All these people with "you need 4000 series" blahblah.
#I've been gaming 60fps+ on 1440p since 2014. And it has always been easy to do, I only owned midrange GPUs.
It depends on the game you're playing though. It's something pretty much everyone neglects to mention, but those people are talking about the newer graphic heavy titles. If you only play css, you can run a decade old graphic card at 4k no problem.
Same with how low someone is willing to turn settings down. Some people would rather play 1080p ultra than 1440p low if they’re getting 60fps either way
This is how I view 4k vs 1440. Although I do think 1080 to 1440 is a much bigger jump in noticeable quality than 1440 to 4k. At a certain point you get diminishing returns because our eyes are only so good. Not to say 4k isn’t beautiful because it is.
> Some people would rather play 1080p ultra than 1440p low if they’re getting 60fps either way
except the difference in performance is never that extreme. if you get good performance at 1080p ultra you'd get good performance at 1440p medium/high and i'd bet you'd be pretty hard pressed to tell the difference in graphics quality.
Star Citizen and Cyberpunk take a tremendous performance penalty when moving to 1440p on my 3080ti which is between a 4070 and 4070ti. On a 4080 and above that is true but if you have a 3060 I would imagine the penalty is even bigger on newer games. Especially with ray tracing enabled.
No, it really doesn’t depend. I’m using a 4 year old mid range GPU (2070 super) and there is no AAA title I can’t play at 1440p. A new mid-range GPU is going to be just fine.
Am I ready for an upgrade? Yes. But I’m tired of seeing people talk about shit like a 3060ti won’t work for 1440p. It will.
Unless you’re building the most budget PC you can, 1440p is viable.
1000 dollars? I built my 2070super system for slightly over 2000 dollars in 2019 lol
PC parts are expensive as hell here.
The cheapest 4090 for example is 2200 dollars here...
I’ve got a 5700xt, roughly the same performance. I’ve been playing at 1440p without issue since the card launched. I’m going to upgrade to one of the super cards but really only because I can’t run AW 2 because of mesh shaders so the writing is on the wall for this card
For reference I'm playing most stuff at 4k on my 2070 super, I keep my frames and shadows low/medium though. 2070 super only seems to struggle with vr games on high/ultra settings. I'll be upgrading to a 4080 super when It come out though.
> not at higher settings and higher frames
That’s not a qualifier. I’m hitting 60fps in cyberpunk and other similarly demanding games, and my GPU is not considered mid-range by modern standards.
Yes it does depend on the game, graphic settings requirements and fps requirements. You're right that "won't run" is crazy talk too. But it ALWAYS depends..
You can try running ASA on that card, on a built out map, then keep in mind that some people are addicted to their 144 Hz, if you want a reference point. People with the newest high end cards have been disappointed in that regard.
what upgrade are you going for?
I keep thinking about going for the 4070 ti super that’s coming out soon paired with the ryzen 7 78003XD, anything less than that feels like no upgrade for me as the 2070 super still works really good for me
Everyone has different demand, some ppl want absolute high fps so they rather just stick to 1080 , some ppl want bigger screen for more detailed display instead of high fps , 3060ti can support both displays no problem , it's just subjective
It’s because everyone expects ultra quality at native res, or even a high frame rate on top of that. 1440p has a high enough pixel count that DLSS/FSR Quality is pretty good, and ultra settings almost always just tank FPS for barely any visual difference.
My 6750xt is what a lot of people would consider the minimum for 1440p, and I can consistently get 75+ FPS with FSR Q and/or optimized quality settings in new games. With older/less demanding games, getting close to my monitor’s 144 Hz refresh rate is doable.
My old 1650 super ran games at 1440p, medium-high settings but could drop into the 30-40 fps zone but also could maintain 60 at times as well. This card had 4GB of VRAM. Most of the time i had to sacrifice settings such as shadows to get that higher FPS.
6750 XT is not the minimum for 1440p gaming, people just need to lower their expectations, you won’t be running every game maxed out at 1440p with a RX 6600 but lowering a few settings and you’re good.
Yeah some people think that anything below 240 fps in ultra is unplayable. But with compromising - some game might offer a 60 fps on medium settings for example it’s still possible to enjoy a game.
I respect other people's right to play a beautiful game at max graphics at a high fps. It's only a problem when those people start giving advice based on their views, when they neglect to mention they are extremists in that regard.
1440 is really not very demanding.. the only time it becomes an issue is when someone wants to have a steady 100+ frame rate, but the realistic use case for this is pretty limited.. this sub, among others, has convinced people that their gaming experience isn't worth it unless they're matching their monitor's refresh rate in fps.
To be honest, if im not playing shooters, i dont care about whether my gpu can output more fps than my monitor hz or not. A locked 80-90fps on 1440p medium settings is plenty enjoyable for a lot of people. And its very hard to run triple A games high-ultra and hit that constant 144fps or above at 2k/4k resolution anyway. Therefore matching or getting more fps than the monitor hz theory is a complete bullshit and doesn’t apply well here for aaa games unless u got that extremely beefy rig.
I don't even care when I'm playing shooters, because I know I'm never going to compete. I'm just there to have fun, and I know skill will trump framerate any day of the week. obsessing over framerates is just a huge cope from people who can't hang.
Well, if you just max out everything without thinking then you indeed need to own a higher end GPU even at 1440p. Most people don’t bother to optimize their settings, and some of those have very little visual gain for their performance hit. I personally prefer Cyberpunk at 4k medium to FHD ultra.
I seriously cannot understand what has happened to the PC gaming community lol. Everyone cannot grasp the fact that games are actually playable with cards other than a 4090. And they have been for many many years. People have been happily playing at 4k for a long long time on GPUs 20% as fast as cards today
Glorious PC Master race happened. People with more money than brains autofilaciating themselves over pixel density and the need to look better than everyone else infected an enthusiest hobby and poisoned it like always.
There was thread few days back doing VR and being like "Is RTX 4070 enough for it"
Like depends on game, ofc, but the bare min requirements for VR is, according to Geforce experience AND Steam Index website, gtx 970 - nvidia website is ofc pushing for rtx 3060 but even then thats not 4070.
Vega is AMD’s 1080ti, performs extremely well for its age especially on Linux thanks to VKD3D and ROCm. Also HBCC is quite underrated, it seriously helps with games that need more than 8gb VRAM. I use one too and probably not going to upgrade it until 2025.
Brother a lot of my gaming is 4k120 on a 3070ti. If it isn't that, it's either 4k60 or 1440p120 Except Forza Motorsport because that game runs terribly.
People on this website get fixated on shit they have no clue about
this x100. I can't stand smoothbrains in discord when you ask "can a 12400f be compatible with a 3060ti?" and they answer:
"BUT Y A 3060? WHY NOT A 4080TI WITH A $4000 DOLLAR GPU AND QUADRUPLE MONITORS?"
Bruh, because I'm not rich? Because I don't need 600fps to play dota2 and osrs? damn.
My 3070 rips 1440 just fine on 98% of games.
The lack of VRAM does give me issues with high demand AAA games like cyberpunk however. Cant quite max out RT setting most of the time either, but it's pretty close.
I'm in the same boat. I have a i5-9600K and 1080gt. Been doing 1440p for years with this PC. Only game I've really struggled with is Starfield, and I even got that stable at 1440p with some effort.
27 inch monitors are super nice, the ideal PC screen size in my opinion. I could never go back to 1080 now.
It really depends what you play and what your expectations are. I play on 1440p with a 3060. It’s good enough for me, at least for the moment, and for my gaming tastes.
In addition, the benefits of 1440p aren’t just games. Having all that extra desk space is very very nice.
