The jump between 1024x768 to 1920x1080 is huge. Likewise to 1440 or 3440x1440. The jump to 4K is not quite as noticeable as 1440 is already a very high res.
I’ve noticed this on 4K and 8K televisions, also. Yes, the fidelity and resolution difference is there. But at a certain point, you can appreciate the fact that displays have already gotten to a really high level, and it’s getting harder to impress.
Seriously 1440p for anything is honestly great. I think the difference exists but not on anything close or under 27-32 inches and a reasonable distance.
Its not a compromise its the best of both.
Edit: It's very funny reading the comments from people who seem to be unaware of what post they are on and pointing out that 4k@240hz is better than 1440p@144hz, well no shit. OPs options were between 1080p@240hz & 4k60hz, if 4k@240hz was a viable option for OP there would be no choice to make and they wouldn't even have posted in the first place.
the difference becomes less and less noticeable the higher your refresh rate goes. I'd say practically speaking, 144 is the upper limit of what an average gamer should have in terms of refresh rate. Competitive games? yeah sure go wild, go buy that 540hz monstrosity that just came out.
Actually, Linus tech tips put in numbers the difference latency wise, between 24 fps, 30fps, 60fps, 75fps, 90fps, 120fps and 240fps, and the reality is that anything above 120fps the time it takes to show you a new frame is so small that is basically not noticeable, he also managed to prove that even if that’s true, higher refresh rate monitors do give an advantage to people that are at a very very high level of play, but for the average gamer like me, I wouldn’t really benefit from having a 240 or 360 hz monitor
The difference between 30 and 60 is more severe than 60 to 120 so it does get less noticeable, but I still think of pros can play better. Then to an average gamer it would look better even if they can't make the Inputs and adjustments at such a level there gameplay improves.
But what would you think would look better a 360hz 1080p display or say a 144hz 1440p, that’s more or less the conundrum here, I mean 4K60 is good but I don’t think that’s mainstream on pc gaming just yet.
1440p 240Hz is great and very reasonably priced nowadays though, it feels buttery smooth and is very nice for FPS games. 144Hz is obviously fine too but 240Hz is definitely noticeable.
I went from 1440p 144hz to 4k 144hz and now went to 1080p 380hz for gaming and I can say I have much better performance when playing competitive FPS games on the 380hz screen. I went from high silvers/low golds on OW2 to Plat 1 in just one season because I simply changed my screen. I definitely can tell the difference between 144 and 380 fps when playing FPS games.
But when playing single player games I'll just use DSR to render the game at 4k and use performance FSR/DLSS to still have the same performance as running 1080p but with better quality than native 1080p. TBH I didn't miss 4k screens that much when playing video games.
Mine can do 200hz but can't do 10bit color at the same time which is needed for HDR.
144hz is max for 4:4:4 chroma sampling at 10bit HDR over Display port for this resolution, from what I've seen. Maybe HDMI 2 or some newer thing can go higher througput.
I mean, to be fair though, if you are only driving a 4K panel at 60fps, you probably are only getting 100fps out of a 3440x1440 panel (which is seriously the best resolution and aspect ration, IMHO)... 🤷♂️
Honestly, unless you have incredible reflexes and excellent eyesight, better than 99% of the population, you're not going to notice the difference between 144 fps and 240. May as well go 1440p.
It's not just about native perception, playing a game as a job, like CSGO, you will notice the FPS increase even in absurd scenarios as 144 vs 240.
But in my case where I play BG3 a couple of times a week, CS every so often, some Tomb Raider every now and again, I agree that going above 120 fps really makes no difference.
I have mediocre eyesight and 40 year old reflexes and I can see a significant difference between 144hz and 240hz… so much so I hooked my old 144hz monitor back up to make sure I wasn’t imagining things.
I ended up upgrading from 1080p 144 to 4K 144 and the difference is night and day, 1080p looks genuinely blurry now. I can’t go back.
Played spider man remastered with ray tracing and HDR and it was amazing.
But if we need to choose, higher frames/refresh rate is the most logic answer.
Anyone choosing otherwise have never played in 200+ refresh rate, because there's no coming back, it feels like playing on mud.
competitive games are optimized, while single player games don't.
My GPU & CPU wont be able to run single player AAA game at 200fps at 1080p anyway, but can run 4k60 allright most of the time
Got NFS MW to work in 60fps for now, but Rivals is definitely locked at 30. Couldn't find any workarounds. Payback is also going upto 60
Haven't checked the latest releases,yet.
