is it a noticeable bump from 1080p

Anything above
>1080p
>500hz polling rate
>240fps
is a meme

>>717558086 (OP)
Yeah pretty noticeable. 1440 to 4k is also noticeable, but maybe not to the same degree as 1080 to 1440.

>>717558086 (OP)
1440 was insane, I will never go back to 1080,
1080 was impressive in 2008.

Not really
The picture is just bigger

>>717558086 (OP)
yes very much noticeable

What does 1080p, 1440p, and 4k even look like side to side?
Would (you) be able to see any difference between any of them?

the human eye can't see past 24fps, so all we can do is go up in resolution.

>>717558653
At decent sizes, yes. When a game starts in 1080p on my 4k monitor, it's obvious and gross.

>>717558086 (OP)
i went straight to 4K that shit blurry and for poor niggas lol

1440p was a mistake.

>>717558312
>>717558086 (OP)
It's a meme resolution for retards. There is NO reason to go beyond 1080p.

>>717558724
Turn off DNR reduction and MPEG clean up.

>>717558689
Crazy how most modern games look like this. Even if you play at more than 60 fps

>>717558086 (OP)
240p is more than enough.
Or in this case 720p smushed down and clipped to 480i because using a HDMI to composite converter that only does 720p.
It works surpisingly well to just set shit to 720p, squish around with retroarch, and use a integer vertical resolution that just happens to fit perfectly with the overscan shit.

>>717558829
This is a cope for poorfags.

>>717559117
I have a 4k 240hz projector that displays a 300" image.

I'm just not a retard that fell for the meme. Video games are not for anything above 1080p. They're not for above 60hz. It's that simple, poorfag.

>>717558086 (OP)
Kinda yeah. That's well past the point of diminishing returns though so don't expect much.

It's better but it's still just kinda meh like I thought it would be more noticeable but it's not really

I don't know if you're talking monitors or televisions but the highest thing you can get is an OLED monitor/TV. The step below that for a TV would be a QD-Mini LED, and it's also way more affordable than an OLED. I find that 4K TV's are more affordable than 4K monitors, but it's also on a smaller screen, so it isn't as "spread out" I guess.

I suppose not everyone likes gaming on a 50-75 inch screen. Back when I was a PC gamer, I will admit that going from 1080-1440p was quite noticable. You can see a difference in visual quality.

>>717559221
>Gaming on a projector
>Brags about it

Absolute retard, kek. And I bet you have a 300'' inch wall to project it on, huh? Okay.

>>717558689
Crazy how most modern games look like this. Even if you play at more than 60 fps

>>717558086 (OP)
not really, i had both a 1080p 120hz monitor next to a 1440 60hz and i'd always prefer the 1080 for everything from gaming to shitposting to watching movies/tv

4k is very noticable, i now have dual 4ks oled and its just night/day difference but you need the best hardware to actually game reliably at 4k, and honestly the 16gb vram cards will become dated in a few years

>>717559440
>He think he gets the full detail of 4k from a fucking tiny monitor or sub 80" TV

You guys are genuinely low IQ and always get mad when someone points out how retarded you guys are.

>>717560819
It's just as obvious on my 55" monitor or 83" TV.

I have one 1440p monitor on the left as my main screen and a 1080p monitor on my right for my secondary screen. Everything looks better on my 1440p monitor, but some things appear smaller in the larger resolution. So like 4chan I have to zoom in at 120% to actually read things

>>717560819
yes? it does matter if you have the monitor at least 1-2ft away (every desk) and the monitor is larger than say 20 inches

you can do the calculation yourself, here's the formula: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airy_disk

I will never us anything below 4k 240hz.

>>717560819
You can. Hold your phone up to the monitor with the same text on both, and zoom the phone so it's the text is the same size as on the monitor.
If you don't see a clear difference then you need to get your eyes checked.