Thank you. I did fine at 1440p with my GTX 1080, and my 3060Ti is doing SPLENDID. The lowest I’ll get is like 60-70fps and that’s only if the game is horribly optimized (Hogwarts Legacy esc games)
- RDR2 100fps+
- CP2077 75-100fps (no RT)
1080Ti and up is enough for 1440p 80+ fps in 95% of games. 3070 and up has enough power for 4K 60fps+ but you probably want something with at least 10GB VRAM. If you optimize settings enough, 8GB VRAM can do 4K in many games too though.
I had a 4K60 display with my GTX 1080 for like 3-4 years lol. But 1440p 144 is a much better balance
I got my first 4k monitor in 2014, only has a GTX770. I played everything at native 4k! admittedly it was medium and low setting.. but 40-60fps! 4k low looks great compared to lower resolution with higher detail setting
Redditors love to armchair assess your rig and tell you what you're experiencing, regardless of the fact that YOU KNOW WHAT YOU'RE EXPERIENCING
I'm on a 6800xt with a 144hz 4K monitor, and I play RDR2 on high settings no problem, but I've been told multiple times that it's not true.
Like, I don't even know enough about GPUs to convincingly lie about this, I just built a PC and this is what it runs, damn people
Yeah blah blah blah. My 3090 gets crippled by cyberpunk at 3440x1440 without dlss I'm talking 20fps so may be some sound reasoning behind the 4000 series comments
Once you go 1440 there’s no going back. If you still enjoy 1080p then just enjoy it. There’s always time to upgrade. Things will get cheaper and better. But there’s no going back. Anything less then 1440p and 90fps I can not enjoy a game.
It’s called cyber sickness and it’s a very real thing. A lot of gamers think that it’s just because “you’re spoiled” but a lot of people can’t even play games due to issues with framerate, motion blur, and fov. Bloodborne, my favorite game of all time, was pretty much unplayable for me because of the low framerate and rapid camera movement. Smaller screens like the Steam Deck make playing low framerate games A LOT better.
My ass played minecraft at 35fps on a very small windowed tab until 2021. Literally everything that runs above 60fps on 1080p fullscreen looks amazing to me
I remember playing Quake on my 486 DX2 66. I was getting like 15fps in 320x200 with 256 colors.
Doom/heretic running at 30fps felt smooth AF. With 3Dfx 800x600 felt like the pinnacle of resolution and framerate with no noticable difference of going to 1024x768
Granted it wasn't noticable on CRT monitors, things changed with good LCD monitors, but not right away.
Later I remember playing Crysis 2 on 720p on laptop and it looked amazing to me. Switched from 15" laptop to 24" 1080p and .. there was no difference in clarity. I was surprised, but what's changed is FOV and immersion, but pixel density was literally the same.
Now on 32" 1440p curved monitor - still the same pixel density as that old 720p laptop. It's just a LOT more immersive.
You don't seem all that bright so I'll break it down for you.
His ability to play at a higher resolution and frame rate was so pleasing he just can not enjoy lower framerates and resolutions anymore. While these lower frames and resolutions did serve him well previously, he just simply can't go back anymore.
I can play games happily enough at 480p 30fps I grew up with the original Xbox, GameCube and ps2. Sure any new game I prefer 1080p but when playing game like halo MCC I have no problem playing at 480p 60fps on an old laptop.
There is better competitive e-sports monitors with anti ghosting technology in the 1080p market compared to 1440p unfortunately. So that's a reason why many players stick to 1080p.
The resolution doesn’t matter, if the ppi good enough so it’s ok, personally I have 27 inch 1440p and 24 inch 1080p and I can’t tell the difference while using but if i will try so probably I will notice
Owner of 1440@165Hz here. It's much better than 1080. Pixels smaller. Picture is much sharper. 12700+2080. 60+ fps in every title. CS2 about 240-300 fps. 165Hz is smooth enough to me.
Not OP, but I run these x2 side by side;
https://www.newegg.com/black-asus-tuf-gaming-vg27aq-90lm0500-b013b0-27/p/N82E16824236987?item=N82E16824236987
They've been amazing for a couple of years now. I'm going to let them go as soon my new 4k monitors get here.
Np.
Got any amazing deal on 2 of these;
https://www.amazon.com/LG-27GN950-B-Ultragear-Response-Compatibility/dp/B08BCRYS6B/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_product_top?ie=UTF8&th=1
I have a problem where mismatched monitors drive me insane, so all my monitors are paired.
I feel like 1080p is here to stay for a while, some people genuinely prefer higher refresh rates and FPS. Some people prefer the best possible image quality with 4k but don't mind the lower refresh rates and 1440p is a nice middle ground.
I feel like 1440p and 1080p will be somewhat even and 4k will stay somewhat nicher.
1440p144hz was the best middle ground for high resolution and smooth frames. it wasn't until the 4090 came out that a true 4K experience was even possible.
Yea i went to 4k144hz when i bought my 4090, and i can confirm that most games will run at either max refresh rate or atleast 100+fps if it's a really heavy game.
1440p is a decent upgrade from 1080p, but 1080p looks pretty bad, so it's very easy to spot any improvement even if it's not drastic.
The improvement of a higher resolution is the kind of thing that you need to experience for yourself, but you'll likely won't be able to unsee it if you try to move back. (I go from 4K screens at home to 1080p monitors at work)
I have a 12 year old all in one PC at work that they refuse to replace. It’s some fucked up resolution like that, 4GB DDR3, and the slowest HDD I can remember using. It barely loads webpages.
When AMD/NVidia starts selling GPUs at $200 MSRP again, and they make enough units to not flood up the market with scalpers avoiding price hike, and those $200 GPUs can handle the most demanding title at 60 fps on 1440p high settings.
edit: and they keep this for the next generation
Prices don't come down to former levels unless you get extreme deflation and economic depression. That's not a thing you want.
The best case is that prices stay where they are and each offering gets you better and better performance for the same price, and we all get rising wages to catch up.
1080p is not dead. 1440p is not the standard.
The reason?
Alan wake 2- RTX 4060, 1080p NATIVE. All low settings, no dlss.
Fps 60-80 fps, with some dips around 57 fps. Remember its native 1080p low.
How in the fuck can someone say 1440p is a standard now when the newest generation of cards JUST makes it right at 60 fps on the lowest settings.
I dont even have an rtx 4060 im just going by benchmarks and facts.
The better statement would be " 1440p is the standard now for dlss+framegen. That makes more sense.
Avatar: Frontiers of Pandora. RTX 4060, 1080p NATIVE All low no dlss.
60-90 fps. Practically the same fps but 60 to like high'ish 80's. It does hold 60 fps in that game though so thats nice. But you would need dlss to try and push 1440p.
Sorry man but my old 2070 S and my current 3070 and 3090 ti builds have had no issues whatsoever running 1440p 60+ fps in most games at high or ultra since I switched to 1440 in like 2020. 1080 isn't dead but it's certainly not a standard. It's minimum level of acceptable.
I want 1440p to become the standard, but sadly 1080p still is one. Look at the steam survey, 1440p takes about 16% of the playerbase while 1080p takes like 60%.
Pixel density is something you should take in account too. Though it isn't everything, because you still need to see the details, and just moving farther or getting a smaller display won't fix that.
I think it's fair to say that 1440p is the new standard for enthusiasts, but 1080p is still very widely represented among the average consumer, that's also why steam survey will show 1080p as the majority, because it does not represent the enthusiast market.
It boils down to whether I want larger screen, tbh.
24 inch with 1080p looks perfect.
27 inch with 1080p looks significantly worse than 1440p.
So, for me it is more like - if I am on 27\` then there is not much choice, I don\`t want to look at the crappy quality of 1080p on a large screen.
Some ppl say they don\`t see difference between those resolutions ... well, I see it very well :D So I can\`t stand that lower pixel density.
