Tell me why 1440p is ok

[Craig234]

A while back after some discussion here I got a great Acer 34" 1400p ultrawide IPS.

I haven't opened it yet. My feeling is: this would be great now, a good fit for my RX 480 card.

But I can't help feeling when I look at it (the box) that soon everything will be 4k and I'll be missing 4k.

This makes me want to sell it for some loss and shop for a 4k instead (when I feel I want an upgrade more).

And of course on top of that there are how prices will drop.

So the reason I should say 'no, use this now, no need for planning for 4k any time soon'?

 

[postmortemIA]

it is OK for non-gaming since many Windows apps [still] have scaling issues. 1440p is practically highest resolution for which you don't have to adjust scaling factor from 100%.

 

[Ken g6]

34"?! That's freaking huge for a monitor! How far away from it will you sit?

Also, "ultra wide"? I see that's 3440px wide! That's practically the same as 4k in width, though not height.

 

[Craig234]

it is OK for non-gaming since many Windows apps [still] have scaling issues. 1

This is mostly for gaming.

 

[Craig234]

34"?! That's freaking huge for a monitor! How far away from it will you sit?

Also, "ultra wide"? I see that's 3440px wide! That's practically the same as 4k in width, though not height.

I'll sit like a normal monitor, what, 18" - 24"/

Number of pixels in width might be close to 4k, but that's because of the extra width - it's loser resolution. 1440p seems like a temporary interim resolution with 4k soon the norm. So...

 

[XavierMace]

Given you're not going to be playing AAA games at 4k on a single RX480, I'd say you made the right monitor choice. it's not like anything is going to be forcing you to run at 4k anytime in the near future.

 

[Craig234]

Given you're not going to be playing AAA games at 4k on a single RX480, I'd say you made the right monitor choice. it's not like anything is going to be forcing you to run at 4k anytime in the near future.

Right, the 4k topic would include a new graphics card. This is just right for an RX 480.

It's more feeling like I'm losing a lot of resale on the 1440p by opening it and expecting big price drops, if I'm going to want 4k in a bit... If I wouldn't want 4k for a few years, then no big deal.

 

[XavierMace]

Only you can decide when you're going to want 4k. It's not like a game is going to come out that requires 4k. It sounds to me like this really has nothing to do with 4k, you're just having buyers remorse over buying a new monitor at all.

 

[Craig234]

Only you can decide when you're going to want 4k. It's not like a game is going to come out that requires 4k. It sounds to me like this really has nothing to do with 4k, you're just having buyers remorse over buying a new monitor at all.

Naw, it has everything to do with 4k. If there wasn't 4k, no question or issue.

It'd be like if you were picking between a great new car, or expecting an important new feature to come out in the next model.

 

[XavierMace]

Naw, it has everything to do with 4k. If there wasn't 4k, no question or issue.

It'd be like if you were picking between a great new car, or expecting an important new feature to come out in the next model.

No it's not, because both cars are available now. You bought the cheaper car and now are having second thoughts. Your statement of "shop for a 4k instead (when I feel I want an upgrade more)" implies you're not terribly unhappy with your current setup/old car but went impulse shopping and are now having second thoughts.

 

[Adawy]

You're really not losing anything if you kept your monitor. 4k won't become mainstream until 2019, 1440p (16:9) on the other hand will be, as any mid range card from the next generation will be able to run it at 60 FPS. So i'd say wait and keep it.

 

[Craig234]

You're really not losing anything if you kept your monitor. 4k won't become mainstream until 2019, 1440p (16:9) on the other hand will be, as any mid range card from the next generation will be able to run it at 60 FPS. So i'd say wait and keep it.

Well, the fact it's new helps the resale, and if I predict the current sell price for this 1440p is likely to go over the next couple years from $700 down to, say, $450 if they're still sold at all, suggests I might be losing a few hundred dollars between selling it now and in a bit. I guess it'd be most frustrating if 1440p was already feeling in need of an upgrade withing a year or maybe two.

 

[Adawy]

Well, the fact it's new helps the resale, and if I predict the current sell price for this 1440p is likely to go over the next couple years from $700 down to, say, $450 if they're still sold at all, suggests I might be losing a few hundred dollars between selling it now and in a bit. I guess it'd be most frustrating if 1440p was already feeling in need of an upgrade withing a year or maybe two.

All right, sell it now and get a 4k monitor of your choice.

 

[whm1974]

I game at 1600p on a 30" display using a 970 GPU and every game I play runs just fine. I want a 4K display for nongaming reasons, but waiting on saving some money and prices going down.