>>717558968
What are you using for downscaling

>>717558086 (OP)
1440 is a genuine improvement. Everything looks significantly sharper and it's especially noticeable on games you've played at 1080 a lot.

I watched Gamorrah in 4K and I could tell the difference, but games, no.

The big difference is on whether the game is willing to put extra details at higher resolution. Higher texture resolution is an obvious one. For example, details that are 5km away from the camera might not be visible with a 1080p resolution but will be at 4K and even then the (LOD) models need to be detailed enough to pop out. Most game just despawn everything too far though.

>>717558653
With a 4k monitor, you aren't seeing the individual pixels at over 1 foot away; you can, however, resolve individual pixels with a 1440p monitor. For comparison, the steam deck's 800p screen has slightly higher pixel density than a 27" 4k monitor (which is why high resolution handhelds is a meme).

4k won't make games look prettier
480 fps won't fix your aim
i'm sorry but the truth hurts
you can't buy your way into success

>>717558086 (OP)
Not really.
If you want higher resolution, go 4K. If you want to chase the dragon of higher refresh rates then just stay at 1080p.

Higher refresh rate was more noticeable and a bigger improvement for me. Give me 144hz+ any day. I can play at 1080p, I cannot play at 60hz.

>>717562936
>4k won't make games look prettier
Objectively false. Imagine just lying on the internet and not feeling bad about it.

>>717558689
the compression artifacts brought on by such a low bitrate certainly aren't helping here

not with DLAA on a 24inch 1080p screen.

no difference.

shekels saved from the holo-cost.

thank you Nvidia.

>>717558086 (OP)
The 1080/4k rut is the actual problem. Ideally we would all be using 5k monitors which can easily run at 1440p for performance in games and run 5k native for sharp looking everything else.

>>717564926
sorry anon, art direction and aiming skills can not be improved with more pixels/frames

1440p/60FPS chads where we @?

I got a 1440p oled during a black friday sale and I really like it. HTH

1440p is the retard option as you will always need to upscale or downscale media and gaming is just barely the same as 1080p
Go 4K or go home

>>717566830
>aiming skills
>nobody ever mentioned that
Imagine being poor and trying to justify it. Do you think you're going to convince everyone to switch to a RX580 like you so you're suddenly not behind by over a decade?

had to go back to 1440p for 2 weeks when my 4k monitor broke. blegh. horrible horrible

>>717558086 (OP)
Whether a given resolution is practical for gaming depends on the size of your screen. You should be concerned with pixels per square inch.

>>717558312
>1440p
>1000hz polling rate
>120fps
Ftfy

>>717568920
I agree. I prefer to have 750+ ppi before I switch to a resolution.

>>717567739
then go waste your mom's money since you can't even read my posts

>>717570519
Go waste your mom's pussy on my dick since you can't read your own post. The 4k part had nothing to do with aiming. That was the refresh rate part. You're poor and live in a favela, Paolo.

>>717558086 (OP)
>is it a noticeable bump from 1080p
yea but not as much as you think. it won't blow your mind or change the visual presentation, the visual issues will be slightly less pronounced so if you want that 1440p will give it, but not more than that
>>717558653
yes lol the differences are pretty big. when a game launches at 1080p on my 4k monitor it legit feels like I have cataract vision, like there is always a depth of field effect and all the surfaces visibly move and shift instead of being stable

>>717561330
And you are playing what, minecraft?
Most games that could actually benefit from it are just not viable to play at 4k or 240fps much less at the same time.

A fool and his money are soon parted

I will never switch to 1440p because it looks good to me already a d all tv show shows and movies are srill coming out in 1080p and will look shitty on 1440p monitor

>>717570807
lol

>>717571531
>I care what you spend on
lol cope

>>717561475
The retroarch scale.

