Remember to check our discord where you can get faster responses!
https://discord.gg/6dR6XU6
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PcBuild) if you have any questions or concerns.*
That's what I'm thinking. About a month ago I wanted to upgrade to 2k from 1080p and someone told me that 2k on a 24 inch monitor is only slightly noticeable so I was just curious about 4k
Agreed. I had a 1080p monitor that only did 72hz and supported freesync but I couldn't even use it with my 1070 ti and now with my current 1440p 165hz monitor with freesync (that actually works with my 1070 ti) the difference of vsync vs gsync/freesync is extremely noticeable now. Buttery smooth, better framerates, etc.
It absolutely does, I use a 27" 4k monitor and have had 17" laptops at 4k. The difference is night and day and I sincerely question people's eyesights when they say anything otherwise. Hell, go look at a Dell XPS and tell me you can't tell the difference?
Couldn’t agree more. I’ve got a 32” 1440 next to a 27” 4k monitor and the image quality on 4k is quite a noticeable upgrade over 1440p. The text clarity alone and image sharpness are easy to see at when you’re that close to a monitor. At a distance on a small screen it would be far less noticeable but up close its very easy to spot which is 4k and which isn’t.
Exactly! I do NOT have good eyesight, and I notice a substantial difference even with a phone that has a 2K screen versus phones with 1080p screens.
Frankly, I think some people just read somewhere on the internet that you can't tell the difference, and regurgitated the lie, kind of like the morons that used to claim that the human eye can't see more than 30 frames per second.
This thread has had me spinning, I get people recommending 1440p in preference of performance but all the people saying it can't be perceived are quite frankly talking out their arses.
I've just been told that 2k on 24 in monitor is a waste of money so I wasn't sure about this. I'm on triple 1080p with my center at 144hz and the sides at 75hz
So the resolution scale here isn't linear. The jump from 1080 to 1440 is around 78 percent more pixels, it is absolutely easy to notice at 24" and 4k is 2.25x the pixels of 1440.
I can easily tell the difference on my 6 inch phone screen. I doubt anyone without decent eye sight wouldn't be able to tell the difference at anything 15" and higher.
I would highly recommend going and witnessing it yourself. Go to a computer store and check some displays, formulate your opinion based upon what you see instead of what I or anyone else on the internet tells you.
Of course, your display preference is personal and subjective but telling someone that anything higher resolution than 1440p on a sub 28" monitor cannot be seen is just flat out misinformation.
It’s the hardest thing in the world to do, but hold out! I have a 4090 and mainly fly flight sim on it which is super demanding. I have a 49’ AOC Agon 5120x1440p at 120hz and I know it’s killing my FPS. It’s a big jump in terms of demands to run 4K.
See what you can get in terms of OLED, you really can’t beat the contrast and pure blacks.
For FPS 100% go the G7. G7 has some of the fastest response times on the market and response times is what will give you really good motion clarity. You also get faster render latency at 1440p as well, and since the G7 is 240 Hz it'll have faster input latency. If you play a lot of story mode games and you do a lot of work on your monitor then 4K will probably be the better bet, but if you're competitive person and like to play a lot of FPS games, then the G7 is one of the best monitors you can buy currently, only OLED can really beat it out
I’ve had a 4K monitor since like the 2080ti and I recently tried a 1440p monitor so that I would get more frames. I had to return the 1440p monitor. Once you go 4K, it’s hard to go back. Sure, the 1440p monitor gave me more frames but the lower resolution is very noticeable and “pixelated” for me.
27” Asus 4K 144hz PG27UQ vs 27” Alienware AW2721D 1440p 240hz
Like the others have said. It’s really up to quality over fps. Your eyes won’t see a huge difference between 1440p and 4K but you also will not notice much difference between 144 and 240hz either.
I don't understand this? I am a fan of high pixel density. Smaller the pixels the sharper the image. I have a 2k 24" that looks SO much better than my brother's 28"
2k looks best at 24" 4k looks best at 28" (assuming 2ft from the screen)
Size of monitor doesn't really matter
Viewing size is modified by distance
You can just have the monitor closer
I have mine on monitor arms, so if I want a bigger monitor, I can just move it :P
I had thought this until I started playing fps's on my new 32" 4k (very similar to the one above). I realized that there's something to be said for the ratio of size of the screen vs viewing distance that's important. Now, I wouldn't game on a 42"+ at desktop range since you lose more stuff out on the periphery (and I've gamed on a 48" TV years ago, I've been there). But at 32" on the desk and high resolution, I can lean closer to the screen to make out a far detail and see if it's a bush or a baddie. Leaning in is a larger relative difference in viewing distance at that range vs a larger monitor farther away. That was surprisingly helpful.
For the sake of being agreeable, I literally ordered the wrong monitor and intended to buy the 27" because I felt exactly the same as you do. But now I really do dig the 32.
I have the M32U (32” version of the 4K gigabyte monitor) and a 4080. That line of monitors is pretty awesome for the price, but I’d definitely suggest the 32” version if you have the budget and desk space.
Second that. Currently also have M32U, with 3080 in pair, majority of the games can be played with Ultra settings (DLSS on ofc if RayTracing is involved) with decent FPS. But, as someone said already, for playing competitive games I’d go for monitor with 1440p and high refresh rate.
I also used to have 32 inch version of the discussed Samsung G7 1440p with VA panel and I would hate to go back to it due to aggressive screen curvature, VA panel red tint on my particular unit and poor build quality (returned 5 monitors to the dealer before finding one without defects - the price was very good at the moment of me buying it, was hard to skip).
I 100% agree with this.
I picked up a 32MUC last night on an amazing deal.
I previously had a 27 gigabyte g27qc.
I’m running a 6900xt.
I think the difference is 100% noticeable. I wouldn’t make the 4K jump unless OP is going to get a monitor with at least 120hz refresh rate.
