4k Gaming, my impressions of 4k vs 3440x1440

[rondocap]

In the past I moved from the 1440p 27 inch Asus/G sync panel, which was great - into the Acer X34 3440x1440.

The widescreen definitely makes it for a very nice gaming experience, even though it's a pretty physically large monitor.

I have also tested the Acer Predator 4k monitor with G sync, with a 1080 ti Strix OC card.

I must say, 4K gaming is where ultimately it's at. You can definitely tell the difference vs 1440p, and 3440x1440 as well after you're used to it. Just looks so sharp.

Of course, the only drawback is 60hz vs 100 or 144hz. 60hz really isn't bad at all, in fact you only really notice it in fast moving FPS games, everything else is fairly fine. Even FPS is very playable at 60hz.

The 1080ti seems to be running everything pretty well too, I am getting 80fps in Battlefield 1 on Ultra, and respectable in other games as well, plus G sync.

As a side note, SLI is almost useless, has not provided many gains even at 4K for most games, so that's disappointing.

When the new 4k 144hz HDR monitors come out next year, with the accompanying upgraded GPU's, that will be the next level for sure.

 

[tential]

Well, I guess I should not backtrack from my 4k monitor to a 1440p 144hz monitor.

 

[Chaotic42]

Now that I have a 144Hz monitor, I can't imagine going back. I'd love to see some sweet 8K@120Hz action, but that will take years, so I guess I'll be stuck with 4K@144Hz whenever they decide to drop those.

 

[omeds]

Currently at 1440p 144hz, can't go back to 60hz. Looking forward to 4k 144hz

 

[Adawy]

Yes I agree. I care more about quality than I do performance, so, 60Hz is just fine. In my opinion, 1440p on an IPS panel isn't worth it, OLED 4k HDR on the other hand, definitely is.

 

[2is]

I'd have to disagree. After gaming on a 144hz display, going back to 60hz feels like I'm playing on a broken computer. It feels like micro stutter at all times, combine that with a significantly lower performance to begin with due to the added load of 4K and it makes it even worse.

I'm personally waiting for OLED gaming monitors. Until then, 27" 1440p 144Hz is where I'm staying. In the unlikely event my monitor simply fails me, I'd move to an ultra-wide 1440p setup similar to what you had.

 

[ozzy702]

I'd have to disagree. After gaming on a 144hz display, going back to 60hz feels like I'm playing on a broken computer. It feels like micro stutter at all times, combine that with a significantly lower performance to begin with due to the added load of 4K and it makes it even worse.

I'm personally waiting for OLED gaming monitors. Until then, 27" 1440p 144Hz is where I'm staying. In the unlikely event my monitor simply fails me, I'd move to an ultra-wide 1440p setup similar to what you had.

This. Anything under 100hz just feels messy after using a high refresh monitor. I'm @ 1440p 144hz on a 1080ti and doubt I'll be changing that anytime before 2019. 4k@ 144hz needs more GPU power than is currently available.

 

[Muhammed]

When the new 4k 144hz HDR monitors come out next year, with the accompanying upgraded GPU's, that will be the next level

Already out, 4K, 144Hz, GSync and HDR.
https://www.asus.com/Monitors/ROG-SWIFT-PG27UQ/

 

[amenx]

Already out, 4K, 144Hz, GSync and HDR.
https://www.asus.com/Monitors/ROG-SWIFT-PG27UQ/

Shame about the size. I'm all for 4k, just that it needs to be a decent enough size to appreciate (min 32"). At 27" may as well stick to 1440p.

 

[Adawy]

Shame about the size. I'm all for 4k, just that it needs to be a decent enough size to appreciate (min 32"). At 27" may as well stick to 1440p.

I'll never comprehend how people love big monitors. For me anything bigger than 24" is unacceptable, I start feeling dizzy and I have to move my head in order to grasp everything that's happening on the screen, even from 1 meter away.

 

[Chaotic42]

I'll never comprehend how people love big monitors. For me anything bigger than 24" is unacceptable, I start feeling dizzy and I have to move my head in order to grasp everything that's happening on the screen, even from 1 meter away.

I get that, but only with much larger monitors. I've got a 43" 4K and I tried gaming on it and got dizzy. Something like 30" is ideal for me.

 

[Yakk]

Yup, I work in 4K, but i game in 1440@120/144.

 

[Madpacket]

In the past I moved from the 1440p 27 inch Asus/G sync panel, which was great - into the Acer X34 3440x1440.

The widescreen definitely makes it for a very nice gaming experience, even though it's a pretty physically large monitor.

I have also tested the Acer Predator 4k monitor with G sync, with a 1080 ti Strix OC card.

I must say, 4K gaming is where ultimately it's at. You can definitely tell the difference vs 1440p, and 3440x1440 as well after you're used to it. Just looks so sharp.

Of course, the only drawback is 60hz vs 100 or 144hz. 60hz really isn't bad at all, in fact you only really notice it in fast moving FPS games, everything else is fairly fine. Even FPS is very playable at 60hz.

The 1080ti seems to be running everything pretty well too, I am getting 80fps in Battlefield 1 on Ultra, and respectable in other games as well, plus G sync.

As a side note, SLI is almost useless, has not provided many gains even at 4K for most games, so that's disappointing.

When the new 4k 144hz HDR monitors come out next year, with the accompanying upgraded GPU's, that will be the next level for sure.

