Should I get a 1440p 140Hz Monitor or a 4K 60Hz (probably pic related)?

also you greentexted wrong, I shouldn't have responded with anything other than
LURK FOR A YEAR BEFORE POSTING

Why would you need 4k monitor for coding?

I AM ESPORTS MAN
240HZ HEAD SHOTS
128 TICK FACEIT SERVERS

you can fit more readable text on the screen at one time, you can see more of a webpage or document without scrolling

>he doesn't split his editor into 4 separate windows to simultaneously edit documents side by side

Attached: 1558367653355.png (822x750, 1.07M)

>1440p 144Hz at home on my PC. It's fantastic for gaymes and I can max out most games with my 1070
Serious, serious doubt.

I should probably specify "most games" when I built it. Now, probably not, but I'll see north of 60fps on most shit

Attached: 0kZNH1F.jpg (561x750, 38K)

>people unironically want those, or something near
>ihnfw retarded gaming comapnies force their fucktarded (((cloud gaming))) bullshit with 30fps and 120-180ms ping (minimum) with the best internet available in SF

Get the 1440p 144hz

I have the FreeSync IPS cousin of that monitor (Acer XF270HUA) and it's fantastic

>>neither
>literal summer 2019 friend

wew lad

Exactly my point. A 1070 would hope to consistently drive a 1440p 60hz. Even a 2080ti can't deliver 1440p 144hz in all games.
Personally for games here are my standards
>minimums should stay consistently above 60fps
>Ideally your fps is between 100fps and 144fps
>what ever resolution lets you achieve that with the GPU you have or plan to have is the one to go with.
And sadly, 90% of the time that is 1080p.
Make no mistake I think 1440p has merit and you can power it with the top of the line GPUS like 2080ti. But fuck, not everybody has the money for a 2080ti.
So for most people it's 1080p 144hz.
And for the rich guys it's 1440p 144hz
That's for gaming. If doing other kind of work or just watching movies, then get 4k 60hz, why not.

>Even a 2080ti can't deliver 1440p 144hz in all games

Considering my 2080 can, I'd say that's a lie.

Attached: Speccy64_ss190531-093402.png (391x60, 4K)

I own a 32inch 4k and a 43inch 4k i have owned a 24 inch 1920x1200....28 inch 4k might be too small imo. 32 seems like a good spot.

If you are playing a lot of games and have something better than a GTX1080 A 28inch 1440 144hz monitor might be a good call.

>Even a 2080ti can't deliver 1440p 144hz in all games
>Considering my 2080 can, I'd say that's a lie.
I hate you delusional faggots.
youtu.be/y8roJuX1VVM?t=172

I really do, you faggots never use objective data and usually say shit like this because you judge it based on "feel"
I have had people claim "it doesn't stutter or drop below 60fps in one unoptimized game. Then I asked them to reccord a frametime benchmark and you could see massive drips below 30 fps here and there.
Fucking annoying to deal with.

>everything at complete ultra

Oh no, I might have to drop the graphics down to high and notice literally no difference in quality, how will I survive?

>posts a scrot only confirming the model of his GPU
>expects us to believe that he can push >= 60FPS @ 1440p on all modern games at best settings
tomshardware reading faggot.
Leave this thread and board and never post again.

>Even a 2080ti can't deliver 1440p 144hz in all games
>Considering my 2080 can, I'd say that's a lie.
>I'd say that's a lie.
>I'd say that's a lie.
>I'd say that's a lie.
>well here is proof and a video showing many games being unable to deliver that even with a 2080ti, so your claim that a 2080 will power it is actually the lie here
>OH NO NO NO NO WE MUST MOVE THE GOALPOST!
>I might have to drop the graphics down to high and notice literally no difference in quality, how will I survive?
FUCK OFFF RETARDED CUNT!

Get an ultra wide 3440x1440 144Hz monitor

Attached: 8rmKuFW.jpg (400x354, 72K)

Text is sharper and more comfortable to use.
The higher the resolution the sharper the text. It's very comfy.

That's a lotta pixels to render.

can I get a good 1440p monitor to use with a rx 580 gb for £250~

As long as you're only watching youtube

every resolution is a meme.
If 720p 300hz or 480p 500hz existed then you should get those then those two monitors that you are stuck with.

