1080p, 1440p, or 4k monitor?

1080p
240fps

1440p
240fps

>>716107884 (OP)
4K monitors are pointless for vidya, but good for productivity. Either 1400p 120fps or >>716107998

1080p, 165Hz because I'm cheap.

>>716107884 (OP)
Buying a 1080p monitor at this point is you trolling yourself.

>>716107884 (OP)
1080p
144hz
vsync ALWAYS off

1440 120Hz but I usually lock games to 60 because thats good enough

I was just thinking about buying a monitor.
What's really the better option higher fps or higher resolution? What's the good spot right now?
Ive pretty much always been 1080p 60fps. My new laptop has 144hz which looks great for browsing stuff.
Im guessing 1440 120?
Ultrawide seems like a meme to me. I'd rather just 2 or 3 separate monitors.

>>716108343
how so?

>>716107998
4k
OLED
240fps

poorfags seethe

3440x1440 @ 165hz

>>716108385
>Good enough
Sorry that your nervous system is so slow.

>>716108496
>AMD

>>716107884 (OP)
1440p for now, 4k 4-6 years from now.

>>716108496
>AMD
You almost made it, anon.

What is the ideal monitor or screen for the gamer who hates PC gaming, hates Steam, hates Valve, wants something that gives the image of a person who hates Gabe Newell and that is not suitable for gaming?

I run my PC to my 4K TV and play in 1440p. I only have a 4070ti Super so I can't play in 4K at a decent framerate for most games.

>>716108394
1440p is the current middle-ground.

>>716108496
>Connected to AMD Radeon

1080p
60fps

>>716108608
A CRT TV
But good lucking finding (a good) one

>>716107884 (OP)
1440p HDR with Local Dimming

I'm too old to need high fps and HDR makes games look a lot less washed out. Great for 4k movies too. I would like to see 4k OLED HDR side by side comparison to see if the price difference is worth it.

>>716108564
Posts like this are wild to me. I've been on 4K since early 2017. Can't imagine ever gaming at anything less, now that I've experienced it.

>>716107884 (OP)
in 2018 I would have said 1440p because it was the goldilocks zone for higher resolution and refresh. today, games run like shit no matter how good your hardware is so you might as well just go 4k30fps

>>716108679
And which console would be ideal for a CRT TV?
I want something that gives me the impression of a gamer who hates playing on PCs and also hates Nintendo consoles.

>>716108496
kek it's always poorfags like this who seek validation online for low stakes purchases like this

>amd
HAHAHA

>>716108734
Depends if you playing on a screen away from you or close. On PC desktop ranges 4k monitors are too big.

>>716108765
Probably an xbox 360

>>716107884 (OP)
4K, it's 15 years old by now...

>>716108908
Plenty of 27 inch 4k monitors now

>>716108153
You'll never want to go back if you try gaming in 4K. Leaning into the screen and actually see details is an experience.

>>716108918
Thanks for the recommendation

>>716109029
Thats too small for 4k to matter

>>716107884 (OP)
I have a Samsung Odyssey G9 ultrawide as my main and then my old LG 27GP83B-B as my vertical.

Have an LG CX as my television but then it started getting dead pixels legit about a week after the warranty expired, never buying LG again the fucking rats

>>716107884 (OP)
i have 1080p 360hz and a 4k monitor, 4k is the side monitor for watching stuff/comms/guides

>>716109152
That's not true in the slightest but even if it was there are 32 inch 4k monitors which are still desktop sized if you have a bigger desk.

>>716109496
Nah 27 inch is the sweet spot for me, any bigger and I have to look around the screen rather than it all being in my vision. And 1440 is fine at 27 inch. Goldilocks zone, optimal.

>>716107884 (OP)
4k, 120hz. I don't need more.

32" 1440p 240fps

>>716108708
It's not.
On top the ever present fears of burn-in, OLED also offers:
Fucked up pixel layout
Aggressive ABL that ruins HDR
VRR flickering
Poor low luminance uniformity and black crush
All for "perfect blacks" that are only noticeable in extreme cases compared to a high end miniled

>>716107884 (OP)
1080p 60hz LED/LCD. You do NOT need anything higher than this unless you only play competitive fps.

>>716108496
y-you missed a bit right there champ

>>716107884 (OP)
4K 65' TV

1k monitor for games and a 2k monitor for watching porn
yes it's hard to play games with one hand

>>716109496
It is true. we already had this discussion over and over how a TV needs to be around 50"-55" to get the full detail out of 1080p. It's why modern 4k screens are hitting 90". Personally I just went with a projector because 120" makes 1080p and 4k look kino.