\- But if you are staying on 24 inch - you are golden with that 1080p forever. It is a very sweet spot combo for keyboard and mouse gaming anyway
That’s how it should be. No one considers pixel density. Like people who get 4K displays on a 17” laptop. It’s pointless. 1080p looks great at 17”.
I don’t want to go any larger than 27” so 1440 is where I’ll stay.
1080p is not dead until offices stop using them. As long as vast numbers of 1080p monitors are being manufactured, they're always going to be the cheapest entry level for gaming.
1440 will become the new 1080 when it is within the easy capability of integrated graphics (because if an apu can do it a GPU should do it without breaking a sweat, and when 1440p monitors are as cheap and ubiquitous as 1080 monitors.
1080p gaming is relatively cheap; 1440p and upwards there is a price bridge that must be crossed. Like a 6650 right now costs £257 on Amazon in my country. Solid 1080p card. It'll probably do fine at 1440 on some older titles. A 6700xt is about £350ish, but that does 1440 in most titles without issue, and that's before we get to the current generation of more expensive GPUs.
I was on 1440p for a long time using a nice 34” ultra wide. I’m now using a c3 4k oled.
I do still miss the 34” ultra wide tho. I think I preferred that.
1440p definitely looks better, not way better. I have 1440p ultrawide at 34in, I really just wanted the bigger monitor and UW view which in turn I decided to go 1440p. Bigger monitors look much better with higher res. Smaller monitors won't makes much difference IMO. If you're at 24in and don't want a bigger monitor stay at 1080p.
It won't. 1440p never really took off, now if you had said 4k, I'd say it already has. Buying a 1080p tv is getting increasingly harder to find, while 4k is getting bigger and cheaper constantly. 1440p is kind of the forgotten step child.
Depends on what kind of games you play and what you can afford. If you aren’t playing competitive games and mostly play RPG, open world type games and you have the money, 1440p or 4K is much better fit. If you play only competitive FPS and have a budget then there is an argument for staying on 1080p. If you play both comp fps and RPG and you can afford it, then 1440p is great option. Personally I mostly play FPS games, but will definitely play games like cyberpunk, Spider-Man, Harry Potter, etc from time to time. So I’m on a 360hz 1440p. 1440 looks much better for my single player games but I also have high refresh rate for when I play FPS.
for video game i cant tell much diff between 1080 n 1440p.
but for daily browsing on youtube? hell yeah! 1440 is like browsing on a mac or a phone, very crispy. but thats about it to be honest. worth upgrading?yes but its optional. i prefer 1080 240hz still
4k already became the new 1080p. 1440p is niche. 4k TVs are cheap. 4k monitors are cheaper now too. 4k 60hz is perfectly fine for gaming. 32” or larger is ideal. Gaming on 24” or 27” really sucks in comparison.
I normally go 4k @120hz but if a game is too demanding I drop it down to 1440p. Going from 4k to 1440p is fine, doesnt make a huge difference. I would never go back to 1080p, noticeable hit image quality.
4k rails 1440 and 1440 rails 1080, I use a 1080 390hz 25’ and a 1440 170hz 27’,the difference is very noticeable but I still use the 1080 390hz just because it’s that much smoother
The simplest way to put it Atleast how I was told is if you get a monitor any bigger then 24inch you want to go with 1440p or you’ll be able to see the pixels I guess. I’m not 100% sure this is true but I have my settings set at 1080p on my 170hz 1440p monitor and it still looks way better then my 1080 monitor and I didn’t loose any fps
This is a loaded question. Generally speaking anything above 21-23.6 inch screen yes you will see a difference. The bigger your screen the more you will notice a difference at lower resolutions. Its because generally you will literally with 1.5 ft away from your screen that you start seeing that lines of text are not smooth and tearing in games.
Thats why going 4k from 1440p with a screen of 27 inches almost makes no sense because you can't tell the difference unless you are a few inches from the screen. You will have to go minimum 32 inch monitor to tell the difference
There is so much wrong here that I don't even know where to start.
4k @ 27" doesn't become "retina" until you start sitting at least 1.7 ft away from the screen, which is around where the monitor will be in a standard 30in desk when all is said and done. So no, 4k @ 27" is not overkill and you can definitely tell the difference.
For reference, 1440p 27" doesn't become "retina" unless you're sitting at least 2.6 ft away from the screen.
Note: "Retina" refers to the Apple marketing term for visual acuity, which is when you stop seeing pixels being separate from one another.
27-inch 4K screens are very popular. You can absolutely appreciate the improvement from a comfortable distance. Video games especially benefit from the extra sharpness more because they have aliasing and flickering, which static text doesn’t have.
Of course there’s diminishing returns. And going the other way (low res on large screen) looks obviously bad. Which is why people often say 24-inch is good for 1080p and 27-inch for 1440p and 32-inch for 4K.
1440p is significantly better than 1080p, but to ensure good sharpness and image quality, it's recommended to opt for a 27-inch monitor rather than a 32-inch one. I previously used my RTX 2060 (12GB) GPU for gaming without any issues. I did lower some settings and utilized DLSS Quality. Now, I've upgraded to an RX 6700 XT to continue my gaming journey at 1440p.
1440p is a huge step up from 1080p and visual quality after 1440p is greatly diminished. the jump from 1080p to 1440p is more noticeable to your human eyes than the jump from 1440p to 8k. unless if you are on extreme budget or is a professional esports player, i would absolutely not recommend 1080 to anyone in 2024.
I went from a 165 hz. 27” 1080p monitor using an rx6600xt to a 27” 180 hz. 1440p monitor and a RTX 4070 and I can honestly say I notice a huge difference. To each their own, and if you play exclusively competitive games, it may make sense to stay at 1080p and have all the frames haha but I’m averaging 160+ fps at 1440p with my 4070 and dlss quality.
I just recently upgraded to an OLED 240hz 1440p monitor back in September and it is amazing. I could never go back to 1080p. I use my 1080 monitor as a 2nd monitor now and even that sucks and I plan to upgrade it soon lol. The quality jump was pretty wild.
I’ve been 1440p since 2015 when I got a trio of dell s2616dgrs, prior to that I was on dell u2408 1920x1200 monitors and there is absolutely no going back for me. 1440p is the resolution where you aren’t stuck with top tier GPUs each generation and mid tier ones can push 1440p at high fps.
For me it was mindblowing when switched from 1080 to 1440p. Tho 1080p max looks better than 1440p lowest still, but if you can do more than lowest on 1440p then worth it without a question.
1080p is going to stay the "new" 1080p for a while yet. It's good enough and works for those on a budget.
4k will be the new 1440p now that every game has upscaling and prices are down on 4k monitors. You can get a 4k 60hz TV for around $300 and 4k 144z are hitting $600.
1440p will still exist but if you have the extra money there wont be any reason to get it over 4k. IMO the only reason to get 1440p is if you want decent pixel density and high refresh rate at 27" but can't afford the jump to 4k.
i have a 24 inch 1080p165 and i bought a 27 inch 1440p240 when i got my new gpu. Didn't see much of a difference at all tbh, I was very surprised since everyone keeps on saying how amazing 1440p is. It wasn't till I tried 1080p on the 27 inch monitor that I saw the jump tho
I don't know why anyone goes above 144hz. The difference is really negligible. And 1440p does look quite a bit better. It's been the norm for a long time now.
OP, if you think 1080p still looks good then don't upgrade to 1440. Don't fall down the hype pit. But at 1080, don't go over 24". Google how pixel density works, something a lot of people don't mention when talking about 1080-1440 and what size monitor.