In other words 1080p 144h for purely gaming. and 1440p and higher is if you are a nigger. High Refresh Rate gaming and fucking Higher Resolutions are contradictory to two different gaming experiences.

4k60 work
1080p144 gayming
1440p144 expensive gayming

why bother that if your SO have a shitty font rendering?

Wat

What's the best 1440p, 120hz+, gsync, and IPS monitor you can get now days? 27 inch is preferable. Seems like there's only a bunch of older monitors available.

i have this but with a 240hz
its nice

I have to agree with this.
The only thing you should have mentioned is that 1080p at 24inch
1440p at 27-32inch
4k at 32inch and above.
At least in my opinion.

This and 144hz for under 4k

Even if you had infinite money, 4K is a joke to be sold on the big numbers.
OP, spend your extra cash on some exercise equipment and become more physically healthy so that you're betting a games and work and save thousands on medical bills.

4k/60 - work
1440/144 - gayming
1080/240 - esports gayming
4k/144 - if you have 4k thousand spare you might aswell get one of these

You save your money until you can afford 4k 144hz. No point spending $500 on a monitor that's a compromise. Better to wait and buy a good monitor that's going to last you 10 years.

Lad, you can't even get 144hz consistently on 1440p.
4k 144hz is an absolute meme at this point.

>You save your money until you can afford 4k 144hz. No point spending $500 on a monitor that's a compromise. Better to wait and buy a good monitor that's going to last you 10 years.
You mean more like save your money and wait 10 years until they come out with GPUs that can actually power a 4K/144hz monitor and buy both at the same time.

There is noting quite as retarded as getting a monitor that no GPU on the market can actually power and wont be able to for many years.
It's like living in the forest and buying a lamborgini, that you can't drive on your bumpy gravel roads. It's just stupid.

4k 144fps+ is no problem in Counter Strike or *insert any competitive shooter*
Just because your monitor says 144Hz on it doesn't mean you need tripple digit framerates in every game.

>4k 144fps+ is no problem in Counter Strike or *insert any competitive shooter*
If that's the only game you play, sure.
But lets be honest, it's much more sensitible to get something else that is cheaper, easier to power, better visuals in some other departnent and so on.
1080p 144hz is the standards for most people that they can achieve and its a good experience.
1440p 144hz is for people with lots of money for the GPU and montior
4k 144hz is for confused people.

own both
my recommendation is: if you have the GPU horsepower to run games absolutely at all times at 4k 60hz, then go for that one over the 144hz monitor
as good as high refresh rate is, nothing beats high pixel density. nothing.

bullshit lol

Any good shit shown at Computex regarding monitors? I just want a 1440p 144hz 10bit IPS (ideally with mini/micro LED backlight). Fucking hate these normalfag subhumans forcing the 4k meme so all monitors that would fit the bill must be 4k therefore they drop refresh rate or something else.

Attached: 1549860602101.jpg (229x250, 8K)

>as good as high refresh rate is, nothing beats high pixel density. nothing.
Except games that run smoothly, except games that aren't on medium/low settings to keep it running at 4k.
Pixel density is nice, truly, but for games 100-144hz is the optimal range, and you want to stay there. If you have to sacrifice all the video settings to get 4k to run well, then what is the point of sharp image of a game that looks like mud?

It is somewhat subjective.
I use a 4k 24" monitor without scaling and I am comfortable with it, while others have trouble seeing.
Some people don't even notice the difference between 144hz and 240.

Ah yes, here is a picture of you using your screen comfortably

Attached: I use a 4k 24inch monitor without scaling and I am comfortable with it.jpg (450x323, 15K)

>misses shot
>it's a hit
boy i'm glad i don't play AAA games

Attached: file.png (997x642, 669K)

What is a good non RGB alternative for a Trident Z (8GB x 2, 3200)?

Short answer: no
High resolution is a meme, because human eye can't see pixels at this density
More than 24Hz is marketing scam, because human eye can't see past 24FPS, so any more FPS are unseen and wasted

4k obviously. Anything higher than 60hz is a meme.

I use 1440p 144hz for gayming. Bretty good.

What GPU? How many FPS you get on average?

Edit photography? Resolution over refresh.
Anything else? Refresh over resolution.

Not OP but I'm using Dell U2715 60Hz IPS. Is there any good 2K 144Hz monitor (similar price) that I can change to? Or is it worth it to go for 144Hz at all? Some people told me that there are only TN panel ones and their color would look like shit compared to my current monitor.

