1080p vs 1440p?

why do you care?
I fuckin hate threads like this, they are literally bait.

More is always better, but everyone has his own budget. I've got a 1080p monitor and a 4K TV and the image quality is another planet. But I can't justify a 4K monitor yet, and 1440p is too close price wise.

both
>27" 1080p 144Hz for gaymen
>27" 1440p 60Hz for productivity, mainly coding. And for some games like civ5

>>57019728
1080p and IPS if possible.

>>57019728
Given the choice why would you prefer less pixels?

There is absolutely no reason not to prefer 1440p other than being unable to afford it, and hardware good enough to support it.

I have 165hz 1440p and it's incredible.

>>57019728
>2k16
>buying anything but 4k
kys

4k on 40 inch

>>57020089
>4k
>can only output 60hz

lmao@u

>>57020288
>>>/v/
is this way gaymur kiddie

>>57020288
>wanting anything more than 60hz

File: karen question-fs8.png (125KB, 963x720px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 963x720px

>>57019837
4K vs 1440p. which one wins?

>>57019728
I don't like big screens (ie >22 | >1080p) because:
1- I'm a programmer, not a gammer
2- Too much bright into my eyes
3- I don't like to move my entire head to see something
4- Waste of energy/CPU/GPU

>>57020423
Dumb anime poster

>>57020443
>Dumb anime poster
says the tripfag
topkek

File: anime haters are retarded.jpg (102KB, 500x1200px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 500x1200px

>>57020443
>attention whoring tripfag
>on an anonymous forum
>on an anime site
>insults anime fans
you really wen the full retard with this one, dipshit.

>>57020443
you're making yourself look stupid with the irony

2k retina display

>>57020443
>tripfag attention whore just...attention whoring...
>good thing no one would actually fall for this b-
>>57020454
>>57020484
>>57020799
>-ait

>>57020808
>2k retina display
what size tho? anything above 27" @ 2K is probably not retina

>>57020484
>>57020454
lifeless weebs on damage control

>>57019728
1440p is dead, there are cheap 4k displays now

>>57020983
>1440p is dead, there are cheap 4k displays now

Dead? It has more vertical space than 4k. 4k is just 1080p with better pixel density.

>>57020998
>It has more vertical space than 4k
are you retarded? or just stupid?

>>57020998
...what?

3840x2160 is simply larger than 2560x1440 in every way, horizontal and vertical.

>>57021016
no one runs it at native you retard. ppl double it up to make it usable.

>>57021067
As the owner of a 40" phillips 4k monitor, you're full of shit.

I use no GUI scaling at all.

Native full res, I can have 4 full 1080p windows open at once.

>>57021067
28" 4k is fine if you have decent eye sight and the price isn't that far off from 1440p IPS displays, it's going to depend on your distance from the display as well

AOC makes a 28" 4k TN Free-sync display for $300
https://pcpartpicker.com/product/Rk98TW/aoc-monitor-u2879vf

color is nearly on par with VA, I was surprised how good modern TN looked

>>57021082
how the fuck do you see anything? post a screencap.

>>57021104
I have a Dell TV from 2015 and it's amazing from the front. It doesn't have wide viewing angles like IPS but then again, I don't fucking look at my screen from the side.

will take a look at that one.

>>57021104
>No VESA mount
Into the trash it goes.

>>57021104
>https://pcpartpicker.com/product/Rk98TW/aoc-monitor-u2879vf
from reviews... one of the cons is blurry text. disappointing.

>>57021263
A small downside for an otherwise perfect display, for the money at least

File: 1475751527775.jpg (1MB, 1500x987px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1500x987px

>>57021248
>how the fuck do you see anything?
are you retarded?

At 40" 3840x2160 is 110ppi, that's identical to a 27" 1440p or a 20" 1080p. Meaning it looks the same for all text and icons as those resolutions on those panel sizes, but since it's 40" obviously there is a lot more usable resolution.


The easiest way to describe it is imagine 4x20" 1920x1080 panels in a grid 2x2 setup without any bezels. THAT is what a 40" 4k monitor is.

>>57021248
4K at 40" has a lower DPI than 20" 1080 monitors

>>57021275
toms hardware has a detailed review on it

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/aoc-u2879vf-28-inch-4k-uhd-freesync-monitor,4575.html

>>57021302
It's identical actually. 110.15PPI
(rounding to the closest full inch for simplicity's sake)

>>57021292
post a screencap of some text you mongoloid. post an screen of opened webpage.

4K without upscaling looks like shit when you try to read something.