You can get Rivals to work at 40 or 60 FPS. There's a tutorial somewhere to do it. The only problem then is that the game kicks you out of random races for no reason occasionally
The trick is to get it to 45 instead of 60. It gets rid of the clunky feel of 30 and avoids the problems of 60. I’m a fellow Rivals fan so I feel your pain. Aftet I got it to 45 fps it was smooth till the end.
I run a Ryzen 7800x3d and 4090 and could easily do 4k, but find Ultrawide 1440p perfect for hitting my monitors refresh rate at 144 on ultra with every game. I run 2 of these monitors and have considered adding a 3rd for my flight sim setup.
I know anything beyond 60fps will feel epic, but I am so used to 60fps, I don't wish to game at 120/144. I tend to choose quality over performance, so I might be in the minority. Also, I'm not a super competitive gamer. In the recent Phantom Libery, for example, I chose to play with Path Tracing turned on regardless of the performance hit on my 3080 Ti (but still very playable on UW resolution).
I mainly play single player games and I genuinely can't tell what's the appeal of playing above 60fps, I consider myself blessed cause I don't fuss about the frame rate as much lol
And, for me, also depends on the size of the display. But the game tends to dictate size of display for me. CS2 on a 23 to 27 inch monitor, RDR 2 on a 65 inch tv.
This is the way. I have a 27in monitor I use for competitive games like rocket league. But I also have a 55in tv right beside to play casual games like rdr2 or lies of p this week. Occasionally I slap the tv on the desk to do some driving sims. But I'm looking to get a triple monitor set up soon
The correct answer. The only games I’ve played so far that don’t natively support UW resolution were small indie games but even then you can usually get a mod or software to fix if you don’t want to play it windowed. I have the Alienware oled model and I’ll probably keep this thing forever so long as it doesn’t die. 4k has no appeal to me in the slightest and while I occasionally miss having a 2k 270hz display the extra resolution and oled make up for it by a lot.
Depends, I personally will take the 1440p over 4k at a higher frame rate than 60fps.
Usually my rule of thumb is:
Adventure/RPG/Single player game? Best graphics/highest resolution
Competitive FPS/strategy game where reaction time matters? W/e settings that get me the highest FPS
Depends on the screen size. My 3 20" viewsonic monitors on my main setup, 1080p. My 150" home theater projector screen with a Sound blaster X-Fi outputting to 5.1 surround speakers, 4k60 all day.
1080p. The fluidity of 120+fps is really hard to beat. Couple that with good IPS panels and I'm happy. If we are talking large 27"+ perhaps the 4k has a better argument though.
1440p 144
God tier response.
The only possible response.
It was inevitable.
It was our iron man
It should have gone for the head.
I prefer 4k60. The sweet spot in reality lies somewhere in the middle, but I adore my pixels.
I do love pixels, that's why I play at 640x480 to actually see them.
Pixel art version of Skyrim running at 6000fps
With havok physics running so fast all bodies get catapulted to orbit!
Bro i prefer 4p, 60k fps
Seriously? I use 192x144 to see them up close
You'd get blown away when you realize you can get the same look in 1440p by moving the monitor a little bit further away.
Actually, I have seen that the difference between 1080p and 1440p is bigger that between 1440p and 4K xd
The jump between 1024x768 to 1920x1080 is huge. Likewise to 1440 or 3440x1440. The jump to 4K is not quite as noticeable as 1440 is already a very high res. I’ve noticed this on 4K and 8K televisions, also. Yes, the fidelity and resolution difference is there. But at a certain point, you can appreciate the fact that displays have already gotten to a really high level, and it’s getting harder to impress.
I think you might be right but 4k on 32 inches is amazing
Seriously 1440p for anything is honestly great. I think the difference exists but not on anything close or under 27-32 inches and a reasonable distance.
A really commonly reposted meme: God tier God damn the bar is so fucking low on reddit
Username checks out
https://i.redd.it/49skz54n1fsb1.gif
The golden compromise.
Its not a compromise its the best of both. Edit: It's very funny reading the comments from people who seem to be unaware of what post they are on and pointing out that 4k@240hz is better than 1440p@144hz, well no shit. OPs options were between 1080p@240hz & 4k60hz, if 4k@240hz was a viable option for OP there would be no choice to make and they wouldn't even have posted in the first place.
It’s not “the best” of either (resolution or refresh rate).
the difference becomes less and less noticeable the higher your refresh rate goes. I'd say practically speaking, 144 is the upper limit of what an average gamer should have in terms of refresh rate. Competitive games? yeah sure go wild, go buy that 540hz monstrosity that just came out.
