-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
1440p is overrated by people who can't go up to 4k
- Thread starter .Pennywise
- Start date
Tommi84
Member
xDDDD
I take 1440p/60fps with high fidelity picture every day instead of 4k/30 with chopped graphics
BlackTron
Member
The joke is on you. My 144hz monitor is only 1080p!
That resolution is enough for a 24" monitor, and a good fit for what I wanted it for, Halo Infinite at 120hz (the Xbox cannot go higher than 1080 doing this anyway) and getting Genji/Widowmaker at 144hz on my GTX 1060.
Yeah I have a 3070 now and haven't played Overwatch in a year, but still feel no desire to upgrade the monitor. Its sole purpose is high refresh rate aiming at 24", which is actually the size I WANT at my desk. I look forward to having a 4k TV, but again, I won't upgrade it until I can catch a deal on a TV with 120hz.
Once you have enough pixel density for your screen size, the marginal benefit of dumping more power on it gets smaller and smaller compared to higher framerates.
This performance is simply good enough for me. I guess I could play at 4k/144hz/ultra gfx, to be honest with what I can get without spending all that, I just don't care enough.
That resolution is enough for a 24" monitor, and a good fit for what I wanted it for, Halo Infinite at 120hz (the Xbox cannot go higher than 1080 doing this anyway) and getting Genji/Widowmaker at 144hz on my GTX 1060.
Yeah I have a 3070 now and haven't played Overwatch in a year, but still feel no desire to upgrade the monitor. Its sole purpose is high refresh rate aiming at 24", which is actually the size I WANT at my desk. I look forward to having a 4k TV, but again, I won't upgrade it until I can catch a deal on a TV with 120hz.
Once you have enough pixel density for your screen size, the marginal benefit of dumping more power on it gets smaller and smaller compared to higher framerates.
This performance is simply good enough for me. I guess I could play at 4k/144hz/ultra gfx, to be honest with what I can get without spending all that, I just don't care enough.
.Pennywise
Banned
People saying you won't tell the difference between 4k and 1440p LMAO. So you're telling me you cannot see a 400% increase in resolution yet you're telling me you can see a 78% increase.
You're laughable.
It's really easy to tell who actually got in front of a screen with 4k resolution and who didn't. You're just one block away from the old "the human eye cannot see above 30fps".
Also, people saying DLSS makes the games look worse? Have you at least tried this technology or just speaking out of spite?
Getting so defensive on 1440p just makes my argument on it being overrated more and more strong.
You're laughable.
It's really easy to tell who actually got in front of a screen with 4k resolution and who didn't. You're just one block away from the old "the human eye cannot see above 30fps".
Also, people saying DLSS makes the games look worse? Have you at least tried this technology or just speaking out of spite?
Getting so defensive on 1440p just makes my argument on it being overrated more and more strong.
grfunkulus
Banned
Those calculators are bullshit. I have a 48 inch CX Oled that I've been using as a monitor for well over a year. Switching back and forth between 1800p and 4k at a little over a meter viewing distance it's obvious that one is sharper than the other. 1800p is a great in between resolution because 1440p is completely insufficient at a size greater than 32 inches for PC gaming purposes. Again, calculator is bullshit--says more than 1440p is unnoticeable at 3.2 feet. I guess all those manufacturers making 4k 32inch monitors are doing it for the lulz
AngelMuffin
Member
I always believed that 1440p was/is the sweet spot for balance between visual fidelity and cost of performance. I’d take more frames, better visual quality, etc. over an increase in resolution over 1440p any day of the week.
T4keD0wN
Member
I doubt that theres a single person who think 1440p looks better than 4k. Its all about priorities. Some people choose 1440p to achieve higher amount of frames per second.
4k is clearly superior, but its not like you can get to really high fps at native 4k even with a 4090. It lacks the connector and the performance for that, but you can achieve that at 1440p so its actually better in this use case.
Anyway, how come my phone has much better image quality than my 4k tv?
I am sorry, but whoever thinks that there are people who genuinely think that 1440p is in any way better than 4k is the real idiot here.
If you were to make this about pixel density, now that would make sense.
Last edited:
captainpat
Member
call me when we start getting 27-32 inch 4k oled monitors.
Kdad
Member
Says folks that can't afford the true best, azure.