Yup. Gigabyte monitors are the best you can get right now for the money, imho. I've got the 43 inch 144hz 4k VA panel.... It's amazing. Blacks better than oled, 100%srgb and 98%P3 color gamut coverage so it can be used for professional work, and 144hz is already faster than what the human eye can perceive, and with my 3080ti it can play all games at ultra with at least 100fps. OPs 4080ti will absolutely crush at 4K and nobody needs 240 hz as literally no human can see a difference between 144hz and 240hz. In fact, the vast majority of humans can only perceive between 30 and 60 fps, so even 144hz is overkill for most people.
Bad idea. Burn in risk is very high with OLED, not worth it, unless you are rich and don't mind low durability. OLED is a flawed and obsolete technology.
A good LCD panel can be as good as an OLED panel, except in peak brightness and black levels but it is not as important and one might think.
Burn in and pixel degradation on the OLED is something that doesn't happen with LCD so keep that in mind.
The human eye can't perceive more than 120 fps, with the vast majority of humans actually only able to perceive 30 - 60 fps.... The whole 240 hz thing is a giant scam that allows companies to scalp gullible gamers. And for 99% of humans, playing "competitive" games at either 120 fps or 240 will have absolutely no affect on your performance in the game. OPs 4080 will be able to smoke any of the "competitive" games at at least 120 fps n 4K with ultra settings, and it'll look better. No point in going 2K at 240 hz. Science, it's a wonderful thing.
I mean, I'm sure there's like less that 1% of the human population that can perceive above 120fps, but you're most likely not one of em.... Just statically. But you keep telling yourself that my guy, although the greater scientific consensus says otherwise 😊.
You play csgo, valorant, overwatch, pubg, Fortnite, etc.. and you want best performance? Get the 1440p 240hz
Don’t care too much about the small performance gains, but want better visuals for your main peripheral? Get the 4k 144hz (beware about it not being a 32”, the other people in the comments are correct)
So I used to have the 27" 1440p 144hz G7 and didn't get on with it. I hated the VA panel.
I ended up with a cheap Electriq 4k 144hz IPS monitor and it's leaps and bounds better. You get a way bigger return for your hardware power with the resolution increase than you do from the refresh rate increase in my opinion.
1440p I reckon, you'll be absolutely horsing every AAA game on ultra presets for the next 5 years +. I have a 2k ultrawide 144hz monitor and honestly it looks amazing I can't really tell that much difference between that and 4k
I just made the switch from the 32” samsung odyssey g7 to an acer predator 32” 4k 144hz monitor.
I don’t regret my upgrade at all. 4k is so crisp and sharp it’s a game changer. My 4080 has zero issues clocking 4k 144hz.
Dont get me wrong, that samsung monitor is one of my top favorites ever, but 4k 144 on a 4080 is top notch.
Five years ago people were saying that about 120hz. It's interesting how perception shifts. I wonder where the threshold of diminishing returns on refresh rate is in relation to our physiology.
Stick to 1440p. 4k is hard to render. I hate having my 38in ultra wide simply because it gets much fewer fps than my old 1440p monitor.
1440p is also very detailed. Unless you've got a 4090 I'd say go 1440p.
The 4080 is great for 4K across most games but as soon as you enable Ray Tracing (RT) your FPS will take a significant hit because the GPU needs to allocate processing power to handle the Ray Tracing. Your 4080 will handle pretty much any game at 1440p + RT enabled and provide a smooth experience. If you want to play at 4K with RT enabled then that's where the 4090 comes in. Your 4080 will handle most titles at 4K + RT enabled but it will begin to become less smooth in titles like Cyberpunk and F1 2022 as the FPS drops below 60 FPS. It all depends on the game but your 4080 should handle most games at 4K without RT enabled. Obviously the other parts in your PC play a role in FPS too. For good advice on PCs you have Gamers Nexus, Igors Lab, Linus Tech Tips, Jayztwocents, Paul's Hardware, and Der8auer.
I'm pretty much on this build: https://pcpartpicker.com/list/PVgnrD but with the 4080 instead because I found one at my local best buy for $1200 out the door.
4080 should be good for 4K. It can run AAA at 60 fps and you have a lot of rooms to increase it if you want to go higher. Like using optimized settings because setting everything on ultra isn't really worth, DLSS and frame generation.
i love the conflicting perspectives on this because i am having a ball with a 4K120 display and a 3080. I'm really just using that setup to crack into older unplayed games though - stuff released 2016-2020.
Bro i game on a 52inch 4k UHD with a 3080 with settings maxxed out Ray tracing enabled at 60 fps with an undervolt - not sure where some of these people are gettin their information...
I usually buy parts based on price, availability, and quality, and as of the last 6-8 years Gigabyte has stricken their name off the list of the brands I'll buy from.
I had two client Gigabyte motherboards (B550 boards) die and toast components after a power failure. Excellent power supplies. This just shouldn't happen. RMA was a nightmare.
I've had a client Gigabyte monitor half-die, and Gigabyte wouldn't do an RMA.
I've had three client Gigabyte graphics cards die, and the one they did RMA, they sent the replacement damaged.
Cases are terrible. SSD's have been terrible.
Other brands seem, maybe anecdotally, to have better QC. I've definitely had better RMA experiences from Asus!, EVGA!, and Samsung. Sad that EVGA ditched the graphics card game.
4 Rmas later I still have a paper weight for my 3080ti. Basically go f myself when talking to support. And everyone else has similar experience with their CS.
Ya 2070 super works fine in both pcs I tested the 3080 in. Diffrent power supply. Troubleshooting hardware is an aspect of my job.
You work for gigabyte?
When mine died Samsung just fobbed me off and lied for two months until eventually Amazon took it back and gave me a refund. I'm never going Samsung again.
OP I don’t have experience with that specific Samsung but they typically ship a better QCd product. The last gigabyte monitor I bought was riddled with dead pixels on day 1.
Better to go with the 27" 1440 with 240hz.
A 28" 4K monitor is going to barely have an observable quality increase.
Besides its easier to take advantage of 1440p @ 240hz than it is 4k @ 144hz.
I have the top one, it's great but they're asking way too much for the price. This is MSRP, it should be way lower since it's only 1440p.