>>57021263
yeah, no VESA is a dealkiller because these AOC monitors come with a shit stands that you can just tilt a little bit.

>>57020868
>I was just pretending to be retarded

>>57020998
1440p is still 16:9. 16:10 at around that size is 2560x1600

>>57019728
I can get 2 1080p monitors for the price of 1 1440p monitor.
So I prefer 1080p.

File: 2016-10-10 23_43_30-.png (459KB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

459KB, 3840x2160px

>>57021329
Lol maybe on a 28" monitor or smaller where you have to do scaling, on a 40" monitor it's 1:1, it looks identical to any other text you'd see being rendered at 1:1, the reason it looks like shit on smaller monitors is because windows is shit with GUI scaling and text looks like crap.

>>57020120
>vertical Civ V
That's actually very interesting.

File: Screenshot from 2016-10-10 23:50:26.png (283KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

283KB, 1920x1080px

>>57021329
not him, but you realize it's not webpages that are the scaling problem. All browsers support text scaling perfectly from almost the beginning. The problem occurs with old software sometimes being tiny and hard to read.

Pic related

File: Screenshot - 10102016 - 11:52:35 PM.png (616KB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

616KB, 3840x2160px

>>57021511
Apparently printscreen button takes the screenshot at 1080p by default

>>57021505
That screen shot is Rome2 or Atilla Total war, but I play Civ5 in the same manner.

File: maxresdefault.jpg (271KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

271KB, 1920x1080px

>>57020000
>27" 1080p

>>57019728
1440p
more desktop = better
since when having more resolution/space on your screen is something bad? worst case scenario you scale shit (I find this beyond stupid, but you can't stop faggots)

>>57020423
I say 1440.

Not much 4k content, all 4k monitors are 60hz right now, no video cards can power 4k games decently yet.

>>57020000
>27'' 1080p

enjoy your 10 pixel per inch

File: just extreme.png (522KB, 500x737px) Image search: [Google]

522KB, 500x737px

> 1920x1200 monitor died yesterday
> replacement 16:10 monitors are too expensive considering I can get a Korean 2560x1440 monitor for the same price
> 2560x1440 would probably too taxing for my graphics card (HD7850)
> the only affordable 24" monitors are shit tier 16:9 monitors
> everyone says 27" 1080p monitors look like shit

Should I just get a 1920x1080 24" monitor and get used to having 120 less vertical pixels?

Maybe my broken monitor is repairable?

>>57022115
take the 27'' and sit 6 feet away

Depends on the screen size

>>57021511
>Apparently printscreen button takes the screenshot at 1080p by default
Yeah, NO SHIT! Look at the SIZE of your fonts! They're DOUBLED!

Your 4K screen displays the EXACT same amount of content as my 1080p screen! It's just that on your screen things are sharper if you look at it from upclose.

I doubt you could tell the diff between upscaled 4K and 1080p from 2 feet away. I view my screen from 2ft and I can't see pixels at all and text seems sharp to me.

4K is such a fucking scam and the refresh rate makes it worthless.

>>57022115
Take 1440p, it will not be taxing since you use it mainly for displaying texts and videos.

It's all relative to the price and what you're getting out of it.

Imo the differences in 1080p vs 4k aren't big enough to justify the price difference. So I have no reason to get rid of my perfectly good monitor for a new one. Will I upgrade to a 4k monitor when this one wears out? Sure. But by then there will be some other cool new meme res.

>>57022331

I do a fair amount of PC gaymen too.

>>57022386
Well, you can play 1080p non-scaled or 720p and then upgrade your graphics card after a while

>>57022375
I meant 1440p*
But I will upgrade to a 4k

File: 1475722497966-fs8.png (73KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 500x500px

>>57021511
>>57021550
>upscaled screen
why even bother with 4k?!?

Due to the cost I'm going from 1080p to 4K and skipping 1440P.

>>57022462
have u even read this thread? with 4k you have two options:

1) Upscaling
- sharper text
- same amount of content as 1080p
- more power required for graphics card
- less framerate
- OK in games

2) Native resolution
- tiny text
- blurry text
- very low framerate
- shit in games

1440 has none of those issues.

>>57022488
>- tiny text
> - blurry text
these are only issues if you're a retard and get a 28" or smaller 4k monitor, with a 40" you don't have this issue at all because you have the same pixel density as a 27" 1440p monitor (so text is the same size as on your 1440p 27")

>>57022488
>winfag problems
>>>>/v/

File: giant monitor.jpg (35KB, 648x392px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 648x392px

>>57022532
>40"
do you want me to get neck strain or something??
imagine the horror of constantly having to move your head to read something...