>>717571458
>Most games that could actually benefit from it are just not viable to play at 4k or 240fps much less at the same time.
Everyone who plays modern games at a 4k monitor uses upscaling to get closer to reaching their refresh rate.
>inb4 LOOOOL UPSCALING LOOL NOT REAL 4K THEN
true but still looks better than anything you can get on your 1440p monitor even natively

left - DLSS from 1080p to 4k
right - native 4k

>>717571749
>owns himself with his post
>lives in the red time zone
LAWL RUFFLES HAVE RIDGES LE MAYONNAISE

>>717572854
>+2
so you can't even into math
stop replying to me nigger

>>717558086 (OP)
no it's not
i see sometimes people try to show the difference between resolutions by zooming 20x into images
LOOK! LOOK AT THOSE JAGGED EDGES! YOU SEE?
lmao and lol you don't play like that

>>717573530
I can't speak to 1440, but 1080 to 4k is very noticeable just at a casual glance here.

>>717558086 (OP)
No. Not at all. 2160p is the jump you're looking for.

>>717573575
again the picture >>717572537
what am i supposed to see there?

things only noticeable if it's a fhd 32'' monitor

>>717572009
Framegen and/or upscaling are hit or miss. Sometimes it works fine, but if you are someone who cares about visual acuity, and if you are a PC gamer with like 4K120hz monitor you probably are, you will notice the ghosting and artifacting.
Modern games are also coded like shit and rely on those to even get to a baseline.

>>717573530
The reason people post zoomed screenshot comparisons or a videos is not because those differences are impossible to see without zooming. It's because we all view these things from different screen resolutions and different screens sizes so zooming helps equalize and point out. Videos get zoomed because it is near impossible nowadays to upload a video online without major compression ruining the visual quality of the video completely.

>still using a 27" HannsG monitor 1080p monitor with a 2" bezel I bought used at least 12 years ago and it was probably 5 years old when I bought it
>the pixels are the size of tictacs

>>717558086 (OP)
Yes, because TAA is cancer.
But VRR and high refresh were bigger deal for me.

>>717558086 (OP)
It is nice as it gives you some larger picture without needing a fusion powered GPU from the future to properly run games like 4k.

>>717573718
The ghosting and artifacting already happen at native resolutions with the standard rendering modes we use in all graphically complex games today. You are not going to escape image quality issues even if you stay away from upscalers, on the contrary if you avoid DLSS4 and FSR4 you will have worse image quality overall because their alternatives are having no anti aliasing which looks bad, or just having a weaker uglier version of DLSS4/FSR4 (called TAA). That's modern gaming for you, isn't it wonderful?

isn't 1440p like a meme jump? it's barely a jump compared to 4k or 8k

>>717558086 (OP)
1440p is twice the amount of pixels of 1080p

>>717558312
fpbp

>>717558312
>1080p
You can tell this board is brown because it's filled with poverty cope

>>717574164
yeah ok mr rich guy
when was the last time you had sex?

>>717558086 (OP)
Yes, temporal techniques have wreaked havock on lower resolutions. 4K or sub-4K is the minimum of output pretty much.
Even 1440p doesn't really cut it.

4k makes anti-aliasing useless unless the game sucks.

>>717574164
no game that I enjoy playing has a native resolution above 1080p
why would I need a higher res screen if I only game in CRTs? to read dumb fuck comments like yours?
buying gear is not a hobby
consumerism is not a hobby
nobody cares about your rig, specs or anything else you buy
only thing that matters in this board is what you play and what you think about it, the end

>>717574331
I've been on 4k since 2016. I hate how poor and 3rd world 4chan is.

>>717574435
>nobody cares about your rig, specs
I care, I want to see the computer you typed this comment on.

>>717573685
It's a different scenario than what I'm describing. 1080p looks much worse than 1080p upscaled to 4k (especially using DLSS). He's illustrating that DLSS is comparable to native in quality.
But a true 1080p image vs 4k? It's obvious. Here's a comparison of the same scene in 1080p and 4k, and the 1080p version is like being nearsighted: https://imgsli.com/NDA0OTYz

>>717573685
>what am i supposed to see there?
that's the point.
DLSS upscaled from 1080p to 4k is more or less the same FPS as native 1080p but looks a whole lot better.
If you're running native 1080p/1440p then there's no reason not to run 4k with DLSS as it's better in every way.