HeisenbergFX4
Member
Perfectly put but the whole point of this thread was to troll people and they keep feeding this troll
intbal
Member
Only if your previous mirror was 1530p.
.Pennywise
Banned
OLED is the worse, paying 4 times more for 4 times less lifetime proper usage LOL, but that's for another thread or I'd prolly get banned because people here can't handle a discussion.
RainblowDash
Gold Member
1080p 240hz or higher is better than both
Kacho
Gold Member
.Pennywise
Banned
No, it's not..Pennywise is this true?
MiguelItUp
Member
Honestly, just shoot for anything you can comfortably do over 1080, you'll see huge differences. Preferences are all different strokes, or the kind of hardware you have, etc. 
.Pennywise
Banned
Cannot not call people blind when they tell you that you can't see a difference between 4k and 1440p.
worldwithpyramids
Member
As someone who games on a 1440p ultrawide HDR monitor and a 4k OLED TV I can tell you that you’re completely wrong. I choose PC gaming on my monitor every time when applicable.
analog_future
Resident Crybaby
Okay, but a modern 77" OLED can be had for close to half of what you paid for yours. And significantly less than that if you're willing to go with LED.
And who said anything about 4k/120? You can build a 4k/60 gaming PC for like $1500-$2000.
manfestival
Member
Low tier trolling bro. Just give it up.
Gameplay Gods Bless
Member
When we get affordable GPUs that can do 4k at 240fps+ people will stop sign boosting 1440p over 4k. The problem with 4k is that it comes at a higher fps cost than 1440p but eventually 4k fps will reach an acceptable level for everyone who's not an eSports gamer just like 720p, 1080p and 1440p did.
KyoZz
Tag, you're it.
I'm telling you, the image quality of my 1440p/144Hz/HDR/G-Sync monitor shits on your 4K display when I play games downsampled from 4K. Or even 3K.
So yeah, you are not open to the discussion. You just want to force your opinion to them.
Some console players can't see the difference between 30 and 60FPS. Some PC players can't see the difference between 60 and 120FPS and so on. Who cares?
And many people play a fake 4K on PS5/Xbox Series that don't even hit true 1440p on most demanding games and are happy with that.
Anyway, who are you to tell other people what to think? Just enjoy the fuckin games and stop being preocuped by anyone else preference.
That's pretty much the only factor anyone should look. But hey 4K
dcx4610
Member
It's all about the screen size. There's a reason why you almost never see a 4K TV below 40" - It's diminishing returns and your eyes can't see a difference.
Making things like phones 4K is a bit a gimmick and just something to sell to the masses. The pixels are so small at that point, you can't pick them out and you wouldn't notice a difference between 1440 or perhaps even 1080.
1440p is also the sweet spot of performance and graphical fidelity. 4K is still very demanding to run and even with a 4090, some games aren't able to reach high frame rates. Meanwhile, you run the same game at 1440p and you might be at 200+ FPS all while being hard pressed to see a graphical difference unless you have a large screen.
I have a 27" monitor and I'm probably only 2 feet away from it. 1440p is still king to me. Once GPUs get powerful enough where 4K is nothing to process, I'd have no problem going 4K just to say it's 4K but it's really not needed. Also, to further prove my point, many movie theaters still use 2K (1440p) projectors. So what you are seeing in the theater is only 2K and it still looks good on a 20 FOOT+ screen. Would 4K look better? Absolutely. Would you need or notice 4K on a 27 INCH screen? Probably not...
Making things like phones 4K is a bit a gimmick and just something to sell to the masses. The pixels are so small at that point, you can't pick them out and you wouldn't notice a difference between 1440 or perhaps even 1080.
1440p is also the sweet spot of performance and graphical fidelity. 4K is still very demanding to run and even with a 4090, some games aren't able to reach high frame rates. Meanwhile, you run the same game at 1440p and you might be at 200+ FPS all while being hard pressed to see a graphical difference unless you have a large screen.
I have a 27" monitor and I'm probably only 2 feet away from it. 1440p is still king to me. Once GPUs get powerful enough where 4K is nothing to process, I'd have no problem going 4K just to say it's 4K but it's really not needed. Also, to further prove my point, many movie theaters still use 2K (1440p) projectors. So what you are seeing in the theater is only 2K and it still looks good on a 20 FOOT+ screen. Would 4K look better? Absolutely. Would you need or notice 4K on a 27 INCH screen? Probably not...