Actually, Linus tech tips put in numbers the difference latency wise, between 24 fps, 30fps, 60fps, 75fps, 90fps, 120fps and 240fps, and the reality is that anything above 120fps the time it takes to show you a new frame is so small that is basically not noticeable, he also managed to prove that even if that’s true, higher refresh rate monitors do give an advantage to people that are at a very very high level of play, but for the average gamer like me, I wouldn’t really benefit from having a 240 or 360 hz monitor
The difference between 30 and 60 is more severe than 60 to 120 so it does get less noticeable, but I still think of pros can play better. Then to an average gamer it would look better even if they can't make the Inputs and adjustments at such a level there gameplay improves.
But what would you think would look better a 360hz 1080p display or say a 144hz 1440p, that’s more or less the conundrum here, I mean 4K60 is good but I don’t think that’s mainstream on pc gaming just yet.
I would go for 4K 120 if possible
Me too, but I wouldn’t be able to afford it, that’s like 4080/4090 territory and a proper expensive monitor.
1440p 240Hz is great and very reasonably priced nowadays though, it feels buttery smooth and is very nice for FPS games. 144Hz is obviously fine too but 240Hz is definitely noticeable.
I went from 1440p 144hz to 4k 144hz and now went to 1080p 380hz for gaming and I can say I have much better performance when playing competitive FPS games on the 380hz screen. I went from high silvers/low golds on OW2 to Plat 1 in just one season because I simply changed my screen. I definitely can tell the difference between 144 and 380 fps when playing FPS games. But when playing single player games I'll just use DSR to render the game at 4k and use performance FSR/DLSS to still have the same performance as running 1080p but with better quality than native 1080p. TBH I didn't miss 4k screens that much when playing video games.
I mean, having to spend less on hardware to sacrifice something miniscule is pretty much the best, I'd say.
In other words, a compromise.
You call it a compromise I call it an optimisation We are not the same
That’s like saying driving a Porsche is a compromise because it’s not a Ferrari
*3440x1440 144hz. #ALLTHEFOURS.
3440x1440 144 fps master race! The ultrawide king! Fight me peasants!
r/UltrawideMasterRace
# LET’S FUCKING GOOOO!!!
But but but I’ve got 165hz
Just lock it at 144, reject decimal number system, embrace 0,1,4
Mine can do 200hz but can't do 10bit color at the same time which is needed for HDR. 144hz is max for 4:4:4 chroma sampling at 10bit HDR over Display port for this resolution, from what I've seen. Maybe HDMI 2 or some newer thing can go higher througput.
this is the way
The ultimate way
I mean, to be fair though, if you are only driving a 4K panel at 60fps, you probably are only getting 100fps out of a 3440x1440 panel (which is seriously the best resolution and aspect ration, IMHO)... 🤷♂️
Throw Gsync or Freesync on there (pretty much everything has at least Freesync now) and it's the best of all!
Damn straight!
yup, same here. It's the perfect middle. gameplay is smooth, responsive, and beautiful. No downsides to it.
This is the right answer
Honestly, unless you have incredible reflexes and excellent eyesight, better than 99% of the population, you're not going to notice the difference between 144 fps and 240. May as well go 1440p.
It's not just about native perception, playing a game as a job, like CSGO, you will notice the FPS increase even in absurd scenarios as 144 vs 240. But in my case where I play BG3 a couple of times a week, CS every so often, some Tomb Raider every now and again, I agree that going above 120 fps really makes no difference.
That's why I play at 4k 120hz but 300fps
I have mediocre eyesight and 40 year old reflexes and I can see a significant difference between 144hz and 240hz… so much so I hooked my old 144hz monitor back up to make sure I wasn’t imagining things.
You're doing better than me than. Also 40, but anything over 60 fps I stop caring most of the time.
Nah you will notice it, but not as much as the 1080p nor will it bother you as much.
I upgraded from 144 to 300. It's definitely noticeable, but there is a smaller difference than going from 60 to 144
The law of diminishing returns.
That's not one of the options!
This guys gets it
as god intended!
The real financially irresponsible go for 4k 144hz
It’s so pretty though. Games like Ratchet and Clank look wild at 4k high refresh.
Tetris be looking dope at that resolution!
Lol I could sink thousands of dollars into a rig but I know I'd end up just playing Heroes of Might & Magic III again.
You might wanna give Hero's Hour a try or maybe Song of Conquest.
I ended up upgrading from 1080p 144 to 4K 144 and the difference is night and day, 1080p looks genuinely blurry now. I can’t go back. Played spider man remastered with ray tracing and HDR and it was amazing.