File: Selection_549.png (10KB, 513x96px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 513x96px

>>57021067

>>57022567
I own one, I don't have to move my neck at all, I can easily move my eyes to see everything without moving my head
>>57021292

>>57022579
what model is that?

>>57022588
Phillips 4065UC monitor. They also have a 43" and seki has a 40" as well.

They aren't TV's either, they're specifically monitors.

>>57022579
Louis, go back to soldering macbooks.

>>57022626
Nice. Kinda expensive but very nice. You use it with DP?

File: maxresdefault.png (762KB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

762KB, 3840x2160px

>>57019728
2160p. Because it's 4 times as good as 1080p

>>57021067
I run it native.

>>57019728

1080p because my eyesight is shitty. I don't want text, icons, or anything else getting any smaller.

>>57020120
is that civ 6?

1440p is the ideal resolution.
Being able to have 4 720x1260 windows tiled is top tier.
I wish I still had my PB278Q ;_;
Remember kids, don't do drink and drugs!

Just buy a Korean 27 inch 1440p for $200. I got one and it's awesome although it only overclocks to 90hz

neither give me 16:10
no 21:9 maymay

>>57022573
I like this meme.

File: 1474147845226.gif (329KB, 140x160px) Image search: [Google]

329KB, 140x160px

2160p 27" x3

I don't think I can go back to anything lower res

>>57024068
>neither give me 16:10
this. golden ratio is godly!

File: Dell-U2417H-front-view.jpg (123KB, 780x630px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 780x630px

Is there a monitor with these specifications:
1920x1080 resolution
60Hz or more response time
Fully utilize 100% of sRGB or 99%
8-Bit or 6-BIT+FRC
22-25 inch
Any type of IPS
15ms more less input lag
Glossy or has ligh anti glare coating display

The clostest one I can think of is the Dell U2414H, U2417H, U2417HJ and Eizo EV2450. But these monitors moniotor don't have 99% or 100% sRGB colour garmet

>>57019728
2160p on 40"
this isn't even a question

I can't believe monitors haven't advanced in screen size since 2009 when i bought my 1920x1080p LG
It's been 7 years already and people are actually STILL buying 1080 monitors. Really makes you think ...

The one who has higher DPI. I would take 13.3" 1440p over 14" 1080p

1920x1200

>>57022460
It's 28". The fonts are smoother than 1080p. High res is also a benefit for rendering Japanese at small font sizes.

I've been using 1440p monitor for 5 years and I have no intention of replacing it.
You can shill your 4K all you want. I ain't falling for it.

>>57026981
>But these monitors moniotor don't have 99% or 100% sRGB colour garmet
What...?

>U2414H
96% sRGB
>U2417H
99% sRGB
>U2417HJ
96% sRGB

Looks like the 24" U2414H and U2417HJ use the same panel, whereas the U2417H uses a newer panel with 99% sRGB, exactly what you are asking for.

What's the issue?

>have a u2515h
>muh pixel density
>muh IPS display
>muh color accuracy

>>57019728
1366x768, of course
10"

>>57027229
>have two of them
>muh matching pixel density
>muh matching IPS colors
>muh matching bezels
feels good

This isn't opinion, one is obviously better than the other

But as for personal preference, 1080p IPS. It gets the job done and is affordable.

>>57027229
>muh gloss and unresponsive touch controls

>>57027311
>he didn't get the Asus version with physical buttons and no glossy plastic bezel.

I've been using a 27 inch 1440p display for around a year now and really like it. You can't top having extra desktop space.

4k already worth it in office environments where everything is about how many rows of your spreadsheet you can see at once.

Video cards for 4k gaming still a bit pricey.

>>57027333
No I didn't I guess I'm quite the fool.

>>57027311

>literally touching the option just once after buying
>caring about it being glossy

>>57027200
my brother made that post, little dummy he is hehe

>>57027311
its not glossy, it uses light anti glare coating like all other utrasharps do

>>57022488
the AOC one is 28" obviously you get more usable screen space compared to 22/24" 1080p

>>57027685
that's because you scale to 150% which is equivalent to 1440p, scaling to 200% would be 1080p equivalent.

So you're just getting basically the same resolution as a 27" 1440p, but you have a bit smoother image because of the higher pixel density.

File: WjGM0fw.jpg (569KB, 3440x1440px) Image search: [Google]

569KB, 3440x1440px

>>57019728
>tfw I like 21:9

Shit's panoramic as fuck.

