Depends how deep your pockets are, there's a 1080p monitor that can do 360 Hz, I'm on a 32" ultra wide HDR 1440p 200Hz. native 4K won't be the norm considering there's already talk about dynamic resolutions and performance modes.
Consoles are generally used on TVs, the title argues a moot point unless you can show how there's a sizable portion of console games using monitors that you're trying to get to use TVs.
I've seen many saying that they're using monitors for their consoles, that's why this thread is relevant. Monitors seem to be like PC gaming, you pay too much for too little. I use my high end PC on my TV, and do video/photo editing on it as well. Never played a game on PC nor wanting to.
If you're very competitive online, then 200Hz+ monitors would fit you. Console usually share even grounds between most gamers, only skills matter.
If DP 2.0 hits the market then that's another story, but by then maybe HDMI 3.0 chims in with 8K@120Hz and 4K@480Hz at full 12-bit. Technology won't stop. Bought a 55" 4K LG LCD in 2015 and a year after got Sony 4K LCD for better input lag and HDR with the Pro. If PS5 Pro comes, gonna buy a microLED 8K with it personally, 4K looks better on 8K just like 1080p looks better on 4K.
8K makes 4K looks so old by the way, seen highlights of a football match at 8K on a store and the picture quality is nearly described as photography in motion (33.2 megapixels vs 8.5 MP for 4K). Experts say that 16K is probably the sealing for common TV sizes and for a human eye to see noticeable upgrade beyond that.
Still, it's my opinion and everybody has different preferences.
Ehh it was like $300 from best buy, I normally don't buy warranties but considering i will use it 8+ hours a day for productivity,.... seemed like a worthwhile gamble.
It's a wise decision for OLED, you bought the peace of mind.