If you, and anyone else, gonna get 1440p monitor, don't get 32" one, take 27". Pixel density is shit on 32"
t. Owner of 32" and 27" 1440p monitors

As written above my current monitor is already 27" 1440p. My concern is if it's worth it to exchange 60Hz IPS for 144Hz TN or the likes

Tn is worth for people who value either motion clarity from faster pixel response times, and 144hz. Or for people who want 240hz monitors.
>60Hz IPS
If you like IPS why not get a 144hz IPS?

I see they're making 144hz IPS now. Other than monetary concerns, is there any reason to get a TN then?

> What is your experience on and what would you receommend?
I'd avoid 4k. It looks marginally better on screens "only" that size and only if you sit pretty close, but it uses a lot moar computer power.

Also, 140hz is okay, but ultimately if it's freesync'd you shouldn't notice anything at 60hz either. At least not as far as I can tell.

not really, 144hz 1440p ips is pretty good with only possible downsides is price and less clear image in high motion enviromenments

So TNs would still be better for rhythm games? That is one of the reason i want to go to a higher refresh rate.

>So TNs would still be better for rhythm games?
Nah, id say IPS would be fine for that, just high refresh rate is needed.
TN motion clarity is more vital in fps games with a lot of panning movement.

here is a TN monitor vs a VA

Attached: compoare VA vs TN2.jpg (9944x2112, 3.9M)

> Edit photography? Resolution over refresh.
I haven't ever seen the benefit of higher resolutions either, except for not pixelating LARGER displays. Even if you have a 40+MP full-frame / large format camera with an amazing prime lens, you zoom in to see what you shot either way. If you happen to just have a 24" monitor because that's all you have space for on your desk, then there's probably really not really any need for a 4k resolution.

Paying attention to monitor colour coverage is almost more interesting IMO.

Is it for vidya or computer stuff?
There's the answer

>28'' (4K 60Hz)
If you're gonna get a tiny 4K monitor, you may as well get one that can do 120Hz. zisworks.com/shop.html

How do things go having different refresh rate monitors right next to each other?

Say I were to get a 1440x144 or such as my main monitor, but have two 60hz IPS to each side. I really don't want to stop using my 1920x1200 dell IPS in portrait mode since its perfect for manga

> ISO80
user's camera or physical film negative was one that was (configured to be) fairly insensitive to light.

Okay, but why is this mentioned? I don't really get what the TN (or is it VA?) panel does at that setting vs higher light sensitivity.

>user's camera or physical film negative was one that was (configured to be) fairly insensitive to light.
It control shutter speed as well.

>Okay, but why is this mentioned? I don't really get what the TN (or is it VA?) panel does at that setting vs higher light sensitivity.
It's not about light sensitivity it's about how much blur is visible.
Here view this on your own monitor to get an idea testufo.com/ghosting

>It control shutter speed as well.
Not usually unless you're in some auto mode. In which case you'd still have no clue what kind of shutter speed it picked at ISO80 anyhow - depends on the lens' transmissivity, chosen aperture, actual light present, and the average brightness level or equivalent that the camera is optimizing the other parameters for.

Anyhow, I guess it still was just an attempt to indicate shutter speed to give some context to the motion, not some other peculiarity that only happens at low ISO. Okay. Makes sense.

>because human eye can't see pixels at this density
This is the point. I really missed the high res crt sharpness, but now with under 30" 4k monitors it is back. It is glorious to try old ass 3d games what can be configured in 3840x2160 in ini files. Looking everything soo sharp like in the good old days and not a fucking pixel even if i push my eyes to the monitor.

>only thing I notice on 144hz (...) it looks smoother
Uhhhhhhhhhhh

Attached: 1553090551189.jpg (720x958, 193K)

high color gamut 4k monitor with high pixel density is the way to go. I recommend the 27 inch 5k LG ultra fine if you can find it. its one of the best displays you can buy atm

Get a 4k 60hz TV that can do 1080p 120hz instead.

Attached: 1558258914633.png (1920x1080, 1.37M)

Neither. You should get a 1080p, 60Hz monitor, unless you're a rich retard who likes wasting money.