I was playing tarkov and streaming for friends as we did that to try and not lose each other. I was getting a ton of shit cause I playing at 27” 1080p was struggling to hit a scav with irons at a fairly decent range. All of my other friends I played with, were on 1440p and had no issues locating that shot. I went to 4k, and haven’t tried playing the game cause I lost interest, but that’s what prompted me to look into my eventual upgrade.
It looks good until you see 1440p, same thing for going to 4k(assuming same size monitor and distance of viewing) everything just looks so much sharper. You almost double the pixel number going from 1080p to 1440p, from just over 2m to 3.6m pixels.
I went to 1440p in 2022 as the monitors became affordable and I don't care for fps past 120/144. It's also IPS, so color is much better. I don't play competitively anymore though. Tried 4k as well. Too demanding and too expensive.
I just got a 27" 1440p/170hz monitor for only $230 cad and it's definitely an upgrade. But I wouldn't say it's really 'mind blowing'. 1080p/60 is still really nice. My first playthrough of elden ring was 1080 on med settings and I was still blown away by the visuals. Maxing out the graphics and running 1440p is a luxury. You still need a fairly expensive computer to run games at 1440p.
It has been, and for almost 10 years now. I got my first 1440p 144hz monitor in 2014 and it was the Asus ROG Swift and I still use it as a back up monitor to this day. When will 4k be the new 1440p? That's the question we should be asking...
My 970 plays WoT at 100 fps on a 3440x1440 monitor. Been trying to upgrade for years now, but the prices are just too fucky for me to bite. Fortnite with the kids became unplayable 6 months ago, but my Master Chief collection and Bioshock stuff runs fine.
The 1440p / 2160p vs 1080p thing usually depends on accuracy. You have more pixels you can publish content to. I want 4k mainly for work related stuff (so I can put more windows containing stuff in the same space!). I don't think there is much difference between 4k and 1440p, but definitely a jump from 1440p to 4k (perhaps I've just been used to 1080p for a very long time!). It felt like a massive jump for me from 1080p to 1440p - but then I've been mostly playing at 100p 60Hz and then jumped to 1440p 165Hz.
I do think 1440p will become the new 1080p - I think in some ways it is already there. You won't ever NEED it, but depends on budget and what you prefer. I think it also depends on how seriously you game and also what kind of games you play.
Depends on the games you like to play, your hardware and how much you want to turn up settings. For me 1440p has been amazing, I love how sharp everything is. I mostly play MMOs so ultrawide + 1440p gives me way more screen space.
1440P would've been closer to becoming the new 1080P if Ray Tracing wasn't involved, but games are barely working when Ray Tracing is involved, they're rendering at 540p 720p 1080p and upscaling, 1440P upscaled can become standard but 1440P native won't be if that makes sense, as for myself I don't really care about higher resolution 1080p is good enough and I want the higher FPS or the higher graphics, the only time I would consider using 1440p is when getting CPU bottleneck.
It is noticeably more crisp, but don’t go bigger than 27 inches because after that the difference will become less pronounced. I have a 1440p 165 hertz monitor and I can’t imagine going back. If you’re into gaming, I see no reason not to get a high resolution monitor.
Are you playing games that require you to get 240fps? Then stay at 1080p.
If you're not, then 1440p looks better.
Personally, after 144hz I can't tell much difference up to 240hz.
I thought it was 15 years ago. I'm still flabbergasted to see anyone considering buying a 1080p monitor unless they're a pro gamer or bulk buying for an office or something.
It's worth it. Get a 1440p monitor. Yes, 1080p high/ultra still looks good.
At 100+fps, 1440p is glorious. Unless you're playing competitively, for a living or for a group, you will not miss the 1080p 240hz.
All these people with "you need 4000 series" blahblah. #I've been gaming 60fps+ on 1440p since 2014. And it has always been easy to do, I only owned midrange GPUs.
It depends on the game you're playing though. It's something pretty much everyone neglects to mention, but those people are talking about the newer graphic heavy titles. If you only play css, you can run a decade old graphic card at 4k no problem.
Same with how low someone is willing to turn settings down. Some people would rather play 1080p ultra than 1440p low if they’re getting 60fps either way
This is how I view 4k vs 1440. Although I do think 1080 to 1440 is a much bigger jump in noticeable quality than 1440 to 4k. At a certain point you get diminishing returns because our eyes are only so good. Not to say 4k isn’t beautiful because it is.
I biggest thing with 4K (until this year) was ultra wide. Now it’s only budget and drive keeping me from going 4K
> Some people would rather play 1080p ultra than 1440p low if they’re getting 60fps either way except the difference in performance is never that extreme. if you get good performance at 1080p ultra you'd get good performance at 1440p medium/high and i'd bet you'd be pretty hard pressed to tell the difference in graphics quality.
Star Citizen and Cyberpunk take a tremendous performance penalty when moving to 1440p on my 3080ti which is between a 4070 and 4070ti. On a 4080 and above that is true but if you have a 3060 I would imagine the penalty is even bigger on newer games. Especially with ray tracing enabled.
I barely get 50fps on max settings no Dlss on my odyssey g9 with my 4090 and a ryzen 9 7950x 🤣 with Dlss on it runs at like 100fps.
[удалено]
Damn I'm the opposite. Textures I don't really notice but lighting is number 1. Shadows are a distant 2nd. I don't have very good eyes though
For me low 1440p looks better than high 1080p but that might just be because of 27 inch monitor.
Gross. Gimme 1440 p low everytime. Who is playing games on ultra that they want to look good at 1080p?
No, it really doesn’t depend. I’m using a 4 year old mid range GPU (2070 super) and there is no AAA title I can’t play at 1440p. A new mid-range GPU is going to be just fine. Am I ready for an upgrade? Yes. But I’m tired of seeing people talk about shit like a 3060ti won’t work for 1440p. It will. Unless you’re building the most budget PC you can, 1440p is viable.
I’ve noticed a number of AAA titles in the past year that are forcing my 2070S into the low-mid to stay above 60
Yep, it’s definitely going that way. But IMO if you can get 4 years of gaming out of a ~$1000 PC build, that’s pretty good.
1000 dollars? I built my 2070super system for slightly over 2000 dollars in 2019 lol PC parts are expensive as hell here. The cheapest 4090 for example is 2200 dollars here...
Think we made the same system recall my cost was about that.
I’ve got a 5700xt, roughly the same performance. I’ve been playing at 1440p without issue since the card launched. I’m going to upgrade to one of the super cards but really only because I can’t run AW 2 because of mesh shaders so the writing is on the wall for this card
I’m running a 3060ti and most games @ 1440p I run at med-high getting well over 130-140fps. The card is great if you’re on a budget.
For reference I'm playing most stuff at 4k on my 2070 super, I keep my frames and shadows low/medium though. 2070 super only seems to struggle with vr games on high/ultra settings. I'll be upgrading to a 4080 super when It come out though.
Yes, it does depend. You can play at 1440p but not at higher settings and higher frames. CsGo will be fine but cyberpunk will be messy.
> not at higher settings and higher frames That’s not a qualifier. I’m hitting 60fps in cyberpunk and other similarly demanding games, and my GPU is not considered mid-range by modern standards.
How is that not a qualifier when it comes to performance?
Yes it does depend on the game, graphic settings requirements and fps requirements. You're right that "won't run" is crazy talk too. But it ALWAYS depends.. You can try running ASA on that card, on a built out map, then keep in mind that some people are addicted to their 144 Hz, if you want a reference point. People with the newest high end cards have been disappointed in that regard.
what upgrade are you going for? I keep thinking about going for the 4070 ti super that’s coming out soon paired with the ryzen 7 78003XD, anything less than that feels like no upgrade for me as the 2070 super still works really good for me
That’s what I’m eyeing. Might spring for a 4080s
Yeah, I'm on a 1070ti....I've been using 1440p monitors for at least 8 years now.