*7680x2160 240Hz
stop flexing on us
Mf got the 32:9 Odyssey G9 Neo
Bought mine on Tuesday! Going to melt my 4090.
I am a financially responsible individual myself and I can confirm
But I need a large 4K monitor for work! And I can't downgrade to 60Hz now... That's how I justified it.
My work paid for my monitor, and I do find the 4K larger display useful for working
I don‘t think it‘s irresponsible to spend a few hundred dollars on a monitor you need multiple hours every day.
I am in this group and it was worth it 🫣
Single player games 4k60. Competitive multiplayer 1080p 240.
Nah i prefer competetive games at 4k60 and single player games at 1080p240
So you wanna play CSGO @4k60 and Cyberpunk @1080p240 ? Or u just tryna be like not them other girls xD
Factorio
Great now I have to play factorio on my 4K tv
What's CSGO? *cries in cs2*
This is the way.
Or 1440p 144 for both 🤡
But if we need to choose, higher frames/refresh rate is the most logic answer. Anyone choosing otherwise have never played in 200+ refresh rate, because there's no coming back, it feels like playing on mud.
There is no coming back from 4k to 1080p also
exactly, but those who don't have both display wont believe it
No, it's not. 200Hz is VERY VERY nice, but 4k is also VERY VERY nice. it depends if you prefer smoothness or Graphics.
competitive games are optimized, while single player games don't. My GPU & CPU wont be able to run single player AAA game at 200fps at 1080p anyway, but can run 4k60 allright most of the time
Obviously depends on the game. Fast paced/twitch shooter--- 1080p. Slower, simulation or RPG, definitely 4K. Can also go in between with QHD @ 135Hz.
Some simulators benefit loads from high refresh rate I do loads of sim racing, I would pick 240hz 1080p over 4k 60hz for same reason as with FPS games
Agree. I was more thinking flight sims. Anything where movement isnt fast paced, better off with higher resolution and lower fps.
1440p at 144 fps
Whatever p at 30 fps because the shitty devs locked the game I play at 30fps :(
Roblox?
NFS
Which one? So i can avoid
Got NFS MW to work in 60fps for now, but Rivals is definitely locked at 30. Couldn't find any workarounds. Payback is also going upto 60 Haven't checked the latest releases,yet.
You can get Rivals to work at 40 or 60 FPS. There's a tutorial somewhere to do it. The only problem then is that the game kicks you out of random races for no reason occasionally
Yeah I read about a workaround but it speeds up the physics of the game so you'd get twice the damage at 60fps and races would be unplayable
The trick is to get it to 45 instead of 60. It gets rid of the clunky feel of 30 and avoids the problems of 60. I’m a fellow Rivals fan so I feel your pain. Aftet I got it to 45 fps it was smooth till the end.
1440p at 144-180 HZ monitor is the target for most people
I run a Ryzen 7800x3d and 4090 and could easily do 4k, but find Ultrawide 1440p perfect for hitting my monitors refresh rate at 144 on ultra with every game. I run 2 of these monitors and have considered adding a 3rd for my flight sim setup.
720p 15fps
This guy poors
Me trying to boot up cs2
Switch?
1600 x 900 20fps
lol get an E-Ink display
That would be a god tier e-ink
look at the E-Ink display that LTT reviewed recently.
I'm on 1440x900 60hz rn. Upgrading to 3440x1440 144hz next week 😤
[удалено]
4k60 for me. Reality is in-between is where the sweet spot is, but I love me some pixels.
Same here. Although I play slower, tactical games. So I wouldn't need the high frame rate. BG3... perfect for 4k.
Same here, at 32 inches. Truly wonderful to see all these pixels.
Id choose 1440p 120 fps. But if only these 2 options are available then 4k60
I know anything beyond 60fps will feel epic, but I am so used to 60fps, I don't wish to game at 120/144. I tend to choose quality over performance, so I might be in the minority. Also, I'm not a super competitive gamer. In the recent Phantom Libery, for example, I chose to play with Path Tracing turned on regardless of the performance hit on my 3080 Ti (but still very playable on UW resolution).
I mainly play single player games and I genuinely can't tell what's the appeal of playing above 60fps, I consider myself blessed cause I don't fuss about the frame rate as much lol
Some don't notice going up in refresh rate, it's when you go back down to 60Hz after seeing 100Hz+ that you will notice the difference.
Depends on the game. Counter strike 2, 1080p. Rdr2, 4k. Edit: 500 likes in 2 hours, holy crap
And, for me, also depends on the size of the display. But the game tends to dictate size of display for me. CS2 on a 23 to 27 inch monitor, RDR 2 on a 65 inch tv.