I actually have both side by side right now, i first got the 4k one and then bought the 1440p one much later. The 4k is wonderful for programming and general browsing, but holy christ going from a 144hz back down to a 60hz almost hurts my eyes.

In games, there's very little appreciable difference between 1440 and 4k while the difference between 60hz and 144hz is mind blowing. So it really depends on what your use cases are

why not 144hz (really 120) 4k monitor?
when i play games it does okay and text looks nice when i do other things

I'm waiting 27'' 1440p 140Hz hdr 1000 monitors to arrive.

Why are there no gaming TVs? I want a TV with low input lag, high response time, and freesync/gsync.
Why have monitors been so slow to adopt HDR? I just want a good mix of the features of modern TVs and modern monitors. I'm really sick of this divide in the market between monitors and TVs

There are, many TV's have a mode specifically for videogames that delivers a sub-10ms response time. I bought this and it has freesync: bestbuy.com/site/samsung-55-class-led-nu8000-series-2160p-smart-4k-uhd-tv-with-hdr/6199827.p?skuId=6199827

>Why have monitors been so slow to adopt HDR
High spec monitors are quite niche market compared to TV's

There literally are gaming TVs. BFGDs came out this year.
4k TVs with interpolation can usually run at 1080p@120hz.
The fact a TV has interpolation means the panel itself actually needs to do 120hz, even if the image those frames show aren't part of the source content. The panel is still physically refreshing at 120hz.

Attached: 1559214098093.png (610x571, 590K)

The lack of 4k materials. If you watch Tv shows like game of thrones etc. it takes ages before yoou get them 4k.

Anything above 1400p is a waste unless you sit with your face 1ft from your monitor.

Anything 100Hz and above is adequate and ideal. Freesync or gsync is more important as no matter what your hardware is some unoptimized game will be running at 50 fps and you dont want that to look choppy or have tearing.

Also XB281HK is a TN so dont be a fucking idiot and buy that trash. Get a VA or preferably an IPS

>implying greentexts have a meaning since like 2010
greentext can be used for quotes, inner monologues, thoughts, change of tone, spam, and basically everything. fuck right off

3840x2160@60Hz 27" is the only non-incel spec for a monitor.

>4k
>27"
Yikes, that's almost as bad as 1080p 27"

Attached: 1556692276366.jpg (600x337, 27K)

Go drink some bleach, shit for brains.

You can buy a 5k computer for $800.
ebay.com/itm/27-5K-Late-2014-iMac-1TB-Fusion-i5-4690-3-50GHz-8GB-MF886LL-A/113759047035?epid=208076531&hash=item1a7c914d7b:g:hioAAOSwdA5c5smG
Or a 5k screen for $800
amazon.com/LG-UltraFine-5120x2880-Certified-Refurbished/dp/B079J62QZM
The future is already prologue.

Attached: desktop-4M.jpg (5120x2880, 3.61M)

I've had an AOC G2770PF (27" 1080P 144Hz Freesync 30-144) for a few years now. It's great for gaming, and most stuff runs just fine on my RX 580 (within reason). 4k is a meme. 1440P is less of a meme, but you need good hardware for it and depending on the distance to the monitor, its size, and your eyesight you might not be able to see the difference.

Basically, what
said.

The difference is quite noticeable, especially when dips happen. 60 to 40 is WAY WORSE than 144 to 100. And given that even 100$ monitors support 75Hz, 60 should really become the minimum standard

Attached: AOC G2770.jpg (355x355, 13K)

This is currently the best gaming moniter on the market. IPS with enhanced colors, 144hz, works with freesync or gsync

Attached: LG 34GK950F.jpg (800x800, 50K)

I recommend trying both, if you have the option. Either choice has significant advantages over the other. The high DPI of the 4K screen looks very nice to the point where 'normal' DPI monitors will always look noticeably inferior to you. The high refresh rate of the 144Hz screen is also very noticeable over 60Hz and after getting used to that you don't want to go back either.

That's why it's best to see both with your own eyes and decide if you prefer image quality or smoothness. I personally went for image quality, after seeing both. Also keep in mind that hitting 60FPS at 4K in games will require a heavy investment in a graphics card as well, like a 2080 Ti. You can get by with lesser cards at 1440p, especially if you don't want an absolutely perfect 144FPS lock at all times.

The best on the market are probably those 4K 144Hz screens with FALD, GSync and HDR1000 certification.