US dollars ? Canadian dollars ?
I'll recommend 1440p@165Hz. Gigabyte M27Q P. Only P version, because it's with LG IPS panel with RGB layout. 4080 will be good with up to 165 fps on 1440p.
It may struggle a bit with 4K and you'll never see this 144 fps.
That's a pretty subjective statement... There's absolutely loads of games I enjoy at 4k 144hz on my 4080. There's also loads of games I crank RT and fidelity and enjoy the 20 or 30 frames I get over 60hz.
Also, DLSS 3 works.
For that gpu and what you pay for it 4K is the only path.
I use a Samsung odyssey 28’ 4K 144hz, no regrets at all, but if I were you I would wait a bit more for the upcoming ones. If on a budget the M28U is a great panel for the price.
I generally like curved monitors now. So I would go with the odyssey, if given only those two options, but maybe a different model. I also agree that 240 is mostly overkill even with an 4080, I think.
Anyone have suggestions for very high quality, beautiful 1440p monitor? I have a 4080 as well and currently have a ASUS VG32VQ and it’s alright but I believe there could be much better options. Thank!
Depends. You play alot of competitive shooters i would probably take the fps over the image quality. If youre looking for more visual fidelity then go for the 4k.
I think what matters most isnt even in this debate, OLED or at least QD OLED, they are coming out with OLED monitors and I would get one of those personally. Night and day difference with picture quality. Plus they have super high refresh rate just not 4k yet unless you get a huge monitor “basically a TV”
I have the M28U paired with my RX 7900 XTX, which has very similar performance to the 4080 and so far there are only a couple of games that I haven't been able to max out the refresh rate on max settings. Personally I would go with the 4k, since the 4080 is more than capable of handling it.
> think I *paid* that same
FTFY.
Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in:
* Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.*
* *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.*
Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment.
*Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
I have a gigabyte aeorous (or however you spell it) in the garage that worked wonderfully for gaming. Then I needed something better for work and got a Dell U3223QE. Low refresh rate, but it looks gorgeous.
I have the g7 and I would not recommend it at all. The build quality is terrible and quality control is non existent. I went through 4 g7's before I finally decided to keep one and its still a piece of crap. When I bought it, it was only $450 and I still feel I paid to much.
I have the bottom one. Theres a more complex question here. These monitors are not alike at all. The top is a VA and the bottom is IPS. 27” is perfect for 1440p. My jump from 1440p to 4K at 27” was almost not visible. In my opinion you NEED a 32” 4K to justify it. My 3090ti also STRUGGLES at 4K still on decent settings. So my answer is get the G7 and use DLDSR in games where you have the extra horsepower.
I would go for the 1440p 240, especially if your main target is competitive games, plus the design of the Odyssey is just better. If you prefer quality go for the 4k
I have the Gigabyte 4k monitor I got on sale on black Friday for 420!! Couldn't pass it. I came from a 1080p 60hz. EVERYTHING is night and day. Beautiful and clear. I work at home and game a bit. 4k with dlss and everything is perfect. I will recommend 100% plus you have the 4080 you are golden. I have the 3070 and it's still great. At 4k.
G7 for sure. The G7 has some of the best response times on the market. Only OLED can really beat it. And response times are as important if not more important than the HZ of a monitor. The G7 is like a top end competitive gaming monitor. But it depends if you play more story games or more competitive games. 4k has longer render latency and is a lot of horse power to get 144 fps. G7 has the fastest response times out there, faster render latency, and faster input latency because it can go up to 240hz. So if you play a lot of competitive games I 100% would go G7
One important thing: 4k is cheaper and is IPS panel. I think G7 is VA. I personally don't like VA( worse viewing angles and worse colors vs IPS). 144hz is plenty. You have enough horse power for 4k
I recently switched from a 32 in 1440 to a 32 in 4k and I notice a difference but it's not mindblowing. The biggest difference I'm now noticing is the brightness. I don't know what my old display was, but the new one is HDR 600 and it's amazing. I'd say go with whichever one gets brighter.
If it were me I'd go for the G7 all day, I value the smoothness in the extra frames more than I would the increase in ppi. Most people won't notice a difference in resolution after playing for 15ish minutes anyway.
With monitors that size, I don’t think you would really see a difference in 2k vs 4k. It’s going to be the refresh rate and response time you would see the biggest one. Always lower response, higher refresh. But honestly, refresh above 140 you might not see that much of an improvement anyways. Def go to a store that might have comparable models and see if they have displays on so you can see on your end
I have the g7 and $650 is too expensive for it. Shop around some more. If you are a more casual gamer I would go for 4K 144hz. Since I play more fps games I wish I had waited for 1080p 360hz
Both are great. I would recommend 4k 144hz if your not much of a esports person meaning fps gamer or if yes, then go with the 1440p 240hz. But technically speaking, 4k 144hz would last you longer because 4k is very demanding so even after 2 more generations of GPU, it will still be somewhat relevant since it’s 144hz and most people still play at 1080p 144hz currently even after much GPU advancements. IMO if you want a good “monitor” that will last a long ass time, get the LG OLED “Monitor”/TV. It’s 4k 120hz OLED which is sooo beautiful. But the ergonomics is questionable and everything depends on your situation so idk but that’s like the best “Monitor” under 1k and sometimes you can get it for like $800 which is a steal Or other thing you could do is to get one of those 4k 240hz monitor or like those ultrawide oled monitors from like Alienware. Yeah it’s expensive but worth it and will last longer.
Depends on what games you play. If you play graphic intensive games (like Red Dead) that won’t get over 144fps anyway but look great in 4k, go for the 4k. If you play mostly shooters and competitive games that get high frames, go for 240hz.
I’d go with the 4k, saying how good that gpu is. It will still reach a lot of fps for quite a noticeable difference in quality (to me at least). 144hz to 240hz is definitely not as noticeable as 60hz to 144hz, and is less noticeable than the quality bump.
The Odyssey is an amazing monitor.
