is upgrading to a 4K monitor worth it?
is there a noticeable difference or is it meme technology?
>>53816461
for what size/what do you usually use your computer for?
>>53816461
>tfw fell for the 144p meme
>>53816461
if you don't know if you need it, you don't have to buy shit you don't need
>>53816461
1080p 144hz is the best at the moment
>price wise anyway
>>53816469
photoshop / gaming
>>53816461
The 1080p should extend exactly to the middle.
The problem with 4K is that everyone just scales it to 1080p anyways, otherwise shit is microscopic. Just go for 2K instead, that is the sweet spot.
>>53816469
23 inches
>>53817711
Would consider going up to 27 inches if it matters.
yeah you should upgrade anon
>>53816461
>is there a noticeable difference
Yes. There's a vast improvement in sharpness/image quality going from 27" 2560x1440 to 27" 3840x2160. It's mostly noticeable in video games. Text is better too, but it's not like it was a major problem or anything at 1440p either.
>>53817739
Thanks Tami! SO!!! helpful to have your technology expertise!!!!1!
>>53817783
Most people are skipping 1440p.
Going from 1080p to 4k. Maybe 8k if the gpu companies can't get their stuff together.
4k porn vs VR porn... the battle of 2016 choices
>>53816461
Probably meme for now since I heard a lot of software have problems with buttons and text on that resolution.
>>53817824
8K is crazy at this point, no use even considering it since there won't be any sort of affordable option for years. You can get a good 4K monitor for about the same as a good 1440p monitor.
>>53817878
and don't forget the massive amount of data 8k content would require
even at 4k there are just a few cities with the infrastructure, and not many people can afford it
>>53817683
Don't listen to her. I'm using a 1440p monitor right now and I hate how it's a awkward resolution between 1080p and 4k.
Planning to upgrade to a 4k monitor in a year as soon as I can get it with 120hz.
>>53817963
120hz in 4k?
Good luck getting to even 50fps.
Never really found high DPI to be all that spectacular for my mostly textual use case, I still use 1280x1024 displays on desktop systems.
>>53818205
1600x1200 is where it's at, hombre
>>53817963
How is it an awkward resolution? Asking as someone who uses a 1440p monitor for gaming regularly.
>>53816479
1440 you mean, also he means real 4K, but also dunno why they call it 4K if its not really even 4000 and also we used to call resolutions by the height like 720p etc, now we call it by wight? 720p...1080p..1440p...and then 4k!? why not 2k
>>53817824
>8k
people would have to sit back far from the screen
>>53816461
Nah, not right now. There are loads of panel techs coming out in the next few months, most significantly HDR.
Get a 1080p 144Hz TN panel if you MUST upgrade. There's even a couple with freesync for less than $250.
Wait a few years for anything better.
>>53817824
You mean most gamers.
People going from 1080p to 4K are fucking retarded.
There are no good affordable options for 4K yet while there are excellent 1440p monitors for great prices.
And there's barely any support for 4K when it comes to websites and scaling, and you'd need a beastly GPU to run games smoothly.
Most media content is in 720p or 1080p and you'd need at least 32" to be able to browse the Internet and do anything else really without straining your eyes. What's the point in spending a ton of money on a resolution when you're going to scale everything at 150% anyway? And don't say "muh PPI" because the PPI of a 25" 1440p monitor is excellent enough for day to day use and gaming.
>>53817963
Awkward resolution?
I like how you state this and then don't reply when someone ask you why.
Got a 4k 32" monitor, using anything else is just awkward now.
You should jump over 4K and directly to 8K which is going to be the hot shit
>>53818644
1080P IS 2K BAKA