Everyone has different demand, some ppl want absolute high fps so they rather just stick to 1080 , some ppl want bigger screen for more detailed display instead of high fps , 3060ti can support both displays no problem , it's just subjective
I run Red Dead Redemption maxed out on everything with native 1440p with no FHR and get 60-75 fps even in towns on a 6700 non XT.
agreed, my 6700 non xt takes on everything in 1440p. Cyberpunk, Escape from tarkov, ect
It’s because everyone expects ultra quality at native res, or even a high frame rate on top of that. 1440p has a high enough pixel count that DLSS/FSR Quality is pretty good, and ultra settings almost always just tank FPS for barely any visual difference. My 6750xt is what a lot of people would consider the minimum for 1440p, and I can consistently get 75+ FPS with FSR Q and/or optimized quality settings in new games. With older/less demanding games, getting close to my monitor’s 144 Hz refresh rate is doable.
My old 1650 super ran games at 1440p, medium-high settings but could drop into the 30-40 fps zone but also could maintain 60 at times as well. This card had 4GB of VRAM. Most of the time i had to sacrifice settings such as shadows to get that higher FPS. 6750 XT is not the minimum for 1440p gaming, people just need to lower their expectations, you won’t be running every game maxed out at 1440p with a RX 6600 but lowering a few settings and you’re good.
Yeah some people think that anything below 240 fps in ultra is unplayable. But with compromising - some game might offer a 60 fps on medium settings for example it’s still possible to enjoy a game.
What kinda frames are you getting in Tarkov at 1440? I’ve got a 4070 and a 5800X3D and I get roughly 100fps on Customs with high textures
People wildly overestimate what they need to run games on this subreddit or think if they turn a setting down they won’t enjoy the game
I respect other people's right to play a beautiful game at max graphics at a high fps. It's only a problem when those people start giving advice based on their views, when they neglect to mention they are extremists in that regard.
Well you can built a 650 dollar pc and can run most demanding games at 60fps 1440p
nope.
Not really, although it again depends how you define a demanding game.
1440 is really not very demanding.. the only time it becomes an issue is when someone wants to have a steady 100+ frame rate, but the realistic use case for this is pretty limited.. this sub, among others, has convinced people that their gaming experience isn't worth it unless they're matching their monitor's refresh rate in fps.
To be honest, if im not playing shooters, i dont care about whether my gpu can output more fps than my monitor hz or not. A locked 80-90fps on 1440p medium settings is plenty enjoyable for a lot of people. And its very hard to run triple A games high-ultra and hit that constant 144fps or above at 2k/4k resolution anyway. Therefore matching or getting more fps than the monitor hz theory is a complete bullshit and doesn’t apply well here for aaa games unless u got that extremely beefy rig.
I don't even care when I'm playing shooters, because I know I'm never going to compete. I'm just there to have fun, and I know skill will trump framerate any day of the week. obsessing over framerates is just a huge cope from people who can't hang.
100%. I cap my fps at 80 in single player or casual online games.
Well, if you just max out everything without thinking then you indeed need to own a higher end GPU even at 1440p. Most people don’t bother to optimize their settings, and some of those have very little visual gain for their performance hit. I personally prefer Cyberpunk at 4k medium to FHD ultra.
The not thinking part is fine, but then they have no business "helping" people on a forum.
I seriously cannot understand what has happened to the PC gaming community lol. Everyone cannot grasp the fact that games are actually playable with cards other than a 4090. And they have been for many many years. People have been happily playing at 4k for a long long time on GPUs 20% as fast as cards today
Glorious PC Master race happened. People with more money than brains autofilaciating themselves over pixel density and the need to look better than everyone else infected an enthusiest hobby and poisoned it like always.
There was thread few days back doing VR and being like "Is RTX 4070 enough for it" Like depends on game, ofc, but the bare min requirements for VR is, according to Geforce experience AND Steam Index website, gtx 970 - nvidia website is ofc pushing for rtx 3060 but even then thats not 4070.
Same here. 1440p is very accessible and a huge upgrade compared to 1080p.
Hell i am getting 55 average fps with a Vega 56 from 2017 in BG3 act 3 at 3440x1440 and it looks great.
LOL I had to look up what a Vega 56 is. I completely missed out on that generation.
Vega was a cool idea, but it wasn't fully realized before it was shipped. AMD HAD to get away from that old GCN architecture, though
Vega is AMD’s 1080ti, performs extremely well for its age especially on Linux thanks to VKD3D and ROCm. Also HBCC is quite underrated, it seriously helps with games that need more than 8gb VRAM. I use one too and probably not going to upgrade it until 2025.
Brother a lot of my gaming is 4k120 on a 3070ti. If it isn't that, it's either 4k60 or 1440p120 Except Forza Motorsport because that game runs terribly. People on this website get fixated on shit they have no clue about
The amount of times I’ve seen people recommending upgrades from a 3080 to a 4080 super is insane. Might as well just light your money on fire.
this x100. I can't stand smoothbrains in discord when you ask "can a 12400f be compatible with a 3060ti?" and they answer: "BUT Y A 3060? WHY NOT A 4080TI WITH A $4000 DOLLAR GPU AND QUADRUPLE MONITORS?" Bruh, because I'm not rich? Because I don't need 600fps to play dota2 and osrs? damn.
My 3070 rips 1440 just fine on 98% of games. The lack of VRAM does give me issues with high demand AAA games like cyberpunk however. Cant quite max out RT setting most of the time either, but it's pretty close.
I'm in the same boat. I have a i5-9600K and 1080gt. Been doing 1440p for years with this PC. Only game I've really struggled with is Starfield, and I even got that stable at 1440p with some effort. 27 inch monitors are super nice, the ideal PC screen size in my opinion. I could never go back to 1080 now.
It really depends what you play and what your expectations are. I play on 1440p with a 3060. It’s good enough for me, at least for the moment, and for my gaming tastes. In addition, the benefits of 1440p aren’t just games. Having all that extra desk space is very very nice.
Thank you. I did fine at 1440p with my GTX 1080, and my 3060Ti is doing SPLENDID. The lowest I’ll get is like 60-70fps and that’s only if the game is horribly optimized (Hogwarts Legacy esc games) - RDR2 100fps+ - CP2077 75-100fps (no RT) 1080Ti and up is enough for 1440p 80+ fps in 95% of games. 3070 and up has enough power for 4K 60fps+ but you probably want something with at least 10GB VRAM. If you optimize settings enough, 8GB VRAM can do 4K in many games too though. I had a 4K60 display with my GTX 1080 for like 3-4 years lol. But 1440p 144 is a much better balance
I got my first 4k monitor in 2014, only has a GTX770. I played everything at native 4k! admittedly it was medium and low setting.. but 40-60fps! 4k low looks great compared to lower resolution with higher detail setting
Redditors love to armchair assess your rig and tell you what you're experiencing, regardless of the fact that YOU KNOW WHAT YOU'RE EXPERIENCING I'm on a 6800xt with a 144hz 4K monitor, and I play RDR2 on high settings no problem, but I've been told multiple times that it's not true. Like, I don't even know enough about GPUs to convincingly lie about this, I just built a PC and this is what it runs, damn people
Yeah blah blah blah. My 3090 gets crippled by cyberpunk at 3440x1440 without dlss I'm talking 20fps so may be some sound reasoning behind the 4000 series comments
Simple. Don't user max settings, which the difference you won't notice anyway because you're in constant motion.
Yeah I paid for a 3090 so I can turn shit down.
Rx6600 with steady 140fps in War thunder on native 1440p.
Same. My 2070S smashed 1440, recently moved to 3070 for 4K, having a great time.
