Jump from 1080p to 2K: Why no "WOW!" factor for me?

Cannibal Corpse

Cannibal Corpse

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 22, 2002
Messages
1,277
Over the past couple of weeks I have been looking at various ASUS monitors, and I finally settled on a MG248Q (1080p):

I know it is 1080p and with my current rig and GTX 1070 Founders Edition I could do 2K, but honestly when I got another ASUS monitor, this time a MG278Q, I really did not notice *that much of difference* between 2K and 1080p.

As a matter of fact, the 1080p seemed a bit sharper in Titanfall 2, and Battlefield 1, COD Infinite Warfare, etc.

These are *very* subjective observations that I am sharing with you, and not all of you might agree with me:

Why no WOW! factor? Maybe I needed a *much* bigger 2K display, like 60 Inches or so, as I am told that with 4K, you wouldn't really notice *that much of a difference* unless you get something larger than 60 Inches.

My rig is already connected to my 60 Inch Sony BRAVIA TV (2015 model), and I am very happy with it, at least playing the campaign modes of the said games. (I sit on a comfy couch playing those modes using controllers)

For the multiplayer modes however, I always play on my desk, with a proper mouse and gaming keyboard, and I notices that my 12 years old DELL LCD is not going to cut it anymore, that is why I got the MG248A:

Then I thought that by getting the bigger version of this monitor (MG278Q), I might be even *impressed more*, but alas that is not the case.

I also decided against the following:

MG279Q = only 90FPS?
PG278Q = only 1 single DisplyPort, and no other ports
PG279Q = too expensive for me (not to mention that the G-Sync is not going to make a difference for me, as I am already getting close to 144FPS)

so that is my reason to stick with MG248Q: I know it is a TN panel, but honestly I am only using it for playing fast-paced FPS games, all others are played on my 60 Inches SONY Bravia.
 
2560x1440 and 1920x1080 are a different world if you ask me. After going 1440p its impossible to go back to 1080p. No way bf1 looked better in 1080p unless your talking about actual 2k resolution(2048 × 1080) in which case there would be pretty much no difference. 2560x1440p is not 2k.
 
Snowknight26 said:
The reason there's no discernible difference between 2K and 1080p is because they have effectively the same resolution. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2K_resolution
Click to expand...

ASUS calls it 2K for some stupid reason, but his monitor is really 1440P or WQHD, 2560x1440. That's an increase of 640x360 lines vs 1080P. In other words... not much, really. by comparison, going to "4K" or 3840x2160 from 1080P would be an increase of... wait for it... 1920x1080. Literally double.

OP: Whoever told you 4K is only relevant above 60" is an idiot. Or blind. Possibly a blind idiot. I have a 40" 4K TV I'm using as a monitor (Samsung KU6290) and can easily tell a difference vs. 1080P and even 3440x1440 (really just in terms of aspect ratio there, to be fair) monitors I've used in the past in terms of clarity and detail. You do not need a 60" 4K display; I wouldn't go much if any smaller than 32" or so, ideally more like 40". Also: TNs are trash.
 
Honestly the difference in panel quality and motion clarity are more important than resolution in many cases.

I must say that the "wow" factor comes more from vivid colors and smooth motion than sharpness, especially if you are playing older/ less graphically-dense games.

Monitor size is also a big factor. 1080p at 24 inches is fine, whereas at 27 the aliasing and blockiness is apparent, and at 32 inches, 1080p is unacceptable.
 
Great, so I am glad that I kept my 1080p monitor. It is awesome for playing super fast-paced multiplayer COD FPS games.
 
It also depends on how far away you are sitting from the monitor / screen. Put it in perspective, in my bedroom I see no reason to get a 4k television as I'm probably 14-15 feet from the screen. Computer room where I'm < 3 feet and I can tell the 4k difference (and in gaming).

I do agree with the 2k assessment though....sort of a waste. I notice the 1440 and can tell on my Sony 4k TV.
 
In games I didn't find the extra resolution to be that big of a deal, less aliasing certainly (this was going from 27" 1080p to 27" 1440p, so the lack of blockiness and aliasing was more obvious than if I had gone from 24" 1080p to 27" 1440p).