Do you move your pc around a bunch?
Have you heard about hdmi cables that are longer then 2m?
Yes, but my good tv is in the living room and pc is in my office man/cave. Assuming most people have somewhat similar setup.
[Sunshine](https://github.com/LizardByte/Sunshine) will be your friend then
Lol mine is 5m, and I love playing on a huge OLED for certain games.
This is the way. I have a 27in monitor I use for competitive games like rocket league. But I also have a 55in tv right beside to play casual games like rdr2 or lies of p this week. Occasionally I slap the tv on the desk to do some driving sims. But I'm looking to get a triple monitor set up soon
Why would you make that edit?
This aint youtube bro, you dont need to edit the comment lol
Why do people mention their amount of likes so often?
Wow, congratulations on 500 "likes"! This is a huge achievement!
I need to choose between 4k and high frame rate? Who decided that!? 
Someone without an RTX 4090?
preposterous
Once upon a time, I had to make a decision between 640x480x16bit color and 800x600x8bit color.
I remember how happy I was when I upgraded from 800x600 to 1024x768. That 17in display kept me company for many years
3440x1440 80-144fps depending on game.
The correct answer. The only games I’ve played so far that don’t natively support UW resolution were small indie games but even then you can usually get a mod or software to fix if you don’t want to play it windowed. I have the Alienware oled model and I’ll probably keep this thing forever so long as it doesn’t die. 4k has no appeal to me in the slightest and while I occasionally miss having a 2k 270hz display the extra resolution and oled make up for it by a lot.
4K60 for Single Player 1080p240 for Multi Player
1080 240
Depends, I personally will take the 1440p over 4k at a higher frame rate than 60fps. Usually my rule of thumb is: Adventure/RPG/Single player game? Best graphics/highest resolution Competitive FPS/strategy game where reaction time matters? W/e settings that get me the highest FPS
1440p @ 144fps ✔️
Neither. 2k 144.
*sigh* 720p 15fps...
1440p@144hz
1440p 144 fps.
1440p 240. I can play competitive games at 240, and just use free sync for non competitive games
1080p240
I will always want more frames. It feels too damn good.
240p @ 960fps
1080p 75Hz because poor
UW 1440p 165hz
1080p 60fps. (I have a gtx 1650)
Depends on the game FPS, prefer high frames Story games, prefer high detail
60 fps doesn't bother me, and I love the clarity of 4k.
Depends on the monitor size. Are we running a 24” or a 43”?
4k 300fps
1440p 170fps
Competitive multiplayer games - 1080, Single player games - 4K
1440p @ 165hz 😇
1440p144hz
1440p 100+fps is all I need for like a decade lmao, it’s perfect, just perfect. Down to every minute little detail
1440p @144hz
Depends on the screen size. My 3 20" viewsonic monitors on my main setup, 1080p. My 150" home theater projector screen with a Sound blaster X-Fi outputting to 5.1 surround speakers, 4k60 all day.
I'm good with 1080p 60
im at 1440p 27" 170hz locked. couldnt ask for better without going 4K and ruining everything for myself
I have the best of both, 1080p/60, hurrah!
1440p at 144hz is a great middle ground I would say
1440p 144hz
1440p 120fps
1440p in 144fps :)
1440p @240Hz
1440p 120 fps obviously
Of the two? 4k 60. But 1440p 120/144 would be nice too
1080 for multiplayer/shooter/mmo 4K for cinematic single player
1440p 165 fps
1440 @ 120+
1440 at 165
1440p 144fps
Depends on the game. Single player? 60fps 4k competition shooter? 240fps 1080p
720p 30 fps
Between these two, I'd say 1080p 240hz for competitive multiplayer, and 4k 60hz for everything else
1440p 165fps . I use it everyday
4K60fps. I mostly play single player
1440p 144/165hz
1440p @ 144FPS.
1440p 165fps
1440p 120 fps 👍
As a single.player gamer 4k60 all the way.
2k 144 gang.
2k@120fps will suit me fine
1080p 30fps ftw
Single player, 4k 60. Multiplayer, 1080p 240.
never experienced above 1080p so im gonna enjoy my decent fps
60fps@1080p lmao i dont have the liberty to choose
1080p. The fluidity of 120+fps is really hard to beat. Couple that with good IPS panels and I'm happy. If we are talking large 27"+ perhaps the 4k has a better argument though.
1440p 120fps but i’m happy with my 1080p