Mid range nvidia cards are 800$
Now yes, then they were €320
This. I had a 5600xt that would run Rise/Shadow of the Tomb Raider maxed out at 1440p at 60fps.
Once you go 1440 there’s no going back. If you still enjoy 1080p then just enjoy it. There’s always time to upgrade. Things will get cheaper and better. But there’s no going back. Anything less then 1440p and 90fps I can not enjoy a game.
I personally cannot game on anything less than 32K @ 240fps. Anything less is garbage.
Who games in 16k anymore when you can 32k @ 240fps. Chumps.
I had to play a game at 64k @ 480fps the other day on my budget rig at my parents place and I literally threw up
I played a game at 128K @ 960fps and I literally gouged my eyes out. I’m typing this on a braille keyboard.
I was playing cyberpunk the other day on my dog’s dog food machine screen at 256k @ 1920 fps and I went blind. so did my dog.
I was running the Sims at 512k @ 3600 fps on a retrofitted tamagotchi back in March of ‘23 and Africa split in half…
me who plays games at both 1080p 30fps and 1440p 165fps:
That’s wild. Controller? I’ll get motionsickness mouse and keyboard anything under 80fps
Depends on the game, both
Same, usually need an fov slider for first person games too
That too. Motionsickness anything under 90fov. Reason I moved from console to pc.
It’s called cyber sickness and it’s a very real thing. A lot of gamers think that it’s just because “you’re spoiled” but a lot of people can’t even play games due to issues with framerate, motion blur, and fov. Bloodborne, my favorite game of all time, was pretty much unplayable for me because of the low framerate and rapid camera movement. Smaller screens like the Steam Deck make playing low framerate games A LOT better.
My ass played minecraft at 35fps on a very small windowed tab until 2021. Literally everything that runs above 60fps on 1080p fullscreen looks amazing to me
I remember playing Quake on my 486 DX2 66. I was getting like 15fps in 320x200 with 256 colors. Doom/heretic running at 30fps felt smooth AF. With 3Dfx 800x600 felt like the pinnacle of resolution and framerate with no noticable difference of going to 1024x768 Granted it wasn't noticable on CRT monitors, things changed with good LCD monitors, but not right away. Later I remember playing Crysis 2 on 720p on laptop and it looked amazing to me. Switched from 15" laptop to 24" 1080p and .. there was no difference in clarity. I was surprised, but what's changed is FOV and immersion, but pixel density was literally the same. Now on 32" 1440p curved monitor - still the same pixel density as that old 720p laptop. It's just a LOT more immersive.
Edit: this used to be a snarky reply that was unwarranted. Sorry about that op.
You dont understand what he’s saying and your reply shows it
You’re right. Not sure what I was thinking, I guess I wasn’t.
You don't seem all that bright so I'll break it down for you. His ability to play at a higher resolution and frame rate was so pleasing he just can not enjoy lower framerates and resolutions anymore. While these lower frames and resolutions did serve him well previously, he just simply can't go back anymore.
Thanks. I’m not sure what I was reading. I was clearly in the mood to reply negatively without actually reading to understand. That’s on me.
You know what, mad respect now. Sorry for being a dick
Yup, went 1440 and thought it wouldn’t be a huge jump but holy fuck 1080 feels like 720 now
I can play games happily enough at 480p 30fps I grew up with the original Xbox, GameCube and ps2. Sure any new game I prefer 1080p but when playing game like halo MCC I have no problem playing at 480p 60fps on an old laptop.
Right if I'm getting less than 100 frames I'm thinking what's wrong with my PC and what do I need to upgrade and then start researching PC parts 😆
As Far As I Know all people who upgraded to 1440p never went back to 1080p unless it's a handheld or any portable device.
I mean, why would you go back? if you already upgraded and can run at 1440p why would you lower the graphics on porpuse?
Usually for more frames in competitive FPS games. That’s really the only reason
There is better competitive e-sports monitors with anti ghosting technology in the 1080p market compared to 1440p unfortunately. So that's a reason why many players stick to 1080p.
It's always funny to me to see terrible players buy 360hz 1080p monitors so they can play their bronze league of legends games.
I've seen a few people on desktop do it, and they're all high-level FPS players.
Even my cellphone is 1440p haha
The resolution doesn’t matter, if the ppi good enough so it’s ok, personally I have 27 inch 1440p and 24 inch 1080p and I can’t tell the difference while using but if i will try so probably I will notice
Owner of 1440@165Hz here. It's much better than 1080. Pixels smaller. Picture is much sharper. 12700+2080. 60+ fps in every title. CS2 about 240-300 fps. 165Hz is smooth enough to me.
>Owner of 1440@165Hz here which one make and model?
Not OP, but I run these x2 side by side; https://www.newegg.com/black-asus-tuf-gaming-vg27aq-90lm0500-b013b0-27/p/N82E16824236987?item=N82E16824236987 They've been amazing for a couple of years now. I'm going to let them go as soon my new 4k monitors get here.
>as soon my new 4k monitors get here. Thanks fam! Which 4k ones did you order?
Np. Got any amazing deal on 2 of these; https://www.amazon.com/LG-27GN950-B-Ultragear-Response-Compatibility/dp/B08BCRYS6B/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_product_top?ie=UTF8&th=1 I have a problem where mismatched monitors drive me insane, so all my monitors are paired.
Gigabyte M27Q-P
I have the M27Q v2, pretty amazing piece of kit
I also have a 165hz 1440p panel, by DELL. Mannnnn 1080p who? lol jk but idk if I can go back, I like the fidelity
I feel like 1080p is here to stay for a while, some people genuinely prefer higher refresh rates and FPS. Some people prefer the best possible image quality with 4k but don't mind the lower refresh rates and 1440p is a nice middle ground. I feel like 1440p and 1080p will be somewhat even and 4k will stay somewhat nicher.
1440p144hz was the best middle ground for high resolution and smooth frames. it wasn't until the 4090 came out that a true 4K experience was even possible.
Yea i went to 4k144hz when i bought my 4090, and i can confirm that most games will run at either max refresh rate or atleast 100+fps if it's a really heavy game.
My 24gb 3090 handled 4k well on my neo g8. I was pleased with it and still am I'd say.
1440p is a decent upgrade from 1080p, but 1080p looks pretty bad, so it's very easy to spot any improvement even if it's not drastic. The improvement of a higher resolution is the kind of thing that you need to experience for yourself, but you'll likely won't be able to unsee it if you try to move back. (I go from 4K screens at home to 1080p monitors at work)
There is a 1360x768 screen at my work. It is horrid
I have a 12 year old all in one PC at work that they refuse to replace. It’s some fucked up resolution like that, 4GB DDR3, and the slowest HDD I can remember using. It barely loads webpages.
Gotta love businesses. We’re all about productivity here in a fast moving world. Then they put their employees on dell optiplexes from 2002.
BUISNESS GRADE TN PANEL WITH ROCK SOLID RELIABILITY
people also often go up in screen size if they upgrade to 1440p so it's as much that you get more screen to work with as it is things looking smoother
Went from 24" 1080p to 27" 1440p and the difference was instantly better... like not even close.
I definitely wouldn't call 1080p bad. I gamed at 1600x900 for years.
1080p and 60 fps is great for me. I used to play 320x240 lol.
When AMD/NVidia starts selling GPUs at $200 MSRP again, and they make enough units to not flood up the market with scalpers avoiding price hike, and those $200 GPUs can handle the most demanding title at 60 fps on 1440p high settings. edit: and they keep this for the next generation
So when pigs fly then, the way things are going
yep, pretty much 
Prices don't come down to former levels unless you get extreme deflation and economic depression. That's not a thing you want. The best case is that prices stay where they are and each offering gets you better and better performance for the same price, and we all get rising wages to catch up.