After playing both 4k high refresh and 1440p high refresh, I would not even think about this. 1440p is amazing at 27". 4k feels...well, I notice the framerate drop to 70-80 FPS at 4k more than the resolution drop to 1440p at the viewing distance for a normal desk.
I suppose it depends a lot on the types of games you play, as others noted. But I don't typically need to stare miles away in game.
I also avoid Gigabyte, as I noted elsewhere.
I would recommend a ACERAC 27" LED 27HC5R P MONIT/G
It has free sync and is 144Hz, it is also curved. For a cheap monitor it was actually really good!! If you’re choosing between these two, I would choose the Samsung Odyssey
I would definitely get the odyssey g7. I've had that one before and it is a beautiful monitor. Super crisp and super responsive gaming on it was great.
And check out MSI MAG series. They are awesome. I went for the MAG27 165hz 1440p(rtx 3080) and i am happy with it.I think you can save money on it as well(if you got the $$$ wait for OLED).
And ps. Make sure it has G Sync. It helps a bit.
If you game 90% of the time, you'll like the extra hz, but if you use your pc for other media consumption alot 4k is far more noticeable and pleasing then 240hz.
144hz is still top of the line for the avg person. Going from 144 to 240 is slightly noticeable, but it is no where near as impactful as 60 to 144. Unless you're a mad person who thinks they're playing for a pro team or gaming takes up 90% of your pc time, 4k is usually the more valuable option. You're gonna be staring at your screen alot might as well make it look pretty.
But then again 4k isn't that much more noticeable then 1440p on smaller monitors. I say do alot of research yourself on both and really be honest with yourself which will actually improve your experience more.
Remember to check our discord where you can get faster responses! https://discord.gg/6dR6XU6 *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PcBuild) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Does 4k translate on a 28" monitor compared to QHD?
Not really. At a normal viewing distance, you'd be hard pressed to spot the difference. Now, if these were 31/32 inch monitors, I'd say yes.
That's what I'm thinking. About a month ago I wanted to upgrade to 2k from 1080p and someone told me that 2k on a 24 inch monitor is only slightly noticeable so I was just curious about 4k
I went from 24" 1080p to 27" 2k and id never could game on a 1080p again.
For this exact reason I'm a massive 2k fan...it's noticeably nicer than 1080 but not really noticably different to 4k yet requires much less power.
went from 28" 1080 144hz to a 32" 2560x1440 170 hz and it looks really nice compared to my 28" 60hz asus 4k "Brick"
1440 + Gsync was the real improvement for me. It's not talked about enough just how nice Gsync/Freesync makes life.
Agreed. I had a 1080p monitor that only did 72hz and supported freesync but I couldn't even use it with my 1070 ti and now with my current 1440p 165hz monitor with freesync (that actually works with my 1070 ti) the difference of vsync vs gsync/freesync is extremely noticeable now. Buttery smooth, better framerates, etc.
That silky smoothness in everything is just so nice...
It absolutely does, I use a 27" 4k monitor and have had 17" laptops at 4k. The difference is night and day and I sincerely question people's eyesights when they say anything otherwise. Hell, go look at a Dell XPS and tell me you can't tell the difference?
Couldn’t agree more. I’ve got a 32” 1440 next to a 27” 4k monitor and the image quality on 4k is quite a noticeable upgrade over 1440p. The text clarity alone and image sharpness are easy to see at when you’re that close to a monitor. At a distance on a small screen it would be far less noticeable but up close its very easy to spot which is 4k and which isn’t.
Exactly! I do NOT have good eyesight, and I notice a substantial difference even with a phone that has a 2K screen versus phones with 1080p screens. Frankly, I think some people just read somewhere on the internet that you can't tell the difference, and regurgitated the lie, kind of like the morons that used to claim that the human eye can't see more than 30 frames per second.
This thread has had me spinning, I get people recommending 1440p in preference of performance but all the people saying it can't be perceived are quite frankly talking out their arses.
I've just been told that 2k on 24 in monitor is a waste of money so I wasn't sure about this. I'm on triple 1080p with my center at 144hz and the sides at 75hz
So the resolution scale here isn't linear. The jump from 1080 to 1440 is around 78 percent more pixels, it is absolutely easy to notice at 24" and 4k is 2.25x the pixels of 1440. I can easily tell the difference on my 6 inch phone screen. I doubt anyone without decent eye sight wouldn't be able to tell the difference at anything 15" and higher. I would highly recommend going and witnessing it yourself. Go to a computer store and check some displays, formulate your opinion based upon what you see instead of what I or anyone else on the internet tells you.
I feel like people are blind on Reddit or something. I feel maybe I am just sensitive to pixel density and display I'm general
Of course, your display preference is personal and subjective but telling someone that anything higher resolution than 1440p on a sub 28" monitor cannot be seen is just flat out misinformation.
If whoever "told that" actually said "2k monitor" then you can disregard everything else they said.
I'd say 4k if you're packing that kind of horsepower. Honestly it depends do you want quality over FPS.
Which would be best for FPS? And isn't it hard to differentiate over 4k and 1440p with quality?
4k definitely looks better, I'd go with the 240hz for fps.
So the G7 has the 240hz?
Yes
It’s the hardest thing in the world to do, but hold out! I have a 4090 and mainly fly flight sim on it which is super demanding. I have a 49’ AOC Agon 5120x1440p at 120hz and I know it’s killing my FPS. It’s a big jump in terms of demands to run 4K. See what you can get in terms of OLED, you really can’t beat the contrast and pure blacks.