>>717573994
4K also sounds cooler than "2160" although UHD ultra high-definition is just more bullshit marketing nonsense

The purpose of 1440p is not to be a visual upgrade but to keep the same high PPI on a bigger screen

1080p looks fine on displays up to ~22 inches, anything above and the lower PPI makes it look blurry, that's why on 23+ inch monitors you want 1440p

At the normal viewing distance there's pretty much no way to tell the difference between a 19 inch 1080p monitor, 27 inch 1440p monitor, and a 40 inch 4k monitor in visual quality, the only real difference is screen real estate

>>717574435
>no game that I enjoy playing has a native resolution above 1080p
You're a tech illiterate retard

I've never seen 1440p.

>>717573914
Yeah that's fair. Some games you can see shit flickering even without using any of that tech.

Could TAA be forced on some games so that it can suggest the "better" DLSS/DLAA? Would be such cancer

>>717574774
ok blind anon

>>717574389
So every ue5 game.

>>717575205
The assets are made in a way that they look wrong without temporal accumulation. Stuff like hair and textures look like a floating pixel grid.

>>717575260
Oblivion remastered with zero AA looks good to me at 4k. I use maximum lumen with turned off screen space reflections and everything else maxxed out.. Didn't play any other ue5 game though.

>>717575364
As long as game has nanite it will look awful without TAA.

>>717575205
TAA isn't really that bad when the framerate is high enough. More frames to sample from means a better result.

1440p monitors don't really cost much more now. Although I guess some people have some specific reason for using a 1080p monitor regardless of their hardware. Getting a high refresh rate monitor is more important regardless of resolution imo. HRR monitors are cheap nowadays, you should get one even if your hardware can't push it in games, you'll appreciate the smoothness even when just navigating windows and your browser. Had to explain this to a dude who kept saying his old ass GPU wouldn't utilize it in games so he'd just get some cheapo Chinese back alley 60hz piece of shit kek.

>>717558535
Wrong. There is more on the picture, it's not just bigger.
>>717558689
That is not smooth. 24 has never been smooth. Neither are 30 or 60. You need at least 120 for really smooth movement.
>>717558829
It looks better, that's reason enough.

>>717572537
>dlss comparison
>no motion
in trash you go

>>717572537
>Games never move

>>717558086 (OP)
Its my next upgrade
as a poorfag on a 1080p display i think my gpu (3060TI) can handle most of the shit i play at 1440p even if i might have to lower the settings a bit
Im watching a few monitors from /pcbg/ in case they get a decent price cut

>>717573994
It's like 80% more pixels. Less than from 720p to 1080p and from 1440p to 4k but I wouldn't say it's not noticable or not worth it. It strikes a good balance between clarity and performance. I also like that the increased screen real estate. The only objective downside to it to me is media scaling can look weird on it unless the shit you're watching is native 720p since it scales directly into 1440p the same way 1080p does into 4k.

>>717575754
>>717575792
yes, dlss is shit when your PC is shit. But it's still better than 1080p

>>717558312
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rsRjQDrDnY8

I’d recommend max 1440p until probably 2035 or until devs drop UE.

>>717574435
>I have no use for it, due to my specific, irregular usecase, so nobody else does
Autism

>>717575754
>I value image quality.
>and that's why I game at 1080p with a budget video card

>>717558086 (OP)
You should look into the eye strain risks as well. I have a 34" 21:9 and I get foggy vision cognitive problems, eyes strain fatigue, seas sick, and memory loss when i am on that thing (for work, no less)

it can look great like nothing else, but if has fucked a lot of people up.

>>717575982
>I game
you clearly don't because gaming imply motion which your comparison lack

>>717576067
I don't need to use DLSS. You do.

