• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

1440p is overrated by people who can't go up to 4k

BlackTron

Member
The joke is on you. My 144hz monitor is only 1080p!

That resolution is enough for a 24" monitor, and a good fit for what I wanted it for, Halo Infinite at 120hz (the Xbox cannot go higher than 1080 doing this anyway) and getting Genji/Widowmaker at 144hz on my GTX 1060.

Yeah I have a 3070 now and haven't played Overwatch in a year, but still feel no desire to upgrade the monitor. Its sole purpose is high refresh rate aiming at 24", which is actually the size I WANT at my desk. I look forward to having a 4k TV, but again, I won't upgrade it until I can catch a deal on a TV with 120hz.

Once you have enough pixel density for your screen size, the marginal benefit of dumping more power on it gets smaller and smaller compared to higher framerates.

This performance is simply good enough for me. I guess I could play at 4k/144hz/ultra gfx, to be honest with what I can get without spending all that, I just don't care enough.
 

OverHeat

« generous god »
Lol OP I have an LG CX 65inch and an a 34 inch OLED ultra wide monitor just because of pixel density the 1440p monitor look better and I get crazy framerate with my 4090 on both.
 
Last edited:

.Pennywise

Banned
People saying you won't tell the difference between 4k and 1440p LMAO. So you're telling me you cannot see a 400% increase in resolution yet you're telling me you can see a 78% increase.
You're laughable.
It's really easy to tell who actually got in front of a screen with 4k resolution and who didn't. You're just one block away from the old "the human eye cannot see above 30fps".

Also, people saying DLSS makes the games look worse? Have you at least tried this technology or just speaking out of spite?

Getting so defensive on 1440p just makes my argument on it being overrated more and more strong.
 

Bo_Hazem

Banned
4K is a good spot, but 8K is the real deal.

If you can't see the difference, then you won't until they produce a cyborg eye replacement for humans.
 
4K displays are overated. Such insanely high resolution is not very universal, so for example 1920x1080 BD movies, or even older games (games with low quality assets and textures) will look much worse when displayed at 4K. What's more, even if you want to play 4K content on your 4K TV/monitor, you will still need to take into account the size of the display and the viewing distance, because if your eyes cant see more than lets say 1920x1080 pixels from the place where are you sitting, so why even bother with 4K display.

https://stari.co/tv-monitor-viewing-distance-calculator

According to this calculator people with perfect eyesight need to sit at a distance of 1 metre from a 55-inch 4K screen in order to really see what 4K has to offer (I'm talking about visual acuity distance). I have never seen anyone sit so close, and most people watch this kind of TV from about 2-3 metres, from which even someone with perfect eyesight cannot see more pixels than good old 1920x1080.

Although 4K displays are overated, I still try to run my games at 4K resolution if only my GPU has enough resources, because aliasing and shimmering arnt pretty, and only downscaling can make the game wi5h crappy TAA look sharp and aliasing/shimmering free at the same time. Even 1920x1080p display will show way more fine details if game will run at 4K downscaled to 1080p, than standard 1080p with TAA running on the same tv. IMO that's why people think 4K makes a difference. It's not because their display has 8M pixels, but it's because picture itself is way more detailed.

I have a total of 4 displays in my house:
-55inch 4K LCD TV for modern games with HDR
-42inch Plasma 1024x768 for PS3-PS2/xboxclassic/GC games
-32inch LCD 1920x1080 for PS4 games
-27inch LCD 2560x1440p with HDR for my PC

WIthout upscaling even my 1024x768 plasma has very sharp picture from a normal viewing distance and on this tv downscaled 1080p is already enough, to make even blurry TAA game look sharp. On my 32'inch 1920x1080 tv I need to dowscale from 4K to make TAA game look sharp. On my 1440p monitor I need 6K, and on my 4K TV i dont even bother with downscaling, because 8K is too demanding and 4K with TAA looks acceptable even without downscaling anyway and especially with good sharpening.
Those calculators are bullshit. I have a 48 inch CX Oled that I've been using as a monitor for well over a year. Switching back and forth between 1800p and 4k at a little over a meter viewing distance it's obvious that one is sharper than the other. 1800p is a great in between resolution because 1440p is completely insufficient at a size greater than 32 inches for PC gaming purposes. Again, calculator is bullshit--says more than 1440p is unnoticeable at 3.2 feet. I guess all those manufacturers making 4k 32inch monitors are doing it for the lulz
 

AngelMuffin

Member
I always believed that 1440p was/is the sweet spot for balance between visual fidelity and cost of performance. I’d take more frames, better visual quality, etc. over an increase in resolution over 1440p any day of the week.
 