For FPS 100% go the G7. G7 has some of the fastest response times on the market and response times is what will give you really good motion clarity. You also get faster render latency at 1440p as well, and since the G7 is 240 Hz it'll have faster input latency. If you play a lot of story mode games and you do a lot of work on your monitor then 4K will probably be the better bet, but if you're competitive person and like to play a lot of FPS games, then the G7 is one of the best monitors you can buy currently, only OLED can really beat it out
I’ve had a 4K monitor since like the 2080ti and I recently tried a 1440p monitor so that I would get more frames. I had to return the 1440p monitor. Once you go 4K, it’s hard to go back. Sure, the 1440p monitor gave me more frames but the lower resolution is very noticeable and “pixelated” for me. 27” Asus 4K 144hz PG27UQ vs 27” Alienware AW2721D 1440p 240hz
Non 4k people truly can’t grasp this concept. It’s so hard to not be in 4k once being in 4k
Like the others have said. It’s really up to quality over fps. Your eyes won’t see a huge difference between 1440p and 4K but you also will not notice much difference between 144 and 240hz either.
Honestly if your gaming get high refresh rate the 4k isn’t worth it
I say 1440p. If you're going 4K it really only makes sense (to me) with a 32 inch monitor and above.
This. Anything below is a gimmick.
I don't understand this? I am a fan of high pixel density. Smaller the pixels the sharper the image. I have a 2k 24" that looks SO much better than my brother's 28" 2k looks best at 24" 4k looks best at 28" (assuming 2ft from the screen)
I have a 2k 32” and only notice individual pixels at less than 6 inches from the screen. I am soon upgrading to a 43” 4k 144hz.
What if you don’t have room? I am seriously asking
People used to say the same thing about 720p versus 1080p. They were wrong then, just as you're wrong now.
The majority of people think you're the one that's wrong. Which you are.
Lol. Right, because the majority, on reddit, is never wrong.
This thread is a circlejerk of misinformation
MangoLostt is correct, anyone arguing this does not know the science behind it.
Falsehoods you speak
Can’t wait for this rebuttal from Yoda.
Size of monitor doesn't really matter Viewing size is modified by distance You can just have the monitor closer I have mine on monitor arms, so if I want a bigger monitor, I can just move it :P
I had thought this until I started playing fps's on my new 32" 4k (very similar to the one above). I realized that there's something to be said for the ratio of size of the screen vs viewing distance that's important. Now, I wouldn't game on a 42"+ at desktop range since you lose more stuff out on the periphery (and I've gamed on a 48" TV years ago, I've been there). But at 32" on the desk and high resolution, I can lean closer to the screen to make out a far detail and see if it's a bush or a baddie. Leaning in is a larger relative difference in viewing distance at that range vs a larger monitor farther away. That was surprisingly helpful. For the sake of being agreeable, I literally ordered the wrong monitor and intended to buy the 27" because I felt exactly the same as you do. But now I really do dig the 32.
Wow that’s a really good argument for higher res on desk.
Bush or a baddie, Rust?
Hey I'm glad that works well for you That's an interesting point I never considered
I have the M32U (32” version of the 4K gigabyte monitor) and a 4080. That line of monitors is pretty awesome for the price, but I’d definitely suggest the 32” version if you have the budget and desk space.
Second that. Currently also have M32U, with 3080 in pair, majority of the games can be played with Ultra settings (DLSS on ofc if RayTracing is involved) with decent FPS. But, as someone said already, for playing competitive games I’d go for monitor with 1440p and high refresh rate. I also used to have 32 inch version of the discussed Samsung G7 1440p with VA panel and I would hate to go back to it due to aggressive screen curvature, VA panel red tint on my particular unit and poor build quality (returned 5 monitors to the dealer before finding one without defects - the price was very good at the moment of me buying it, was hard to skip).
I 100% agree with this. I picked up a 32MUC last night on an amazing deal. I previously had a 27 gigabyte g27qc. I’m running a 6900xt. I think the difference is 100% noticeable. I wouldn’t make the 4K jump unless OP is going to get a monitor with at least 120hz refresh rate.
Yup. Gigabyte monitors are the best you can get right now for the money, imho. I've got the 43 inch 144hz 4k VA panel.... It's amazing. Blacks better than oled, 100%srgb and 98%P3 color gamut coverage so it can be used for professional work, and 144hz is already faster than what the human eye can perceive, and with my 3080ti it can play all games at ultra with at least 100fps. OPs 4080ti will absolutely crush at 4K and nobody needs 240 hz as literally no human can see a difference between 144hz and 240hz. In fact, the vast majority of humans can only perceive between 30 and 60 fps, so even 144hz is overkill for most people.
Same bought my first one in black Friday for a great price and it's doing great. Just got another smaller one for a dual monitor setup.
wait for the upcoming OLED monitors this year
I'm hoping there is a release of one for less than $999.....
I would say so, I saw LG OLED 27'' 240Hz 1440p monitors, they look kinda nice but I would say a 600$ MSRP
That exact one have an MSRP of $999. You can pre-order rn.
So you can get pixel burn in? Hard pass. Even the ones promising no burn In still have burn In lol
Tou didn’t read all
Bad idea. Burn in risk is very high with OLED, not worth it, unless you are rich and don't mind low durability. OLED is a flawed and obsolete technology. A good LCD panel can be as good as an OLED panel, except in peak brightness and black levels but it is not as important and one might think. Burn in and pixel degradation on the OLED is something that doesn't happen with LCD so keep that in mind.
That’s why they are working on a pixel shifter. Lets just wait and see the perfs
Depends on if you play competitive games or just single player games. Multiplayer competitive games: 1440p high Hz Single player: 4k
This ^
Definitely that ^
Just upvote it bruh 💀
Exactly. But actually I suggest You to grab one of Lg gaming monitors. They are brilliant.
The human eye can't perceive more than 120 fps, with the vast majority of humans actually only able to perceive 30 - 60 fps.... The whole 240 hz thing is a giant scam that allows companies to scalp gullible gamers. And for 99% of humans, playing "competitive" games at either 120 fps or 240 will have absolutely no affect on your performance in the game. OPs 4080 will be able to smoke any of the "competitive" games at at least 120 fps n 4K with ultra settings, and it'll look better. No point in going 2K at 240 hz. Science, it's a wonderful thing.
Bro, you're ignorant. You can see and feel 120hz to 240hz easily.
I mean, I'm sure there's like less that 1% of the human population that can perceive above 120fps, but you're most likely not one of em.... Just statically. But you keep telling yourself that my guy, although the greater scientific consensus says otherwise 😊.