>>717558086 (OP)
I guess.

>>717574435
>I only play games released a decade ago, I am le true gamer
and before you respond with a normalfaggot meme I'll just say "No."

>>717575907
I can't wait to upgrade from my 4090 to a 9070XT. No more fake pixels or fake frames.

>>717576017
fake and gay

>>717575209
100ppi is 100ppi anon

>>717576532
Nobody needs more than 96ppi ever.

>>717576586
Exactly, so 1440p is worth it if you're going for a bigger screen that might drop PPI below 96 or 100, but on a say 22 inch display there's almost no noticeable difference between 1080p, 1440p, or 4k from the normal viewing distance

1080 and 60+ FPS is all you need but a lot of people have been programmed to think you need even higher resolution and anything above 120 fps. Somebody has to buy these newer video cards I guess.

>>717558689
>the human eye can't see past 24fps
biggest cope known to mankind. and I even know people IRL that believe this bullshit

Remember to sit the correct distance from your screen for its size and resolution anons.

>https://www.ecoustics.com/articles/optimal-hdtv-size-viewing-distances/
>https://carltonbale.com/home-theater/home-theater-calculator/

>>717576804
The magic is that cope is 10-15 years out of date.

1440p made sense 15 years ago, using it in 2025 is really sad. 4k is the first real improvement to monitors since CRTs.

>>717576863
>4k is the first real improvement to monitors since CRTs.
lol no it's not, it's barely noticeable and inconsistently supported

The actual real jump will be microLED

>>717576908
>it's barely noticeable and inconsistently supported
It's 4 times bigger than 1080p, and supported by every 3D title natively.

Now, of course, if you fell for the "apple retina" scam and bought a tiny little macfag monitor, you wouldn't get it. 4k starts at 40", there is literally no point in anything smaller than that.

>>717576858
It's surprising to see a "home cinema" faggot site that actually gives accurate numbers for once instead of just trying to sell you tiny TVs or make you feel better about buying a tiny display.

>>717577009
Games play best on small square ratio screens, sorry you had to find out this way moviegamefag

>>717558086 (OP)
even just downsampling from 1440p on a 1080p monitor makes a hell of a difference

>>717577043
>i-it's better on a small screen!
Whatever helps you cope, man.

>>717577009
>It's surprising to see a "home cinema" faggot site that actually gives accurate numbers for once instead of just trying to sell you tiny TVs or make you feel better about buying a tiny display.
That is because in the past a lot of them - much like the actual audiofool crowd - have gone by gut feelings and tea readings for their setups rather than paying attention to actual research done. Then again you'll find /v/ generally says high resolution is a meme and you need to sit really far away because...uuuhh.....you just do okay!? when the reality is far more complex.

The next wave of idiocy we will see (and sort of do now) is going to be HDR because while it should be a simple fire and forget switch it isn't so people talk nonsense about it because they don't understand it but y'know, are experts.

>>717577043
Widescreen has been the norm for like 20 years now. No game has been designed with 4:3 in mind in forever and I can't think of a genre that would benefit from having less horizontal space.

>>717577896

>>717577832
The key issue with "HDR" is that it's a meaningless buzzword that covers shit like 400 nits all the way to 10k nits. It's the new "HD ready" plastered all over 720p screens, and it's very easy to try dogshit HDR content on a dogshit HDR screen and write off the whole concept.

The reality of screens is very simple, it's all about PPD. The optimal PPD for any screen is 60, because this is the best ratio in terms of performance cost to value.

While you can go to 120 PPD and up, all you get for this is sharper looking text, while vastly increasing computational costs. When you go below 60, pixels are too visible.

>>717577896
>Widescreen has been the norm for like 20 years now. No game has been designed with 4:3 in mind
Games have also been shit for like 20 years now, coincidence?

>>717578103
Does this mean retina is a scam?