T4keD0wN

Member
1440p is overrated by people who can't go up to 4k

Going from 1080p to 1440p is a 78% increase

While going from 1080p to 4k is a whopping 400% increase

People feel compelled to defend 1440p and call it "the sweet spot", but there's nothing sweet about it, you're just getting scammed into believing you should invest in such resolution increase only to make you believe you made a wise decision in your investment

4k is the real deal, is the real upgrade, and now it's more accessible than ever with the powerful GPUs available in the markets and technologies like DLSS to not compromise 60fps

Also, you can still play games at lower res on 4k hardware if you need to.

What made you think that a 78% increase in resolution is better than a 400% increase? What made you believe that 78% is worth it but not 400%?
They're just making you believe you're the smart one buying another monitor/TV in between the real upgrades, charging you for old cheap tech while you're going "oh yeah I'm really smart in not falling for that 4k stuff that's just a waste of resources hurr durr"

#FACTS
I doubt that theres a single person who think 1440p looks better than 4k. Its all about priorities. Some people choose 1440p to achieve higher amount of frames per second.

4k is clearly superior, but its not like you can get to really high fps at native 4k even with a 4090. It lacks the connector and the performance for that, but you can achieve that at 1440p so its actually better in this use case.

Anyway, how come my phone has much better image quality than my 4k tv?

I am sorry, but whoever thinks that there are people who genuinely think that 1440p is in any way better than 4k is the real idiot here.

If you were to make this about pixel density, now that would make sense.
 
Last edited:

HeisenbergFX4

Gold Member
I doubt that theres a single person who think 1440p looks better than 4k. Its all about priorities. Some people choose 1440p to achieve higher amount of frames per second.

4k is clearly superior, but its not like you can get to 200+fps at native 4k even with a 4090. It lacks the connector and the performance for that, but you can at 1440p so it has its uses.

I am sorry, but whoever thinks that there are people who genuinely think 1440p is in any way better than 4k is the real idiot here.
Perfectly put but the whole point of this thread was to troll people and they keep feeding this troll
 

TheSHEEEP

Gold Member
I'm still on 1080p.
Not due to money issues, but my monitors just refuse to kick the bucket and I'm not gonna waste money :messenger_beaming:

And honestly?
Games look great in 1080p!
 
Last edited:

MiguelItUp

Member
Honestly, just shoot for anything you can comfortably do over 1080, you'll see huge differences. Preferences are all different strokes, or the kind of hardware you have, etc. 🤷‍♂️
 

.Pennywise

Banned
You don't open a discussion, you just state what you think are facts and if we don't agree, we're either poor or blind...
See my response here, and stop trolling.
Cannot not call people blind when they tell you that you can't see a difference between 4k and 1440p.
 
As someone who games on a 1440p ultrawide HDR monitor and a 4k OLED TV I can tell you that you’re completely wrong. I choose PC gaming on my monitor every time when applicable.
 

Housh

Member
27" 1440p 170hz is my daily cause the monitor is in my face. 55" 4K 120 using hdmi 2.1 tv when sitting on the couch at a distance. Next monitor I might try a 48" OLED TV.
 

Warnen

Don't pass gaas, it is your Destiny!
I got a ps5 hooked up to an Oled 4k tv, an Xbox series x to a 4k qled tv and a Xbox series s hooked up to a 1440p monitor…

All look good.
 
Last edited:

analog_future

Resident Crybaby
This is obviously bait. OP is having a go at worst-thread-of-the-year award, but I'll indulge.

Playing games at 4K/120 *is* superior but also prohibitively expensive.

A 77" LG C9, at the time I bought it, I think was over $4,000.
My computer build, after dropping a 4090 in it, probably another $4,000.

Not flexing, just saying that very few are going to pay that. 1440p is not overrated, it's just the most sensible choice right now.

Okay, but a modern 77" OLED can be had for close to half of what you paid for yours. And significantly less than that if you're willing to go with LED.