 

[ElFenix]

assuming you've got one of those 21:9 super wide monitors, it benefits gaming because lazy programmers have locked the vertical field of view. so, you get to see more than someone on a ginormous 16:9 screen.

 

[urvile]

I went the other way. I bought a 4k gaming laptop then an acer 34" 3440x1440 and then a 35" AOC 3440x1440 both are curved and have the 21:9 aspect ratio. Both are super immersive for gaming and have refresh rates of 75hz for the former and 100hz for the latter.

4K has a higher pixel density. Wow. I am still not seeing the point of 4k gaming. However a laptop screen is small so maybe on a decent size screen it would be considerably better? I still don't think we are at a point where the hardware can comfortably handle 4k with luxuries like AA turned on.

Admittedly I haven't looked at 4k screens for my PCs because I don't have an interest in gaming at that res yet.

 

[snoopy7548]

When I upgrade, I'm going 27" 1440p. 4k just seems way too demanding for the hardware currently out, unless you like turning down all the fancy graphics options. Give it a few years.

 

[moonbogg]

Wouldn't trade my 21:9 for any 4K screen. I say keep the ultrawide and embrace the glory.

 

[urvile]

It's probably a personal choice thing but I build high end gaming rigs so I can max out the latest AAA titles. 3440x1440 ultra wide is highly immersive and allows me to have all the game features maxed out. At a noticeably better looking resolution than 1080p.

I am not saying that won't be possible @ 4k with a similar setup as mine but you won't be turning on AA. I have seen benchmarks of far cry 3 with a gtx1080ti playing at ultra and AA was turned off. When demanding AAA games like far cry 5 drop good luck playing that without turning down settings @ 4k unless you like console visuals and frame rates.

We are still years off having GPUs that will be capable of maxing out the latest graphically demanding open world games. I think 3440x1440 is a good compromise. You just need to be prepared to spend more on your hardware. Otherwise you might as well stick with 1080p or just buy a console. This is just the way I see it of course.

 

[urvile]

Actually if you want to game at 4k only i.e. you don't want a 4k screen for productivity purposes. It would probably be better just to buy a 4k TV and a 4k capable game console. Which will probably give you more consistent gaming performance.

Because all of the settings have been tweaked and the hardware configurations will be consistent. Then when the hardware becomes available to max out demanding AAA titles at 4k go back to PC gaming. Then you can reuse the 4k screen as a PC monitor.

 

[nOOky]

4K is stuck at only 60HZ so many people bemoan that fact and are waiting for higher 120HZ monitors to come out. Many people also claim 4K 60HZ gaming sux because 144HZ monitors are so much more responsive.

I game at 4K and I assume it's a very low percentage of overall gamers. However I came from 1920 x 1200 and personally the resolution is amazing. Currently I am only playing DOOM, PREY and some older games, but I'm holding 60 FPS in them and they look amazing. I don't play any fast twitch shooters anymore, mainly because cheating online is rampant, so I don't miss 144HZ monitors. I prefer the higher resolution anyway.

Your monitor's resolution is still pretty darn good, and it doesn't require the fastest GPU to have a great game playing experience. I would say keep it if you like the aspect ratio. You could compromise and step up to something like this: https://www.amazon.com/Acer-XR382CQK-bmijqphuzx-UltraWide-FreeSync/dp/B075LQLJ52?th=1 which should satisfy the need for pixels and offer the widescreen aspect ratio and be immersive. It's just expensive, but it is a couple million pixels less than 4K and easier to drive to that 75HZ.

I guess a few questions would be how much actual gaming do you do, how do you use your PC i.e. for productivity/work or just web browsing and pictures etc.

 

[Craig234]

Several people have provided what I asked for, reasons to be happy with the 1440p monitor, and it's at least largely working, thanks

 

[Craig234]

I guess a few questions would be how much actual gaming do you do

Quite a lot, but none of it needing high refresh rate. My interest is more simply the beauty of the game, the immersive issue for the monitor.

, how do you use your PC i.e. for productivity/work or just web browsing and pictures etc.

Normal stuff, some video watching, none of that is driving the need for the better monitor, only gaming, other than the quality of the video etc. being nice. But it wouldn't be worth it for the non-gaming.

 

[wilds]

4k will be stuck at 60hz until Acer and Asus release their 4k144hz monitors later this year.

1440p165hz is king of the hill for high refresh rate and resolution. Right now, you want BOTH.

 

[ultimatebob]

I have a 27" 1440p monitor. I still had to scale it to 125% in order to be able to read it right, because my eyesight sucks.