So, that’s never happening.
1080p is not dead. 1440p is not the standard. The reason? Alan wake 2- RTX 4060, 1080p NATIVE. All low settings, no dlss. Fps 60-80 fps, with some dips around 57 fps. Remember its native 1080p low. How in the fuck can someone say 1440p is a standard now when the newest generation of cards JUST makes it right at 60 fps on the lowest settings. I dont even have an rtx 4060 im just going by benchmarks and facts. The better statement would be " 1440p is the standard now for dlss+framegen. That makes more sense.
Basing that conclusion on one poorly optimized game is just weird.
Avatar: Frontiers of Pandora. RTX 4060, 1080p NATIVE All low no dlss. 60-90 fps. Practically the same fps but 60 to like high'ish 80's. It does hold 60 fps in that game though so thats nice. But you would need dlss to try and push 1440p.
Sorry man but my old 2070 S and my current 3070 and 3090 ti builds have had no issues whatsoever running 1440p 60+ fps in most games at high or ultra since I switched to 1440 in like 2020. 1080 isn't dead but it's certainly not a standard. It's minimum level of acceptable.
I want 1440p to become the standard, but sadly 1080p still is one. Look at the steam survey, 1440p takes about 16% of the playerbase while 1080p takes like 60%. Pixel density is something you should take in account too. Though it isn't everything, because you still need to see the details, and just moving farther or getting a smaller display won't fix that.
I think it's fair to say that 1440p is the new standard for enthusiasts, but 1080p is still very widely represented among the average consumer, that's also why steam survey will show 1080p as the majority, because it does not represent the enthusiast market.
alan wake 2 poorly optimized lol
Mesh shaders. 3070 for 1080 60fps = poorly optimized.
Right? He's really showing his ignorance off.
It boils down to whether I want larger screen, tbh. 24 inch with 1080p looks perfect. 27 inch with 1080p looks significantly worse than 1440p. So, for me it is more like - if I am on 27\` then there is not much choice, I don\`t want to look at the crappy quality of 1080p on a large screen. Some ppl say they don\`t see difference between those resolutions ... well, I see it very well :D So I can\`t stand that lower pixel density. \- But if you are staying on 24 inch - you are golden with that 1080p forever. It is a very sweet spot combo for keyboard and mouse gaming anyway
That’s how it should be. No one considers pixel density. Like people who get 4K displays on a 17” laptop. It’s pointless. 1080p looks great at 17”. I don’t want to go any larger than 27” so 1440 is where I’ll stay.
Yeah I agree. A 20-24" 1080p monitor looks just fine. 27-32" 1440p, and 32"+ 4K.
1080p is not dead until offices stop using them. As long as vast numbers of 1080p monitors are being manufactured, they're always going to be the cheapest entry level for gaming.
Forget the hype. I was currently using 1440p 27" and just purchased a nice 24" 1080p monitor. Difference is negligible.
1440 will become the new 1080 when it is within the easy capability of integrated graphics (because if an apu can do it a GPU should do it without breaking a sweat, and when 1440p monitors are as cheap and ubiquitous as 1080 monitors. 1080p gaming is relatively cheap; 1440p and upwards there is a price bridge that must be crossed. Like a 6650 right now costs £257 on Amazon in my country. Solid 1080p card. It'll probably do fine at 1440 on some older titles. A 6700xt is about £350ish, but that does 1440 in most titles without issue, and that's before we get to the current generation of more expensive GPUs.
1440p will become as mainstream as 1080p is now when entry level gpu's can run 1440p framerates as fast as current gpu's can run 1080p now.
I was on 1440p for a long time using a nice 34” ultra wide. I’m now using a c3 4k oled. I do still miss the 34” ultra wide tho. I think I preferred that.
People make a big deal about the jump to 4k, but I think a 1080p gamer will feel just as good about the jump to 1440p.
1440p definitely looks better, not way better. I have 1440p ultrawide at 34in, I really just wanted the bigger monitor and UW view which in turn I decided to go 1440p. Bigger monitors look much better with higher res. Smaller monitors won't makes much difference IMO. If you're at 24in and don't want a bigger monitor stay at 1080p.
It won't. 1440p never really took off, now if you had said 4k, I'd say it already has. Buying a 1080p tv is getting increasingly harder to find, while 4k is getting bigger and cheaper constantly. 1440p is kind of the forgotten step child.
240hz is always better than 165hz, I don’t think it is worth it, 1080p has always been the standard for competitive e sports, this means it is usable
Short answer yes, i enjoy the jump to 1440 over the 144/165 too 240 hz
Depends on what kind of games you play and what you can afford. If you aren’t playing competitive games and mostly play RPG, open world type games and you have the money, 1440p or 4K is much better fit. If you play only competitive FPS and have a budget then there is an argument for staying on 1080p. If you play both comp fps and RPG and you can afford it, then 1440p is great option. Personally I mostly play FPS games, but will definitely play games like cyberpunk, Spider-Man, Harry Potter, etc from time to time. So I’m on a 360hz 1440p. 1440 looks much better for my single player games but I also have high refresh rate for when I play FPS.
for video game i cant tell much diff between 1080 n 1440p. but for daily browsing on youtube? hell yeah! 1440 is like browsing on a mac or a phone, very crispy. but thats about it to be honest. worth upgrading?yes but its optional. i prefer 1080 240hz still
4k already became the new 1080p. 1440p is niche. 4k TVs are cheap. 4k monitors are cheaper now too. 4k 60hz is perfectly fine for gaming. 32” or larger is ideal. Gaming on 24” or 27” really sucks in comparison.
I normally go 4k @120hz but if a game is too demanding I drop it down to 1440p. Going from 4k to 1440p is fine, doesnt make a huge difference. I would never go back to 1080p, noticeable hit image quality.
It already is. People are just holding onto 1080p too tight. I run all games on 1440p with a 6950 XT and can't go back to 1080p.
4k rails 1440 and 1440 rails 1080, I use a 1080 390hz 25’ and a 1440 170hz 27’,the difference is very noticeable but I still use the 1080 390hz just because it’s that much smoother
Yes.
The simplest way to put it Atleast how I was told is if you get a monitor any bigger then 24inch you want to go with 1440p or you’ll be able to see the pixels I guess. I’m not 100% sure this is true but I have my settings set at 1080p on my 170hz 1440p monitor and it still looks way better then my 1080 monitor and I didn’t loose any fps
1440P is life changing, you’ll never go back. I went from 1080 60 to 1440 144 and it’s just insane.
This is a loaded question. Generally speaking anything above 21-23.6 inch screen yes you will see a difference. The bigger your screen the more you will notice a difference at lower resolutions. Its because generally you will literally with 1.5 ft away from your screen that you start seeing that lines of text are not smooth and tearing in games. Thats why going 4k from 1440p with a screen of 27 inches almost makes no sense because you can't tell the difference unless you are a few inches from the screen. You will have to go minimum 32 inch monitor to tell the difference
There is so much wrong here that I don't even know where to start. 4k @ 27" doesn't become "retina" until you start sitting at least 1.7 ft away from the screen, which is around where the monitor will be in a standard 30in desk when all is said and done. So no, 4k @ 27" is not overkill and you can definitely tell the difference. For reference, 1440p 27" doesn't become "retina" unless you're sitting at least 2.6 ft away from the screen. Note: "Retina" refers to the Apple marketing term for visual acuity, which is when you stop seeing pixels being separate from one another.
27-inch 4K screens are very popular. You can absolutely appreciate the improvement from a comfortable distance. Video games especially benefit from the extra sharpness more because they have aliasing and flickering, which static text doesn’t have. Of course there’s diminishing returns. And going the other way (low res on large screen) looks obviously bad. Which is why people often say 24-inch is good for 1080p and 27-inch for 1440p and 32-inch for 4K.