And who said anything about 4k/120? You can build a 4k/60 gaming PC for like $1500-$2000.
 
1440p is overrated by people who can't go up to 4k

Going from 1080p to 1440p is a 78% increase

While going from 1080p to 4k is a whopping 400% increase

People feel compelled to defend 1440p and call it "the sweet spot", but there's nothing sweet about it, you're just getting scammed into believing you should invest in such resolution increase only to make you believe you made a wise decision in your investment

4k is the real deal, is the real upgrade, and now it's more accessible than ever with the powerful GPUs available in the markets and technologies like DLSS to not compromise 60fps

Also, you can still play games at lower res on 4k hardware if you need to.

What made you think that a 78% increase in resolution is better than a 400% increase? What made you believe that 78% is worth it but not 400%?
They're just making you believe you're the smart one buying another monitor/TV in between the real upgrades, charging you for old cheap tech while you're going "oh yeah I'm really smart in not falling for that 4k stuff that's just a waste of resources hurr durr"

#FACTS
When we get affordable GPUs that can do 4k at 240fps+ people will stop sign boosting 1440p over 4k. The problem with 4k is that it comes at a higher fps cost than 1440p but eventually 4k fps will reach an acceptable level for everyone who's not an eSports gamer just like 720p, 1080p and 1440p did.
 

KyoZz

Tag, you're it.
Cannot not call people blind when they tell you that you can't see a difference between 4k and 1440p.
I'm telling you, the image quality of my 1440p/144Hz/HDR/G-Sync monitor shits on your 4K display when I play games downsampled from 4K. Or even 3K.

So yeah, you are not open to the discussion. You just want to force your opinion to them.
Some console players can't see the difference between 30 and 60FPS. Some PC players can't see the difference between 60 and 120FPS and so on. Who cares?
And many people play a fake 4K on PS5/Xbox Series that don't even hit true 1440p on most demanding games and are happy with that.

Anyway, who are you to tell other people what to think? Just enjoy the fuckin games and stop being preocuped by anyone else preference.

Pixel density is the most important metric, followed by viewing distance.
That's pretty much the only factor anyone should look. But hey 4K

Girl Reaction GIF
 

dcx4610

Member
It's all about the screen size. There's a reason why you almost never see a 4K TV below 40" - It's diminishing returns and your eyes can't see a difference.

Making things like phones 4K is a bit a gimmick and just something to sell to the masses. The pixels are so small at that point, you can't pick them out and you wouldn't notice a difference between 1440 or perhaps even 1080.

1440p is also the sweet spot of performance and graphical fidelity. 4K is still very demanding to run and even with a 4090, some games aren't able to reach high frame rates. Meanwhile, you run the same game at 1440p and you might be at 200+ FPS all while being hard pressed to see a graphical difference unless you have a large screen.

I have a 27" monitor and I'm probably only 2 feet away from it. 1440p is still king to me. Once GPUs get powerful enough where 4K is nothing to process, I'd have no problem going 4K just to say it's 4K but it's really not needed. Also, to further prove my point, many movie theaters still use 2K (1440p) projectors. So what you are seeing in the theater is only 2K and it still looks good on a 20 FOOT+ screen. Would 4K look better? Absolutely. Would you need or notice 4K on a 27 INCH screen? Probably not...
 
Last edited:

twilo99

Member
That's pretty much the only factor anyone should look. But hey 4K

Marketing gets the better of people.

If you ask around here what's better, 27 inch 1440p monitor or a 65 inch 4k TV 90% would say the 4k TV, when in reality..

108.79 PPI vs. 67.78 PPI

this is a good tool:


300 PPI is considered best, but we are far from that on monitors and TVs, phones have been there for a while I think.
 

ReBurn

Gold Member
Realistically 1440p is enough pixels for games. Native 4K at the expense of frame rate is a waste. Games need frames more than pixels for right now, so drop the internal resolution and do AI upscaling from 1440p to 4K for me all day every day.
 
Last edited:

Antwix

Member
To a 4k disbelievers. Play dark souls 3. A game with poor aa.
It l looks so much better at 4k.
Nobody would say it’s not worth it.
Early last year I played through Dark Souls again on XSX before Elden Ring came out. Played through DS1r first and I believe it's 1800p. Then I went to DS3. That's at 900p. Sure I could tell but I didn't even really notice after like 10 minutes of gameplay. If you're playing a good game that's immersive and fun, it doesn't even matter. The presentation is still good. I'm glad I'm not a graphics whore.
 