>>717578261
Retina is a buzzword Apple uses as cope because they don't have a patent on cleartype, and so instead they designed their OS to be scaling heavy and run like absolute shit with tiny undersized monitors. But hey, the text looks sharp, right!

>>717575754
>>717575792
DLSS/DLAA used to soften too much in motion back during its CNN model days, but at this point it's better in motion than any alternative. DLSS at half the input resolution has better motion and clarity and image stability than standard native TAA does. (Of course not having any anti aliasing results in better motion clarity but leads to other visual eyesores that are not worth putting up with)

>>717558312
240fps is a meme

>>717578184
your father left 20 years ago as well, funny how that works

>>717558535
good morning saar

>>717578184
Yes grandpa, your old TV is still there, you can play snes before bed, just for an hour though, remember you need to get up for colonoscopy tomorrow.

>>717579195
You ran out of arguments so you're projecting, funny how that works

>>717579270
Play more moviegames faggot

>>717579145
I agree - it simply isn't enough.

I play 4K120fps with BFI and HDR on a 48" oled TV and it's glorious.
>everything I don't like is a meme
4K pixel grid is a bit overkill for sure. But 1440p at that size wouldn't be great either, you'd see the pixels. I hated 1080p TVs from years ago. With upscaler todays 4K is no longer an issue regardless.
>120fps isn't enough
120fps is enough in term of gameplay, but not in term of motion clarity, modern LCDs and even Oleds are blurry af even at 120
This is why BFI is super important and sadly nobody knows about it.
On my tv (LGC1) 120fps + BFI mode maxed gives me about 300FPS of effective motion clarity for free with no lag and sloppy fake frames (it's just rolling black frames like CRTs), but real CRTs used to be even better than this.
>HDR is meme
It's the only way you can use high nits brightness in a way that actually make sense. It's also the only way a game can use modern color spaces.
The issue is, virtually no devs knows how to implement it and community mods and patches does better HDR everytime, so you need to know your shit, if you don't, it's no wonder you think it's a meme, the option is broken by default on nearly any games that offer the option.

>>717579587
> BFI and HDR
At the same time? [X] Doubt.

>>717579272
But I didn't, my argument is that you are a jaded faggot since your daddy left you, and I'm correct. Simple as.

>>717579587
>48"
that's because ppi is purest garbage on such huge screen

>>717579636
LG's TVs allows it, yeah.
Pretty sure it works on Samsungs tv as well.
The issue is that nobody support 120hz BFI now, only 60hz.
This was why I panic bought the C1 back then, it allows 120hz BFI in HDR just fine.

I don't need more.

>>717558312
1080p on a monitor above 24 inches is a meme

>>717558086 (OP)
depends on your screen size

>>717576858
>I'm supposed to be sitting 5 feet from my 75"
jesus christ what are they smoking

>>717583256
Well unless you have the eyesight of a hawk then yes, that is correct for human visual acuity.

>>717558086 (OP)
Depends on the screen size of the two screens you're comparing
A 32 in 1440p monitor looks exactly as sharp as a 24 in 1080p monitor, for example. Just bigger.

>had a 17'' eMachines CRT
>1280x1024 60Hz
>perfectly happy with it
>upgraded my GPU
>GPUs stopped supporting VGA natively
I know I could've used an active adapter to hang on a little longer but whatever. I miss my CRT. I used to warm my pop-tarts on the back of it

>>717558086 (OP)
yes but 4k 27 mogs

>>717574435
>no game that I enjoy playing has a native resolution above 1080p

>>717558086 (OP)
Depends on the screen size and the distance you sit from it. At 27" it's noticeable.

the people who can't see resolution differences are the same people who can see upscaling artifacts

>>717558086 (OP)
>went from 1080p 27' to 1440p 32' like a retard and can't tell the difference at all
apparently the smaller the screen, the more noticeable it is, in my case it looks exactly the same, even when i'm playing 1080p games on it.
>>717558653
4k on a good monitor is genuinely insane.
i'm not dropping $2000 on a gpu tho

>webm 2.3MB
>limit 2MB
fuck this stone age

>>717583987
It's the opposite, the smaller the screen the smaller than difference since lower resolutions have a higher pixel density (therefore look better)than they do in large screens

>>717584068
behold, magic!