File: bst408.png (3MB, 2400x1600px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2400x1600px

>>57021292
Man I remember last year when this was first starting out, great job senpai looks comfy

On a related note I use 1440 as my main and a 1080 in vert as the dual.

>>57027714
or just move your monitor slightly closer to you and have good eye sight.

>>57022321
It's easy to tell the difference between 1080p and 4k after using hidpi scaling if you're not blind. Especially the sharper text.

>>57019837
asus currently has a 1440p monitor for about $269 on amazon. has the same panel as dell ultrasharps if I recall, same thin bezel to.

I'm going to upgrade to two 4k monitors by the time I build my new PC. Which I will do in another two years, by then 4k monitors will be cheaper and high quality, right? Well maybe just higher quality.

>>57027771
28" 4k is 157PPI, far too dense for reading text without a magnifying glass, or having the monitor literally 12-18 inches from your face.

I currently use 2560x1440 @ 25" for 117PPI which at ~24" away is perfect, 157PPI would just be unreadable.

>>57027873
whats the acceptable ppi range for using a monitor at normal desk distance?

>>57027873
I have a laptop with 150ppi and it's perfectly fine at native res

>>57027916
90-120 seems to be good for normal viewing distances.

~90PPI is what you get with a 24" 1080p
110PPI is 20" 1080p, 27" 1440p, and 40" 2160p.
120PPI is a 24" 1440p (these are fairly rare however as most people find it right at cusp of TOO dense without using some scaling)

>>57027963
yes, a laptop which is generally 12-18 inches away, for desktop use MOST people use a decent chair and a desk with a keyboard, this means most people will have their monitors at 24-36 inches, sometimes even more.

We aren't talking about laptops here.

>>57027969
good post thanks

>>57027983
It requires some amount of scaling yes, but it's still perfectly viable at 28" at 4k

would be nice if the 40" displays would get cheaper though

>>57020071
Fewer.

File: like your style.jpg (18KB, 350x330px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 350x330px

>>57027746
1080p looks weird in portrait mode. aspect ratio is just fucky.

>>57027963
>I have a laptop with 150ppi and it's perfectly fine at native res

Thats find for laptops or phones with small screen since you're viewing them at an arm''s length. We're talking large monitors sitting 2 feet away. Pay attention!

1080p all day, it's still the standard so better support, you can get higher refresh rates with better panel tech for cheaper at that res too, and really is it that bad, if you need more space get a second monitor or hook your old one up as extra. Also if you like gaymen, having to push the extra pixels for 4K or 1440p is just wasting hp on frivolous shit.

>>57029694
There are people on here who haven't used 1080p since 2009, sure 1080p might be good enough for many people, but you're kidding yourself if you dont think 1440p or 2160p are better if you can afford it.

For those of us who can afford it and can actually make decent use of more resolution (not gayming, this isn't /v/) 2160p is a nice upgrade over 1440p, and a HUGE upgrade over 1080p.

>>57029781
But is a it a worthwhile upgrade over three or four good 1080p monitors for the price of two alright 1440p/cheap 2k monitors?

>>57030118
Good 1080p's still cost close to $300 each. So three or four "good" 1080p's would be like $1.2k

So that could get you 4-5 cheap 1440p or 1 really good 40" 4k, or a few smaller 4k's.

>>57022626
I wasn't a huge fan of the panels used in the Philips and Seiki 40" models and was happy to see the 43" IPS Philips offered this year.

I really hope they have DP 1.3/1.4 support for 120 Hz in next year's model, which will be enough to make me jump.
I'm still ghetto cruising with a 43" LG TV since it at least gets 60Hz at 4:4:4 chroma thanks to HDMI 2.0, and I don't care about getting absolute minimum input latency.

Thinking of replacing my 1080p monitor since it has some damage on it after years of use.

Is it worth getting anything higher than 1080p when video cards still cant do 1080p 60fps on ultra?

How bad will games look at 1080p on a 1440p monitor? On a 4k monitor?

>>57030343
What rock are you living under dude, video cards have been doing 1080p/60hz at Ultra for years now.

File: Capture.jpg (84KB, 608x659px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 608x659px

>>57030540

If thats the case then why do even the newest cards struggle to reach 1080p60fps?

It makes the 4k resolution redundant since you will never run anything above 1080p60fps no matter how many new cards you buy.

File: 1465458140721.gif (103KB, 284x280px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 284x280px

>>57020484
>anime site