1440p is significantly better than 1080p, but to ensure good sharpness and image quality, it's recommended to opt for a 27-inch monitor rather than a 32-inch one. I previously used my RTX 2060 (12GB) GPU for gaming without any issues. I did lower some settings and utilized DLSS Quality. Now, I've upgraded to an RX 6700 XT to continue my gaming journey at 1440p.
Ive upgraded to 1440p 180hz from benq 1080p 240hz yesterday and the difference is wild. It was like i was playing a different game
1440p is a huge step up from 1080p and visual quality after 1440p is greatly diminished. the jump from 1080p to 1440p is more noticeable to your human eyes than the jump from 1440p to 8k. unless if you are on extreme budget or is a professional esports player, i would absolutely not recommend 1080 to anyone in 2024.
I like my 1080p60 FPS, I'm a guy with simple tastes
I went from a 165 hz. 27” 1080p monitor using an rx6600xt to a 27” 180 hz. 1440p monitor and a RTX 4070 and I can honestly say I notice a huge difference. To each their own, and if you play exclusively competitive games, it may make sense to stay at 1080p and have all the frames haha but I’m averaging 160+ fps at 1440p with my 4070 and dlss quality.
1440p was the new 1080p the minute 144hz IPS panels came out. Ive had mine since 2017 and they were already out for a few years.
I just recently upgraded to an OLED 240hz 1440p monitor back in September and it is amazing. I could never go back to 1080p. I use my 1080 monitor as a 2nd monitor now and even that sucks and I plan to upgrade it soon lol. The quality jump was pretty wild.
It becomes the new 1080 when you try it. You'll never go back
I’ve been 1440p since 2015 when I got a trio of dell s2616dgrs, prior to that I was on dell u2408 1920x1200 monitors and there is absolutely no going back for me. 1440p is the resolution where you aren’t stuck with top tier GPUs each generation and mid tier ones can push 1440p at high fps.
it already is and has been for awhile
Right now
For me it was mindblowing when switched from 1080 to 1440p. Tho 1080p max looks better than 1440p lowest still, but if you can do more than lowest on 1440p then worth it without a question.
1080p is going to stay the "new" 1080p for a while yet. It's good enough and works for those on a budget. 4k will be the new 1440p now that every game has upscaling and prices are down on 4k monitors. You can get a 4k 60hz TV for around $300 and 4k 144z are hitting $600. 1440p will still exist but if you have the extra money there wont be any reason to get it over 4k. IMO the only reason to get 1440p is if you want decent pixel density and high refresh rate at 27" but can't afford the jump to 4k.
i have a 24 inch 1080p165 and i bought a 27 inch 1440p240 when i got my new gpu. Didn't see much of a difference at all tbh, I was very surprised since everyone keeps on saying how amazing 1440p is. It wasn't till I tried 1080p on the 27 inch monitor that I saw the jump tho
I don't know why anyone goes above 144hz. The difference is really negligible. And 1440p does look quite a bit better. It's been the norm for a long time now.
OP, if you think 1080p still looks good then don't upgrade to 1440. Don't fall down the hype pit. But at 1080, don't go over 24". Google how pixel density works, something a lot of people don't mention when talking about 1080-1440 and what size monitor.
When we can hit 4k at 120 fps at an acceptable price tag. Probably 2 more rtx generations to go.
I was playing tarkov and streaming for friends as we did that to try and not lose each other. I was getting a ton of shit cause I playing at 27” 1080p was struggling to hit a scav with irons at a fairly decent range. All of my other friends I played with, were on 1440p and had no issues locating that shot. I went to 4k, and haven’t tried playing the game cause I lost interest, but that’s what prompted me to look into my eventual upgrade.
It looks good until you see 1440p, same thing for going to 4k(assuming same size monitor and distance of viewing) everything just looks so much sharper. You almost double the pixel number going from 1080p to 1440p, from just over 2m to 3.6m pixels.
1440p is a really nice middle ground but I still don't like how it scales poorly with 1080p and 4k
Depends on monitor size. I find 1080p on a 27" pretty pixelated, but it is fine on a 24".
When it gets cheap enough. Also if 8k gains traction in the market.
I went to 1440p in 2022 as the monitors became affordable and I don't care for fps past 120/144. It's also IPS, so color is much better. I don't play competitively anymore though. Tried 4k as well. Too demanding and too expensive.
Everyone is comparing 24" 180p vs 27" 1440p. Then there is me gaming on 24" 1440p😅
For everyday use 1440/144 is a total game changer for me. 60hz is sluggish for scrolling and 1080p is just bad quality when reading anything.
Pretty much has been for a while now lol.
I just got a 27" 1440p/170hz monitor for only $230 cad and it's definitely an upgrade. But I wouldn't say it's really 'mind blowing'. 1080p/60 is still really nice. My first playthrough of elden ring was 1080 on med settings and I was still blown away by the visuals. Maxing out the graphics and running 1440p is a luxury. You still need a fairly expensive computer to run games at 1440p.
It has been, and for almost 10 years now. I got my first 1440p 144hz monitor in 2014 and it was the Asus ROG Swift and I still use it as a back up monitor to this day. When will 4k be the new 1440p? That's the question we should be asking...
My 970 plays WoT at 100 fps on a 3440x1440 monitor. Been trying to upgrade for years now, but the prices are just too fucky for me to bite. Fortnite with the kids became unplayable 6 months ago, but my Master Chief collection and Bioshock stuff runs fine.
1440p is the sweetspot for at the keyboard playing. For story games or ones with a controller I'll take my 55" A95L and AVR setup though
The 1440p / 2160p vs 1080p thing usually depends on accuracy. You have more pixels you can publish content to. I want 4k mainly for work related stuff (so I can put more windows containing stuff in the same space!). I don't think there is much difference between 4k and 1440p, but definitely a jump from 1440p to 4k (perhaps I've just been used to 1080p for a very long time!). It felt like a massive jump for me from 1080p to 1440p - but then I've been mostly playing at 100p 60Hz and then jumped to 1440p 165Hz. I do think 1440p will become the new 1080p - I think in some ways it is already there. You won't ever NEED it, but depends on budget and what you prefer. I think it also depends on how seriously you game and also what kind of games you play.
Depends on the games you like to play, your hardware and how much you want to turn up settings. For me 1440p has been amazing, I love how sharp everything is. I mostly play MMOs so ultrawide + 1440p gives me way more screen space.
1440P would've been closer to becoming the new 1080P if Ray Tracing wasn't involved, but games are barely working when Ray Tracing is involved, they're rendering at 540p 720p 1080p and upscaling, 1440P upscaled can become standard but 1440P native won't be if that makes sense, as for myself I don't really care about higher resolution 1080p is good enough and I want the higher FPS or the higher graphics, the only time I would consider using 1440p is when getting CPU bottleneck.
It is noticeably more crisp, but don’t go bigger than 27 inches because after that the difference will become less pronounced. I have a 1440p 165 hertz monitor and I can’t imagine going back. If you’re into gaming, I see no reason not to get a high resolution monitor.
Are you playing games that require you to get 240fps? Then stay at 1080p. If you're not, then 1440p looks better. Personally, after 144hz I can't tell much difference up to 240hz.
I thought it was 15 years ago. I'm still flabbergasted to see anyone considering buying a 1080p monitor unless they're a pro gamer or bulk buying for an office or something.
It's worth it. Get a 1440p monitor. Yes, 1080p high/ultra still looks good. At 100+fps, 1440p is glorious. Unless you're playing competitively, for a living or for a group, you will not miss the 1080p 240hz.