Stopped reading after "...60hz really isn't bad at all"

 

[Shamrock]

I am currently on a QNIX 27" 1440p monitor (officially it's 60Hz, but can overclock to 96). I am receiving a LG 2560x1080p Ultrawide for Christmas, and can't wait to delve into 144Hz 1ms Freesync , as even 96Hz makes me nauseous after a few hours.

Yup, I am down grading in pixels, but Freesync 144Hz is well worth it.

 

[wanderica]

I have to agree, but only at larger screen sizes. Upgrading to a 40" 4K was one of the most noticeable upgrades in terms of immersion in a long time for me. I don't play FPS games at all really, so 40 inches of screen real estate to stare at was more important to me than 144 Hz. I don't think I would feel the same if I had a 27" 4K monitor. I can't wait on someone to make a 40" 4K 144 Hz Gsync monitor for under a grand. I'll be first in line.

 

[OlyAR15]

Already out, 4K, 144Hz, GSync and HDR.
https://www.asus.com/Monitors/ROG-SWIFT-PG27UQ/

No it's not.

 

[LTC8K6]

https://www.anandtech.com/show/11701/acer-and-asus-delay-their-4k-144-hz-gsync-hdr-displays-to-2018

 

[amenx]

I'll never comprehend how people love big monitors. For me anything bigger than 24" is unacceptable, I start feeling dizzy and I have to move my head in order to grasp everything that's happening on the screen, even from 1 meter away.

I dont have that issue. For me ideal monitor size is 32-40". I guess for the same reason that many people prefer to watch their TVs, movies and other entertainment on a large screen (60"+). The larger, the more immersive. Same applies to monitors imo, on a smaller scale. My first PC monitor was 15" back in the day, and I thought that was all I needed. Every monitor upgrade and size bump since then has impressed me and kept going until 40", although I think I'll stop there.

 

[JimKiler]

I'll never comprehend how people love big monitors. For me anything bigger than 24" is unacceptable, I start feeling dizzy and I have to move my head in order to grasp everything that's happening on the screen, even from 1 meter away.

But if you get 1440p or 4K and want to use those at your default resolution in windows you need at least a 27" for 1440p and above 32" for 4K otherwise you cannot read anything without scaling which is not perfect for all apps.

 

[Adawy]

I dont have that issue. For me ideal monitor size is 32-40". I guess for the same reason that many people prefer to watch their TVs, movies and other entertainment on a large screen (60"+). The larger, the more immersive. Same applies to monitors imo, on a smaller scale. My first PC monitor was 15" back in the day, and I thought that was all I needed. Every monitor upgrade and size bump since then has impressed me and kept going until 40", although I think I'll stop there.

Believe it or not some people get dizzy from any monitor that's bigger than 22". Although for me that only applies to PC Monitors. When it comes to TVs, I don't have problems watching media on 47" or bigger sizes, as long as i'm sitting far enough.

But if you get 1440p or 4K and want to use those at your default resolution in windows you need at least a 27" for 1440p and above 32" for 4K otherwise you cannot read anything without scaling which is not perfect for all apps.

I'm aware of that, that's why in the future, if I have to, then i'll buy the smallest size available, whether it'll be 27" or bigger and i'll do my best to adapt. But it has to be OLED 4k HDR.

 

[Elfear]

I dont have that issue. For me ideal monitor size is 32-40". I guess for the same reason that many people prefer to watch their TVs, movies and other entertainment on a large screen (60"+). The larger, the more immersive. Same applies to monitors imo, on a smaller scale. My first PC monitor was 15" back in the day, and I thought that was all I needed. Every monitor upgrade and size bump since then has impressed me and kept going until 40", although I think I'll stop there.

100% agree. I thought a 40" monitor would be too big from 18-24" away but it's been a fantastic upgrade. Just need OLED, A-Sync, and 100Hz+ now.

 

[Grubbernaught]

So I have been running 3x Asus swift (1440p 144Hz gsync) since mid 2015 and really had an itch to check out 4k hdr.
I ended up with a Samsung Q7F 55" that I've pushed back an extra foot on my desk (it's still a little large for my taste however).

I thought the 60hz no adaptive sync would absolutely turn me off.....But I have been pleasantly surprised.

Nv fast sync actually does a good job of eliminating tearing without adding a tremendous amount of input lag (not it's intended usage scenario but believe me it does work).

The 60hz refresh wasn't as big of a deal as I feared going in due to the fact that 60fps is a reasonable target to strive for at 4k with a 1080Ti.

I know it will definitely not appeal to everyone, but as a staunch high refresh fan I've got to say.......don't knock it until you've tried it.

The Q7F is now my primary monitor.

 

[Grubbernaught]

What I didn't actually cover in the above post is what I really LIKE about it.

At 4k it is far easier to resolve fine texture detail at distance. Threads in cloth textures, fine stonework and that sort of thing are all much more defined at medium distance. The increase in detail is immense over 1440p.

And HDR looks great, but even non HDR content has much more colour vibrancy over the swift.

Those two features alone have made me prefer it to the Swift.

 

[JimKiler]

Stopped reading after "...60hz really isn't bad at all"

Does that mean you do not watch movies or TV shows since you would be stuck to 24 frames or 60 interlaced frames?

 

[Tweak155]

I just recently went from a 40" 4K down to a 32" 4K (much better) and now to a 27" 1440p 144hz (the best). I never noticed the major difference until trying Rocket League... I will not go back to 4K (for a main monitor) until it is IPS and at least 120hz.