less parts. You need to read all the fine print. Just be careful a lot of the fine print is techno babble designed for people think if it sounds complex it must be a good thing. Only some features will actually be something you can see.

The thing is when I game I reduce settings to get higher fps in shooters, and given the little time I have to game it is less priority in decision compared to before, so I just want great IPS (more affordable than OLED). So, I'm thinking 4k will be fun for better viewing compared to my 9yr old IPS. And yeah I work in tech mkt, so I'm aware of "gaming" and other silliness, like AI SSD. But seems all above 60Hz are marketed as gaming.

Thinking Asus but only comparable is GBT model: Gigabyte GS27U or Asus XG27UCS. Both about $300, but Asus has better brightness, Gsync compatible, and better stand for only $20 more.

 

[SkyNetRising]

So, I'm thinking 4k will be fun for better viewing compared to my 9yr old IPS.

Nah. It won't.

Thinking Asus but only comparable is GBT model: Gigabyte GS27U or Asus XG27UCS.

You already have an excellent 27" 1440p screen.
Going 4k would make sense only, if you increase screen size also.

 

[alceryes]

Nah. It won't.

To each their own. I went from a good quality 27" 1440p to a 32" 2160p about 2½ years ago and it was an amazing upgrade for video watching AND gaming. I would never go back.

Monitor technology hasn't changed much. At standard desk monitor viewing distance, you'll want a 32" monitor if going up to 2160p.

 

[SkyNetRising]

I went from a good quality 27" 1440p to a 32" 2160p about 2½ years ago and it was an amazing upgrade for video watching AND gaming. I would never go back.

I can understand that - going from 27" to 32".

But OP is talking about going from 27"/1440p to 27"/4k.

 

[alceryes]

I can understand that - going from 27" to 32".

But OP is talking about going from 27"/1440p to 27"/4k.

Yeah, that I definitely would NOT do.
OP would probably end up having to scale up text which can cause spacing and picture quality issues, or worse run the monitor at non-native resolution.

Unless going up to 32" 2160p, stay with your 27" 1440p.

 

[envy14tpe]

At 32" 4k IPS 160Hz or more, is there anything under $500? The price seems to jump a lot.

 

[bill001g]

Maybe settle for 120hz. Many of these monitors can run faster at say 1080 if you for some reason have a actual need for a higher FPS.

I am not so sure there is a lot of 4k video content that runs at even 120hz a lot that I see is 60hz. If you really dig around on youtube there are some but almost all the streaming services like netflix at only using 60fps

When it comes to games even a 5090 really struggles to get 120hz at 4k on many games. If you already are paying over $2000 for a GPU a few hundred extra for a monitor that can do high FPS if you happen to have a game that works at high frame rates in 4k tends to not be a issue.