>>717558312
brownoid cope
I want to see the images in the gooner threads in full resolution, no downscaling

>>717584106
i thought it made more sense the opposite ?
if you take more pixels and cram them into a smaller area it'll be more detailed as the concentration of pixels increases instead of stretching them out over a larger area ?

>>717558086 (OP)
I love my 1440p 240hz OLED monitor :)

I think it's the good resolution for gaming on bigger screens. More HD means that you get distracted by the textures because our eyes have limited capability. With frame rates as well. When it's as fluid as real life in frame rate, for instance, I feel like I'd be a little disoriented. Especially if you're going to play on ultra graphics settings. This is my monitor and I think it's perfect for me. It's 1440p I think, and if you upscale the textures it isn't blocky. And it has HD speakers in it too.

Yes, moving up from 1440p to 4k is not though

>>717583987
You do not need a 2000$ GPU when you buy a 4K monitor. I got my 4070 Ti Super in January together with my 1440p display on which I played natively. Got a 4k display in June and playing at Dlss performance mode which gives the same fps as 1440p DLAA except it looks way better. Also the majority of the games I love come from the 2004-2016 era and I can run those at full 4k with triple digit fps. There's really no need to spend two grand on a card if you can do this.

>>717584472
To elaborate one final thought, I feel like my ability to scan the area in my games is made easier in this resolution, 1440p.

>>717584472
>When it's as fluid as real life
ror
rmao
wave your hand before your eyes, you'll see ghosting, what fluid you are talking about

I imagined those 4k or 4k+ tvs when you put a football game on.

>>717584481
I think 4k gaming is just not worth its high price.

>>717584481
t. 1440p owner
1440p is 3,686,400 pixels,1080p is 2,073,600 pixels, 4k is 8,294,400 pixels.
Which means 1440p is 1.77x of 1080p - but 4k is 2.25x of 1440p or 4x of 1080p. 4k is a substantially bigger upgrade over 1440p than 1440p is over 1080p.

>>717584692
I imagined those 4k or 4k+ tvs when you put a football game on. Sorry for the double post.

>>717558086 (OP)
Yes, but make sure you get an OLED. It's the simple biggest monitor upgrade you can make.

>>717558689
Crazy how most modern games look like this. Even if you play at more than 60 fps

>>717558086 (OP)
It's nice
But I prefer fast ips

>>717585470
lmao I wonder who could be behind this post

>>717558312
keep living your meme life I guess

>>717558312
Cope harder poorfag

>>717558086 (OP)
Yup, but if your graphics card is old I suggest going for a higher refresh rate instead. Once you increase res you wont want to go back and that's not a mistake you want to make when you have an aging card.

>>717558086 (OP)
>noticeable
it's day and night. I wish native 4K was affordable so I can make another jump already.

>>717558653
How to tell you are brown without telling you are brown

>>717559221
No you don't brownoid

>>717571749
It did it for me
You absolute bottom of the barrel clown
Better gear=better skills

>>717585470
glossy>4k>oled>high hz

>>717574164
gay sex doesn't count, Pablo

>>717586512
I have a glossy oled

>>717558086 (OP)
It's noticeable, particularly in textures and geometry (aliasing jaggies are a lot less noticeable, to the point I sometimes even play games without any AA at all).

>>717572009
Then you lied in your original reply and you are in fact using less than 4k@240.

>>717576745
Funny for me that this has an ME screenshot, because ME was my original resolution eye-opener, when mid-playthrough I upgraded from 720p to 1080p and definitely noticed the difference. And 1080 > 1440 was a similar jump in quality for me.

>>717579587
Yeah I find myself more blown away with special K HDR than most native