Early last year I played through Dark Souls again on XSX before Elden Ring came out. Played through DS1r first and I believe it's 1800p. Then I went to DS3. That's at 900p. Sure I could tell but I didn't even really notice after like 10 minutes of gameplay. If you're playing a good game that's immersive and fun, it doesn't even matter. The presentation is still good. I'm glad I'm not a graphics whore.
Art style> graphics.
 

TheDreadLord

Gold Member
There is a huge difference between 1440p and 4k. At least for me…also, for retro gaming on modern display, 4k is very interesting for scanlines simulation… it becomes almost identical to a crt.
 

Leonidas

Member
1440p is overrated by people who can't go up to 4k
I was at 4K previously and happily went back to 1440p because I now prioritize high framerate. And I'm not interested in spending $1000+ on a GPU.
My current 1440p monitor is much better than my old 4K one.

While going from 1080p to 4k is a whopping 400% increase
Most high refresh 4K monitors are only 144 Hz, while many 1440p displays are often 165-240 Hz. I'll take the higher refresh rates at 1440p which are much more reasonably priced compared to high refresh 4K displays.
4k is the real deal, is the real upgrade, and now it's more accessible than ever with the powerful GPUs available in the markets and technologies like DLSS to not compromise 60fps

Also, you can still play games at lower res on 4k hardware if you need to.

What made you think that a 78% increase in resolution is better than a 400% increase? What made you believe that 78% is worth it but not 400%?
They're just making you believe you're the smart one buying another monitor/TV in between the real upgrades, charging you for old cheap tech while you're going "oh yeah I'm really smart in not falling for that 4k stuff that's just a waste of resources hurr durr"

#FACTS
4K is objectively better than 1440p, but it's not something I notice when I'm gaming, I do however notice that my frame-rate in games is much higher than it was on my old 4K monitor. 1440p looks much better on a 1440p screen than it does on a 4K screen.
 

BlackTron

Member
Sure he's right that on a 50" TV, the difference between 1440 and 4k is noticeable. But on the game consoles we have now, the reduction in framerate and visual fidelity would be even more noticeable.

It's like an RPG where you need to choose where to spend your skill points. People have an efficient way they like of doing it, this is just saying "why not just max out ALL skill points its better, if you can't see that you're an idiot".
 

NeonDelta

Member
I thought the playstation has lost its magic thread was a cert for worst thread of the year, but this has entered the race.
 

hyperbertha

Member
Oh no, not the blind guys telling me you can't tell the difference in a 400% resolution increase while they went for a 78% increase.

Logic through the window
No you are the one missing logic. Just as 30 fps to 60 fps is far more noticeable than 60 fps to 120 fps, 1080p to 1440p is more noticeable thatn 1440p to 4k. Diminishing returns. Honestly your post reeks of regret. You seem desperate to justify your 4k purchase. If you are on console, I pity you. If you are on pc, 4k is somewhat justified provided you have a 4090.
 

rofif

Can’t Git Gud
I never did that comparison with 1440p 27" montior but I had few and it was barely any better than 1080p.

I had 1080p 27" monitor running 4k supersampling and 4k 27" monitor running native. These were the results...
wUghV0k.jpg


Now. This was on 27". It's even more important on bigger screens
 

hyperbertha

Member
This actually brings me back to an old debate.
If I were to show you a 1080p tv show (lets say the rookie, or game of thrones, or the last of tv show), it would look "real" to you. Yes.

And then we have video games at 1080p, or 1440p, and 4k. Still, for the most part, none of them look "real" regardless of resolution. (Getting closer......but you'd never say any driving game looks like a real race at 1080p, yet you would a real race at 1080p.......)

So while I would agree games look better overall at higher resolutions, I would content we have many other areas other than resolution to improve how our games look.
Resolution are by far the least useful metric to improve video game visuals. Heck, in older ps2/ps3 games, higher resolutions make them look WORSE. THeir textures and models aren't meant to be scrutinized without some blurring to hide the lack of detail.
 
Top Bottom