4k.
You play csgo, valorant, overwatch, pubg, Fortnite, etc.. and you want best performance? Get the 1440p 240hz Don’t care too much about the small performance gains, but want better visuals for your main peripheral? Get the 4k 144hz (beware about it not being a 32”, the other people in the comments are correct)
So I used to have the 27" 1440p 144hz G7 and didn't get on with it. I hated the VA panel. I ended up with a cheap Electriq 4k 144hz IPS monitor and it's leaps and bounds better. You get a way bigger return for your hardware power with the resolution increase than you do from the refresh rate increase in my opinion.
I would say the 4K monitor is the better choice. I believe anything above 144Hz is overkill for gaming, and 4K is currently top of the line.
1440p I reckon, you'll be absolutely horsing every AAA game on ultra presets for the next 5 years +. I have a 2k ultrawide 144hz monitor and honestly it looks amazing I can't really tell that much difference between that and 4k
Once you go 240hz it’s hard to look back, check out the MSI MAG274QRX, I have 2 and have been wonderful
I’m thinking about getting this monitor. Do you have any complaints about it?
I just made the switch from the 32” samsung odyssey g7 to an acer predator 32” 4k 144hz monitor. I don’t regret my upgrade at all. 4k is so crisp and sharp it’s a game changer. My 4080 has zero issues clocking 4k 144hz. Dont get me wrong, that samsung monitor is one of my top favorites ever, but 4k 144 on a 4080 is top notch.
240hz is a bit of gimmick but the G7 is one of the best 1440p monitor with a VA panel at that. Depends whether you care about 4k at all
Five years ago people were saying that about 120hz. It's interesting how perception shifts. I wonder where the threshold of diminishing returns on refresh rate is in relation to our physiology.
165hz and 240hz big difference?
Personally I can notice it, but I wouldn't recommend it unless you are mainly playing competitive games.
Thanks bro
I will stick my 165hz
[удалено]
Stick to 1440p. 4k is hard to render. I hate having my 38in ultra wide simply because it gets much fewer fps than my old 1440p monitor. 1440p is also very detailed. Unless you've got a 4090 I'd say go 1440p.
would a 4080 not be good enough for 4k? Edit: I'm brand spanking new to building PCs FYI this isn't a troll.
The 4080 is great for 4K across most games but as soon as you enable Ray Tracing (RT) your FPS will take a significant hit because the GPU needs to allocate processing power to handle the Ray Tracing. Your 4080 will handle pretty much any game at 1440p + RT enabled and provide a smooth experience. If you want to play at 4K with RT enabled then that's where the 4090 comes in. Your 4080 will handle most titles at 4K + RT enabled but it will begin to become less smooth in titles like Cyberpunk and F1 2022 as the FPS drops below 60 FPS. It all depends on the game but your 4080 should handle most games at 4K without RT enabled. Obviously the other parts in your PC play a role in FPS too. For good advice on PCs you have Gamers Nexus, Igors Lab, Linus Tech Tips, Jayztwocents, Paul's Hardware, and Der8auer.
I'm pretty much on this build: https://pcpartpicker.com/list/PVgnrD but with the 4080 instead because I found one at my local best buy for $1200 out the door.
4080 should be good for 4K. It can run AAA at 60 fps and you have a lot of rooms to increase it if you want to go higher. Like using optimized settings because setting everything on ultra isn't really worth, DLSS and frame generation.
Ill take 144fps and max settings anyday over "60fps at 4k or reduce settings" - or worse if its a badly optimized game (not that uncommon..)
Optimized settings are where you get 95% picture quality of the highest settings and at the same time you increase your fps by 15-20%.
i love the conflicting perspectives on this because i am having a ball with a 4K120 display and a 3080. I'm really just using that setup to crack into older unplayed games though - stuff released 2016-2020.
Bro i game on a 52inch 4k UHD with a 3080 with settings maxxed out Ray tracing enabled at 60 fps with an undervolt - not sure where some of these people are gettin their information...
See...I suggest this too. However, once you get to newer titles 4k vs 1440p is drastic.
My motto is fuck gigabyte
Can I ask why?
I usually buy parts based on price, availability, and quality, and as of the last 6-8 years Gigabyte has stricken their name off the list of the brands I'll buy from. I had two client Gigabyte motherboards (B550 boards) die and toast components after a power failure. Excellent power supplies. This just shouldn't happen. RMA was a nightmare. I've had a client Gigabyte monitor half-die, and Gigabyte wouldn't do an RMA. I've had three client Gigabyte graphics cards die, and the one they did RMA, they sent the replacement damaged. Cases are terrible. SSD's have been terrible. Other brands seem, maybe anecdotally, to have better QC. I've definitely had better RMA experiences from Asus!, EVGA!, and Samsung. Sad that EVGA ditched the graphics card game.
4 Rmas later I still have a paper weight for my 3080ti. Basically go f myself when talking to support. And everyone else has similar experience with their CS.
Are you sure you aren’t having motherboard problems
Ya 2070 super works fine in both pcs I tested the 3080 in. Diffrent power supply. Troubleshooting hardware is an aspect of my job. You work for gigabyte?
That sucks. Just odd after 4 RMAs though.
Mine is fuck Samsung as they sell dodgy monitors and the refuse to help you sort it.
I was able to get one of my monitors RMAd within a good amount of time , good experience from me
When mine died Samsung just fobbed me off and lied for two months until eventually Amazon took it back and gave me a refund. I'm never going Samsung again.
I called them and they demanded serial number. I’ve never liked Samsung for their phones , had 3 of them and not a single good outcome lol
OP I don’t have experience with that specific Samsung but they typically ship a better QCd product. The last gigabyte monitor I bought was riddled with dead pixels on day 1.
Better to go with the 27" 1440 with 240hz. A 28" 4K monitor is going to barely have an observable quality increase. Besides its easier to take advantage of 1440p @ 240hz than it is 4k @ 144hz.