Last edited:
ZoukGalaxy
Member
#FACTS
Last edited:
YeulEmeralda
Linux User
Who can do native 4k? We are all using DLSS and whatever AMD is doing on PlayStation.
twilo99
Member
Marketing gets the better of people.
If you ask around here what's better, 27 inch 1440p monitor or a 65 inch 4k TV 90% would say the 4k TV, when in reality..
108.79 PPI vs. 67.78 PPI
this is a good tool:
Pixels Per Inch PPI Calculator
PPI Calculator finds pixels per inch (PPI) and pixels per square inch (PPI^2). Calculate screen resolution and pixel density using width and height of display screen in pixels. Also find dot pitch and diagonal in pixels. Enter screen diagonal in inches or cm.
www.calculatorsoup.com
300 PPI is considered best, but we are far from that on monitors and TVs, phones have been there for a while I think.
Antwix
Member
Early last year I played through Dark Souls again on XSX before Elden Ring came out. Played through DS1r first and I believe it's 1800p. Then I went to DS3. That's at 900p. Sure I could tell but I didn't even really notice after like 10 minutes of gameplay. If you're playing a good game that's immersive and fun, it doesn't even matter. The presentation is still good. I'm glad I'm not a graphics whore.
YeulEmeralda
Linux User
Art style> graphics.
TheDreadLord
Member
There is a huge difference between 1440p and 4k. At least for me…also, for retro gaming on modern display, 4k is very interesting for scanlines simulation… it becomes almost identical to a crt.
Leonidas
AMD's Dogma: ARyzen (No Intel inside)
I was at 4K previously and happily went back to 1440p because I now prioritize high framerate. And I'm not interested in spending $1000+ on a GPU.
My current 1440p monitor is much better than my old 4K one.
Most high refresh 4K monitors are only 144 Hz, while many 1440p displays are often 165-240 Hz. I'll take the higher refresh rates at 1440p which are much more reasonably priced compared to high refresh 4K displays.
4K is objectively better than 1440p, but it's not something I notice when I'm gaming, I do however notice that my frame-rate in games is much higher than it was on my old 4K monitor. 1440p looks much better on a 1440p screen than it does on a 4K screen.
BlackTron
Member
Sure he's right that on a 50" TV, the difference between 1440 and 4k is noticeable. But on the game consoles we have now, the reduction in framerate and visual fidelity would be even more noticeable.
It's like an RPG where you need to choose where to spend your skill points. People have an efficient way they like of doing it, this is just saying "why not just max out ALL skill points its better, if you can't see that you're an idiot".
It's like an RPG where you need to choose where to spend your skill points. People have an efficient way they like of doing it, this is just saying "why not just max out ALL skill points its better, if you can't see that you're an idiot".
Pyral Phoenix
Member
I don't see much of a difference when I use a screen that has a respective resolution
There's a difference ofc, but not the one that would make me want to leave higher FPS ofc, it's a matter of taste and money
VAVA Mk2
Member
A 4KTV and a 4K monitor are not exactly alike and not all 4K TVs are good....
VAVA Mk2
Member
I have a 32" ultrawide, bitch.
hyperbertha
Member
No you are the one missing logic. Just as 30 fps to 60 fps is far more noticeable than 60 fps to 120 fps, 1080p to 1440p is more noticeable thatn 1440p to 4k. Diminishing returns. Honestly your post reeks of regret. You seem desperate to justify your 4k purchase. If you are on console, I pity you. If you are on pc, 4k is somewhat justified provided you have a 4090.
coffinbirth
Member
We're not talking native res here, you would have to drop settings for that...but neither is the OP.
rofif
Can’t Git Gud
I never did that comparison with 1440p 27" montior but I had few and it was barely any better than 1080p.
I had 1080p 27" monitor running 4k supersampling and 4k 27" monitor running native. These were the results...
Now. This was on 27". It's even more important on bigger screens
I had 1080p 27" monitor running 4k supersampling and 4k 27" monitor running native. These were the results...
Now. This was on 27". It's even more important on bigger screens
hyperbertha
Member
Resolution are by far the least useful metric to improve video game visuals. Heck, in older ps2/ps3 games, higher resolutions make them look WORSE. THeir textures and models aren't meant to be scrutinized without some blurring to hide the lack of detail.