The greater amount of desktop realestate while keeping text legible is also a plus.

My biggest wow factor was definitely the refresh rate though. 144hz is delicious, I often feel my 60hz monitor is broken lol

4k was gorgeous, but framerates be damned. My next monitor upgrade is definitely going to be 4k 144hz 32"+ for sure, but not until GPUs can do on 4k what 1080 can do on 1440p right now, I'd say.
 
Obviously, the WSGF thread. It can take a while before someone bothers to update PCWiki articles with the latest compatibility news/fixes for ultrawide/eyefinity/surround etc.
 
1440p is about 80% more pixels. Makes a difference to me certainly. I move a little slower than some. I had a 37" 1080p to 32" 1440p. And I'm not saying there aren't factors like that to consider, like said this size at 1080p would kind of blow. Most people aren't going to compare like for like (for instance a lot of people have 1440p 27" here than 27" 1080p), but just to put it in perspective, it is a lot more pixels, and noticable to me.

I want to get one of the new 3440*1440 joints soon, it's basically more stuff on the side. Not much sharper or anything. Any more than that though and I suppose 4k is just another chunk, another tier of graphics, to keep up with. Just compared the multiplied numbers, and youll basically get to the load on the gpu and number of pixels, along with size sort of get the PPI etc.
 
There was a lil wow factor to me. Now when I tried out 1080p to 4k. Now that is the wow factor you want.
 
KazeoHin said:
Honestly the difference in panel quality and motion clarity are more important than resolution in many cases.

I must say that the "wow" factor comes more from vivid colors and smooth motion than sharpness, especially if you are playing older/ less graphically-dense games.

Monitor size is also a big factor. 1080p at 24 inches is fine, whereas at 27 the aliasing and blockiness is apparent, and at 32 inches, 1080p is unacceptable.
Click to expand...

I think the color vividness was a big deal for me, along with the size and glossy panel of the one I got.
Also don't play the most recent AAA titles too.
 
in games, i could not really tell that much of a difference except my frame rate took a huge hit.. But in desktop, productivity, general web using and every day tasks, it LOOKs amazing.
 
texuspete00 said:
1440p is about 80% more pixels. Makes a difference to me certainly. I move a little slower than some. I had a 37" 1080p to 32" 1440p. And I'm not saying there aren't factors like that to consider, like said this size at 1080p would kind of blow. Most people aren't going to compare like for like (for instance a lot of people have 1440p 27" here than 27" 1080p), but just to put it in perspective, it is a lot more pixels, and noticable to me.

I want to get one of the new 3440*1440 joints soon, it's basically more stuff on the side. Not much sharper or anything. Any more than that though and I suppose 4k is just another chunk, another tier of graphics, to keep up with. Just compared the multiplied numbers, and youll basically get to the load on the gpu and number of pixels, along with size sort of get the PPI etc.
Click to expand...
This. I don't believe for one second that anyone couldn't tell the difference on a monitor of the same size. It's nearly double the pixels. Going from a 24" 1080 to 27" 1440, then the difference may be harder to discern as the PPI is only 18.5% higher on the latter.
 
I have a 40 inch Samsung IPS 1080p TV as a monitor. Gamed on a 40 inch 4k TV and I am happy to go back home and play on my 1080p. Just not worth it. It's nice but nothing holy shit worthy.

I sit about a little more than an arms length and I love my 40 incher. Nothing compelling in display tech right now. Not to my eyes. To your eyes it may be worth it.
 
jarablue said:
I have a 40 inch Samsung IPS 1080p TV as a monitor. Gamed on a 40 inch 4k TV and I am happy to go back home and play on my 1080p. Just not worth it. It's nice but nothing holy shit worthy.

I sit about a little more than an arms length and I love my 40 incher. Nothing compelling in display tech right now. Not to my eyes. To your eyes it may be worth it.
Click to expand...
I had a 42 in 1080p plasma and made the jump to 55in 4k oled and i was beyond blown away but i think its more the oled vs res but text is a lot sharper at 4k at 55 vs 1080p st 42
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top