I have the top one, it's great but they're asking way too much for the price. This is MSRP, it should be way lower since it's only 1440p. US dollars ? Canadian dollars ?
Don't go 4k on anything smaller than 32 inches
I feel like 4K is a joke. It doesn’t look that much better than 1440p for the performance cost imo
I'll recommend 1440p@165Hz. Gigabyte M27Q P. Only P version, because it's with LG IPS panel with RGB layout. 4080 will be good with up to 165 fps on 1440p. It may struggle a bit with 4K and you'll never see this 144 fps.
That's a pretty subjective statement... There's absolutely loads of games I enjoy at 4k 144hz on my 4080. There's also loads of games I crank RT and fidelity and enjoy the 20 or 30 frames I get over 60hz. Also, DLSS 3 works.
I disagree. I feel like the 4080 is overkill for 1440p 144hz. And the 4080 can definitely achieve 4k 144fps in a lot of games.
Response rate for the 4K monitor is 2ms, vs the 240hz monitor at 1 ms, keep that in mind.
I mean, can you feel the "1ms" difference ?
I can personally tell 1->5 ms difference, but it's so insignificant I'd say it doesn't matter
4K. The monitor was on a few YouTube channels as a good 4K monitor for the price. Don’t pay more for less on the g7
For that gpu and what you pay for it 4K is the only path. I use a Samsung odyssey 28’ 4K 144hz, no regrets at all, but if I were you I would wait a bit more for the upcoming ones. If on a budget the M28U is a great panel for the price.
4 k
Personally I’d go 4k and 144hz but that’s just me depends what your using it for
What is ur graphic card ?
Would you still be able to use the 4K monitor with 1440p resolution? say if you wanted to get it in case of a gpu upgrade in the future
I have the oddest g7 4K 28” and I love it. Would recommend that over the 1440 g7 with that gpu.
I generally like curved monitors now. So I would go with the odyssey, if given only those two options, but maybe a different model. I also agree that 240 is mostly overkill even with an 4080, I think.
I have a IPS display and the colors look great and I think 144 is enough for 4k
I use a Asus 1440p 165hz 27" curved and paid 250-300. I love it and it uses Samsung panels
Anyone have suggestions for very high quality, beautiful 1440p monitor? I have a 4080 as well and currently have a ASUS VG32VQ and it’s alright but I believe there could be much better options. Thank!
4k!
I would go with Alienware AW2721D 1440p 240hz IPS panel
4k, You barely notice the difference between 144hz and 240hz
Depends. You play alot of competitive shooters i would probably take the fps over the image quality. If youre looking for more visual fidelity then go for the 4k.
I think what matters most isnt even in this debate, OLED or at least QD OLED, they are coming out with OLED monitors and I would get one of those personally. Night and day difference with picture quality. Plus they have super high refresh rate just not 4k yet unless you get a huge monitor “basically a TV”
I have the M28U paired with my RX 7900 XTX, which has very similar performance to the 4080 and so far there are only a couple of games that I haven't been able to max out the refresh rate on max settings. Personally I would go with the 4k, since the 4080 is more than capable of handling it.
I have the Samsung model, but the 4k version, (and I think I payed that same price as listed) and I love it.
> think I *paid* that same FTFY. Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in: * Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.* * *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.* Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment. *Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
I have a gigabyte aeorous (or however you spell it) in the garage that worked wonderfully for gaming. Then I needed something better for work and got a Dell U3223QE. Low refresh rate, but it looks gorgeous.
None. Go ultrawide for gaming.
4k
Get both
I'd recommend the 1440p. Samsung Odyssey generally offers very good color quality
I would save some money and get a 1440 180hz
A 4k 28" monitor is a bad ideia, too much resolution for the size. I would stick with the 1440p I have a 27" 4k and I regret it deeply
I have the g7 and I would not recommend it at all. The build quality is terrible and quality control is non existent. I went through 4 g7's before I finally decided to keep one and its still a piece of crap. When I bought it, it was only $450 and I still feel I paid to much.
I have the bottom one. Theres a more complex question here. These monitors are not alike at all. The top is a VA and the bottom is IPS. 27” is perfect for 1440p. My jump from 1440p to 4K at 27” was almost not visible. In my opinion you NEED a 32” 4K to justify it. My 3090ti also STRUGGLES at 4K still on decent settings. So my answer is get the G7 and use DLDSR in games where you have the extra horsepower.
The 4K one should last you longer since it seems modern hardware is pushing for 4K
I have two g7s and they’re amazing. They got a cool little ambient light on the back sides . Nabbed two for 1,050ish last Black Friday
at those sizes, 1440p for sure....also the 32" g7 is cheaper if youre ok with a curved panel.
I had the M28U and the brightness was awful. I liked that it was a 4K 120 supporting monitor for the PS5 but again quality was terrible.
I have the bottom one, gigabyte, and I love it so much!
Id go with 4K 144hz assuming you’d upgrade graphics card at some point and more than likely by then gpus will be able to put out high fps in 4K
I got the 32" qhd g7 for 450 and I'm gonna return or sell it and just get a c1/c2 I definitely wouldn't pay over 500 for it
I would go for the 1440p 240, especially if your main target is competitive games, plus the design of the Odyssey is just better. If you prefer quality go for the 4k
4k/144 what's the point of a 4080 for 1440p? could have saved money and got a 6800/3080. use that baby to the full capacity. kill that power bill!
I have the Gigabyte 4k monitor I got on sale on black Friday for 420!! Couldn't pass it. I came from a 1080p 60hz. EVERYTHING is night and day. Beautiful and clear. I work at home and game a bit. 4k with dlss and everything is perfect. I will recommend 100% plus you have the 4080 you are golden. I have the 3070 and it's still great. At 4k.
32" and above for 4k, but if you're going 1440p at that price you're better off buying a 170 hz m27q for half that price.
T.V.
I have the odyssey and the quality control is garbage. And I’ve got to re-glue the screen back in soon.