>>716107884 (OP)
4k if you have the hardware for it
Otherwise 1440p is good

>2k
>120fps
everyone can afford it
easy to achive nowdays

easy and looks great

all these faggots ITT babbling about 200hz+ monitors or 160+ hz
You retards, first of all most graphically intensive games cant run above 120-150fps, and more importantly theres SEVERE diminishing returns in fluidity after 120fps/hz

1440p 240hz IPS
You dont need more than 1000:1 contrast ratio
OLED has its place in a home theatre but not on a PC monitor

>>716110297
The pixel layout isn't really an issue if you go 4K, 1440p it's very noticeable though.
The rest are valid concerns though.

>>716109068
>Leaning into the screen
nobody does this

>>716107884 (OP)
PAL/NTSC 50/60hz 480i/576i 4:3 TV.
No input lag. No performance wasted on pixels. Bright, with good presentation of pixels. Not squares.
Though the bigger the screen the better.

Burn-in, clarity of consessions is not upgrade. I prefer sets look real, accepted so, instead of all trying to acheive belief all is fake. It isn't. Your waste and trade of substance for scrutiny is just degenrate.

>>716108550
>>716108574
what's wrong with AMD

>>716110720
>you're only allowed to play AAAAAAA games from the last 3-4 years

>>716107884 (OP)
I'm currently on a 27 inch 1440p and I can't go back. Trust me I tried a 24 inch 1080p and it was impossible..

>>716108734
The graphics cards are too expensive to push 4k comfortably. If you have the money to drop thousands on new graphics cards I'm sure its great.

>>716110720
>and more importantly theres SEVERE diminishing returns in fluidity after 120fps/hz
even if your monitor physically cannot display more than 120hz, there's still more frame data to draw from 200fps+
you might not see the difference but you will feel it

>>716110993
>>716109068
>>716108153
Really depends on the type of game, games with lots of detail in small spaces like city builder games or tycoon games greatly benefit from it

>>716111239
>you might not see the difference but you will feel it
Naaaah, at 120-144hz/fps i dont feel any difference anymore. Latency is super low at that point, like 8ms or less.

>>716111150
>AAAAAAaaaaaa games
Calm down there Ubisoft clown employee.

>>716111353
Even on the desktop I can "feel" the difference going above 120hz, but I do agree it's a lot smaller then going from 60 to 120.

>>716107884 (OP)
1080p is worthless nowadays unless you are an esports shitter.
1440p is bare minimum. They are dirt cheap so being poor isn't an excuse.
4k is superior. If you have a modern gpu it isnt even that hard to run with dlss or fsr.

>>716111353
not talking about latency.
you're simply getting fresher, more accurate frames.

>>716107884 (OP)
I do 1440p 144FPS, but my 1440p monitor is an ultrawide.

>>716107884 (OP)
4k or >>716107998
1440 is a meme

I use a 1440p 240hz OLED monitor with DLDSR to play at 4k

>>716107884 (OP)
I have all three.

Work/desktop use: 4k
Gaming: 1440p + OLED
Vertical mounted extra screen: 1080p

I will not explain this is just a fact.

>>716111761
Grok-chan is this real?

>>716111815
Oh and i forgot to add
All these three options at 30hz.

I just got two AOC Q27G3XMN's for free last week and they're pretty great. 1440p 180hz MiniLED monitor and even though they're not as good as my LG OLED tv, they're quite nice. Way deeper blacks than my Dell S2716DG and the HDR is cool, but holy fuck the local dimming (necessary for HDR I think) always fucks up my contrast every few hours or so but damn is it nice to play games that support it.

>>716108496
1440p was nice, but high refresh 4k OLED is it. 27 inches too for that extra ppi.

>>716111901
Actshutally its all 240+ but the you can barely see a difference above 144hz

>>716107884 (OP)
1080p 120fps

>>716107884 (OP)
32" 1440p has been the sweetspot for a long time now for primary monitors. i could probably do with a bigger screen since it sucks if i want to have a game+browser open at the same time on the same screen, but anything bigger is usually a TV or a workstation monitor with retarded pricing. alternatively an ultrawide with extra vertical space might work, but those are also premium priced.

everything is shit, it is what it is

4k 240hz with dual mode 1080p 480hz. It's such an obvious solution. I love my new monitor

>>716111642
very weak bait

asdf

1440p
The white man's choice.