In your personal opinion, would you rather have 1440p144hz, or 4k60hz? If you want to ramble on your reasoning...

In your personal opinion, would you rather have 1440p144hz, or 4k60hz? If you want to ramble on your reasoning, feel free.

Pic unrelated.

Framerate difference is far more enjoyable and doesnt nuke your FPS for detail you cant notice

1440p 60hz master race

1440p60hz x2-3 for productivity

Pic related but not mine

I have a 4k60hz and prefer it for programming and reading, but 1440p144hz is superior for gaming easily. Though I can still run most games at 4k at 40-60 fps depending on the game by turning off post-processing and stuff that doesn't really affect the graphics much like shadow quality from ultra to high or shit like that.

>60hz
Why wouldn't you want higher refresh rates?? Everything looks buttery smooth on 144hz.

4k, I don't play gaymes

1440p
The jump from that to 4k isn't worth it

1440p/144hz because that's what I've got and I'm going to blindly defend my purchase to reassure myself.

>In your personal opinion, would you rather have 1440p144hz, or 4k60hz?
depends on the task
for work: ultrawide or multiple monitors
for videos: 4k60Hz > *
for gaming: 1440p120Hz ULMB > *

i play games, so the choice is obvious. don't fall for the 144Hz meme, 120Hz ULMB is far superior (pic related).

testufo.com

4k all day.

1440p144hz for gaymen, 4k60hz for anything else.

1080p 60hz

1080/240hz is the only way to go

It's not often that I encounter high frame rate video, but when I do, I like it a lot. So I'd probably opt for higher refresh rate display than a bigger one.

That alien is fast as fuck.

I'm okay with 1080p 60hz

240p, 960Hz

Once you go 4K, you never come back.
All text is really smooth.
You can read text on thumbnails of images and PDF files.
Your GUI could be as small as you want it.
Every vector art looks like real image.
You don't have to scroll in while editing large diagrams, since you always can read everything.

144hz is the way to go

I'd love to have a 60Hz WQUXGA monitor

Depends on the size. If I'm going for like a 27 inch on a smaller desk or something definitely 1440 at 144hz, but if I'm going for something more work-focused I'd probably go like 42-55 inch 4K screen at 60.

4k because it has perferect scaling for both 720p and 1080p content

Neither.

1920 x 1080 @ 60hz

Anything else is literally retarded.

t. Poorfag

The human eye can't even see past 720p

@63941741
t. shit for brains

you need to kill yourself immediately. how did you manage to get to Sup Forums on your xbox 360 anyways?

This is only the case with some asua monitors. Stop the fud

the fact i wouldn't buy a TN monitor limits my refresh rate options, but i can live with that. i could not live with colour shift.

are you talking about videos above 60fps? higher resolution doesn't mean "bigger display".

4k is only useful if you have either a gigantic screen or sit far away. 1440p 144Hz definitely.

4k60Hz. I'm used to 1080p60Hz anyway.

4k
screen restate > framerate

144hz
>high framerate
>everything feels smooth
>can watch muh animus and movies without judder or interpolation
>can be downclocked to 120hz and 100hz to accomodate PAL and NTSC framerate.

Both are memes, but if you need to go with one, go with 4k. Especially if you can get a colour correct monitor with a 99% AdobeRGB colour gamut. The colours and true blacks will blow you mind. 144HZ is a meme.

Otherwise get a 1920x1200, 24" monitor

That's kind of a meaningless question without stating the primary purpose of the display. Gaming would massively benefit from the higher refresh rate over the higher resolution. Productivity is the exact opposite.

Ultrawide 1080p 144hz overclocked to 165hz.

Much easier to drive, better for gaming, better for multitasking than 16:9 and smooth as fuck.

t. poorfags

Meaningful applications these days are all DPI-aware. Higher resolution doesn't necessarily mean more screen space unless it's a massive monitor.

poverty

I'd rather triplehead 4k 16:10. Where the fuck are my 16:10 4k displays?

>for productivity
No amount of monitors will make you productive.

Being able to have one monitor dedicated to your IDE and one monitor dedicated to documentation, etc is actually really nice.

>1440p144hz
This but they are nonexistent unfortunately. TN a shit and IPS can barely break 75Hz with overdrive.

1440p@144Hz. Because at 1440p you can still get away without scaling. At 4K you either use gnomeme or you're fucked.

not to mention how shit Windows is at scaling too

Looks like ULMB isn't compatible with g-sync. Does it work with freesync? I suppose it doesn't.

I feel like my eyesight worsens every day even with 1440p with windows. Only scale browsers because scaling in windows is virtually nonexistent.

MS gets alot of shit (rightfully) for their NSA tier spying and shit security but the fact that it's 20 fucking 18 and they still can't get scaling right is beyond pathetic

Quality > quantity
I LOVE my wonderful 4k panel.
so fucking great for multitasking

240hz @ 1080p

Nope, at least not on my monitor.
You have to choose one of the two, can't have them at the same time.