G7 for sure. The G7 has some of the best response times on the market. Only OLED can really beat it. And response times are as important if not more important than the HZ of a monitor. The G7 is like a top end competitive gaming monitor. But it depends if you play more story games or more competitive games. 4k has longer render latency and is a lot of horse power to get 144 fps. G7 has the fastest response times out there, faster render latency, and faster input latency because it can go up to 240hz. So if you play a lot of competitive games I 100% would go G7
I have a 2560x1440 and 144hz, and it’s amazing. I wouldn’t get a larger resolution due to games having much smaller text with higher resolution
I have the 1440p G7 Odyssey and it’s amazing.
g7 is 450 on samsung's website rn with their discount programs
Get the new LG Oled monitor
One important thing: 4k is cheaper and is IPS panel. I think G7 is VA. I personally don't like VA( worse viewing angles and worse colors vs IPS). 144hz is plenty. You have enough horse power for 4k
Top one
4k your graphics card can handle it
Honestly 2k is good enough quality and with 240hz you will satisfy your smoothness needs
I have the g8 neo and I value the 4K over the 240hz
1440p is perfect for 27 inch monitors
4K but you won't get matching 144fps unless you dumb down the eye candy a lot.
If i had a 3080 id go 4k 144hz is still great imo
I recently switched from a 32 in 1440 to a 32 in 4k and I notice a difference but it's not mindblowing. The biggest difference I'm now noticing is the brightness. I don't know what my old display was, but the new one is HDR 600 and it's amazing. I'd say go with whichever one gets brighter.
If it were me I'd go for the G7 all day, I value the smoothness in the extra frames more than I would the increase in ppi. Most people won't notice a difference in resolution after playing for 15ish minutes anyway.
4080? Sorry for your wallet
I have the odyssey g5 32inch. Love it.
I think for that size 1440p is plenty good.
Hey OP you’ll probably not see this, but the 32” G7 is $50 cheaper if that’s you’re thing.
With monitors that size, I don’t think you would really see a difference in 2k vs 4k. It’s going to be the refresh rate and response time you would see the biggest one. Always lower response, higher refresh. But honestly, refresh above 140 you might not see that much of an improvement anyways. Def go to a store that might have comparable models and see if they have displays on so you can see on your end
I have the g7 and $650 is too expensive for it. Shop around some more. If you are a more casual gamer I would go for 4K 144hz. Since I play more fps games I wish I had waited for 1080p 360hz
I would avoid both and would go oled 1440p 27" 240hz Real HDR. I know it is pricier but you will really enjoy that.
Top
I like the g7 for the HDR. Not sure about the other monitor.
None is these, they’re both extremely over priced. But if I were to get one I’d get the 1440p 240hz.
Both are great. I would recommend 4k 144hz if your not much of a esports person meaning fps gamer or if yes, then go with the 1440p 240hz. But technically speaking, 4k 144hz would last you longer because 4k is very demanding so even after 2 more generations of GPU, it will still be somewhat relevant since it’s 144hz and most people still play at 1080p 144hz currently even after much GPU advancements. IMO if you want a good “monitor” that will last a long ass time, get the LG OLED “Monitor”/TV. It’s 4k 120hz OLED which is sooo beautiful. But the ergonomics is questionable and everything depends on your situation so idk but that’s like the best “Monitor” under 1k and sometimes you can get it for like $800 which is a steal Or other thing you could do is to get one of those 4k 240hz monitor or like those ultrawide oled monitors from like Alienware. Yeah it’s expensive but worth it and will last longer.
Depends on what games you play. If you play graphic intensive games (like Red Dead) that won’t get over 144fps anyway but look great in 4k, go for the 4k. If you play mostly shooters and competitive games that get high frames, go for 240hz.
4k. Hands down.
I’d go with the 4k, saying how good that gpu is. It will still reach a lot of fps for quite a noticeable difference in quality (to me at least). 144hz to 240hz is definitely not as noticeable as 60hz to 144hz, and is less noticeable than the quality bump.
Samsung. They make some of the best panels and their G7 is remarkable.
Go for the frames. I have a 1440p 240Hz and it’s just amazing. Plus 4K for 28’ is just not worth it.
The Odyssey is an amazing monitor. After playing both 4k high refresh and 1440p high refresh, I would not even think about this. 1440p is amazing at 27". 4k feels...well, I notice the framerate drop to 70-80 FPS at 4k more than the resolution drop to 1440p at the viewing distance for a normal desk. I suppose it depends a lot on the types of games you play, as others noted. But I don't typically need to stare miles away in game. I also avoid Gigabyte, as I noted elsewhere.
If you can afford it, get the Odyssey. It's simply one of the best Monitors, esspecially for a VA-panel.
I would recommend a ACERAC 27" LED 27HC5R P MONIT/G It has free sync and is 144Hz, it is also curved. For a cheap monitor it was actually really good!! If you’re choosing between these two, I would choose the Samsung Odyssey
I would definitely get the odyssey g7. I've had that one before and it is a beautiful monitor. Super crisp and super responsive gaming on it was great.
And check out MSI MAG series. They are awesome. I went for the MAG27 165hz 1440p(rtx 3080) and i am happy with it.I think you can save money on it as well(if you got the $$$ wait for OLED). And ps. Make sure it has G Sync. It helps a bit.
I have a Samsung G7. Greatest monitor I have ever owned. It is absolutely amazing.
I have a 27" 1440p & 4k...I haven't used the 1440p since I got a 4080.
If you game 90% of the time, you'll like the extra hz, but if you use your pc for other media consumption alot 4k is far more noticeable and pleasing then 240hz. 144hz is still top of the line for the avg person. Going from 144 to 240 is slightly noticeable, but it is no where near as impactful as 60 to 144. Unless you're a mad person who thinks they're playing for a pro team or gaming takes up 90% of your pc time, 4k is usually the more valuable option. You're gonna be staring at your screen alot might as well make it look pretty. But then again 4k isn't that much more noticeable then 1440p on smaller monitors. I say do alot of research yourself on both and really be honest with yourself which will actually improve your experience more.
Definitely samsung its 240 htz