Then what is the point? You might as well play at 120 fps on 60 Hz display.

rather have two 1440p60hz monitors then one 1440p144hz or 4k60hz

Well personally I do this
>when playing FPS games turn off freesync and use ULMB, maximise FPS with in-game settings to get that stable 144fps with ultra low motion blur
>when playing singleplayer games or more relaxed stuff like racing games turn on Freesync and turn up the graphics & resolution, usually stuff is staying at around 100 to 120fps but it feels very smooth and comfy

Remember, Freesync introduces input lag, so you don't want to use it when playing stuff where extreme responsiveness is important, but for other things, especially when you're not getting 144fps all the time, Freesync improves the experience greatly.

Well I never had troubles with tearing on radeon gpu so didn't really bother with freesync and stuff because maximizing performance and limiting fps worked very well. When I switched to novideo I was genuinely surprised by the amount of tearing, it's not tolerable. So I think of going back to radeon camp and want to learn of relevant features and maybe get an appropriate display before that. Because I can't be sure novideo is just bad at it, most likely it's marketing move to bait people into g-sync, and it's possible newer radeon cards will have same issues. Freesync is free though so it's not likely.

he just said it, because it's crazy taxing on performance (assuming you play lots of games).

4k60 easily unless you extensively play FPS/Racing games. Make sure not to fall for the giant screen meme and instead get something

For gayming, probably 1440p144Hz.
For everything else, 4k60Hz

4k60hz on a 40+inch display, because even while I play games I appreciate like the extra screen real estate more and 1080p content should scale perfectly.

1080p/144hz. I've had 1440p/144hz, the framerate was amazing but the resolution was barely noticeable. I'd take 4k over 1440 for 1:4 upscaling, but with how many geimus I play I don't think the extra resolution is worth the grunt.

This If you are truly competitive or in a top percentage of FPS, get the 144hz. Having a 4k though is sweet as hell. The amount of workspace is nice. I just started Doom'16 and it is amazing how beautiful it looks.

>1440p144hz
I currently have this. I swapped monitors with a buddy who has a 4k and everything was so small the resolution wasn't usable for me. I much prefer the smoothness of 144hz.
Keep in mind i have 2 vertical 1080p on either side of my main display so i have less of a need for higher resolution. If youre running a single display and have never experienced 144hz, maybe the 4k is for you

cheap 144Hz monitors are so shit i'd get a 4K 60Hz one, if I was rich i'd get a 4K144Hz

I'm rich and 4k@144hz doesn't exist yet.

I ended up going with 1440p@144hz and gsync. Very much worth it. My next monitor will be 4k though.

Someone explain to me why the jump from 144 to 240 isn't as shilled as 60 to 144 pls

cheap 144Hz monitors are still shit though

who said I got a cheap one? I dropped $900 on it.

You might want to refresh your info.

Because hardly anyone has a 144 hz monitor, and hardly anyone can run anything at 240 fps.

1440p 144Hz. Gaming aside, it's easier on the eyes.

I'd like a 40" 4k god tier IPS panel monitor.

I tried both on 27" screens. 144Hz is nice and visibly smoother, tearing is also less noticeable than 60Hz it seemed to me, but 4K on a high-DPI screen is just amazingly sharp and has very little visible aliasing at the same view distance (was probably ~60-65cm). I've been noticing aliasing since I was a kid and before I even knew what it was, high DPI screens are finally a thing on PC and well on their way to eliminating it without applying any extra AA, which nowadays often tends to be some crappy post-processed shit anyway. 144Hz is an upgrade for sure, but 60Hz with low frame time variance is still good and looks smooth. The image quality of a high-DPI 4K screen is just undeniable, getting one was an easy choice for me.

4K also has the extra advantages of larger work area (I use 125% scaling, which is a larger area than 2560x1440 at 100%) and better font rendering. Fonts look wonderfully smooth and easy to read, even smaller ones. There's none of that muddying/blending you get on lower DPI screens, while displaying the font at the same physical size. I wouldn't pick 144Hz over the image quality, I play a lot of games but I don't pretend I'm a pr0 tryhard, 60Hz works just fine until 4K monitors with higher refresh rate are out.

40k60Hz.

I can tell the difference between 60 and 144Hz, but I value graphical fidelity over refresh rates. I don't play any games at a competitive level, so 144Hz is simply a luxury. And 2K doesn't feel too different from 1080p, so I'd rather have a higher resolution.

2K 144hz.

I get a pretty decent resolution, I don't need some crazy expensive hardware to max it with some games, frankly I don't get the point of 4K right now.

I can't tell the difference past 32Hz (and most people can't either) so I'll go with the 4k

I guess you're the type of person who buys 27" 4k monitors.

Please end yourself.

People saying they'd prefer 1440p/144hz have obviously never used a HiDPI screen because it's absolutely fucking gorgeous.

144Hz looks really nice in games and while scrolling through webpages but really doesn't make much of a difference in terms of productivity. I'll take the 4K monitor as long as it's 16:10.