1080p vs 1440p

[Texhnlyze]

For people who has both, do you guys notice huge difference between the both res? Does it justify the additional cost?

[Aniallation]

For people who has both, do you guys notice huge difference between the both res? Does it justify the additional cost?

At 27" it's worth the extra money if you can actually afford it. At below that 1080p is fine IMO

[arnavvr]

There are 1440 phones, you know

[I/O]

For people who has both, do you guys notice huge difference between the both res? Does it justify the additional cost?

Not at all. I think a quality 1080P panel is better than a sub par 1440P panel. IMHO and Linus agrees that 21:9 will be the next mainstay standard after 1080P. 4K is silly on anything smaller than 40".

[Texhnlyze]

At 27" it's worth the extra money if you can actually afford it. At below that 1080p is fine IMO

 

The BenQ XL2720Z 27in 1080p monitor is on sale right now and I'm debating with my family if I should go wait till next year and buy a 1440p or buy the 1080p right now.

 

[PerfectTemplar]

 

The BenQ XL2720Z 27in 1080p monitor is on sale right now and I'm debating with my family if I should go wait till next year and buy a 1440p or buy the 1080p right now.

 

 

for 27" I suggest going 1440p. I got 27" 1080p monitors and they're not great tbh. I plan on either upgrading to 1440p or getting 24" 1080p ones soon.

[Geekazoid]

IMHO and Linus agrees that 21:9 will be the next mainstream standard after 1080P.

Yeah, you're probably right. How long before every home has a 21:9 TV and TV shows, news and current affairs are all filmed in 21:9, and then you'll have the 21:9 video cameras. Who knows what next. It'd be great if this happened because then TV networks could stop cropping 21:9 movies to 16:9 and just continually broadcast movies in their full 21:9 aspect ratio, otherwise known as their OAR - Original Aspect Ratio. It'd be great!

[I/O]

Yeah, you're probably right. How long before every home has a 21:9 TV and TV shows, news and current affairs are all filmed in 21:9, and then you'll have the 21:9 video cameras. Who knows what next. It'd be great if this happened because then TV networks could stop cropping 21:9 movies to 16:9 and just continually broadcast movies in their full 21:9 aspect ratio, otherwise known as their OAR - Original Aspect Ratio. It'd be great!

Ya watching a movie like The Dark Knight Imax version in 21:9 native aspect ratio would be amazing. Also games would be much more immersive with all that extra viewing area.

[Geekazoid]

Ya watching a movie like The Dark Knight Imax version in 21:9 native aspect ratio would be amazing. Also games would be much more immersive with all that extra viewing area.

Yeah, super amazing awesomeness! B)

[Texhnlyze]

Looks like I'm going to be waiting till next year. I hope there will be news for IPS 144hz monitors! Thanks for the suggestions and advice guys! 

[I/O]

Looks like I'm going to be waiting till next year. I hope there will be news for IPS 144hz monitors! Thanks for the suggestions and advice guys! 

Maybe there will be news of the Radeon 390x then you could actually use a 144Hz monitor.

[Stomplar]

Maybe there will be news of the Radeon 390x then you could actually use a 144Hz monitor.

that supposed to be the next superbeast?

[I/O]

that supposed to be the next superbeast?

Perhaps. It does have like a 10,000 bit memory bus if that's an indicator.

[PerfectTemplar]

Maybe there will be news of the Radeon 390x then you could actually use a 144Hz monitor.

Haha, yeah. I have a GTX 980 and find my 120Hz monitor useless because games coming out lately are so unoptimised.. *cough* AC unity *cough*

[I/O]

Haha, yeah. I have a GTX 980 and find my 120Hz monitor useless because games coming out lately are so unoptimised.. *cough* AC unity *cough*

30 and 60fps frame caps are BS IMHO but really most gamers can't run more than 30 or 40fps min anyway unless dropping resolution and IQ settings to far below that of modern consoles.

[Ahimoth]

1440p for the next year and a bit. 1440 is on the way out but it's definitely worth it mate. By 2016 4k will replace it, completely.

[I/O]

1440p for the next year and a bit. 1440 is on the way out but it's definitely worth it mate. By 2016 4k will replace it, completely.

21:9 makes much more sense as the next step in mainstream resolutions.

[VMaxMuffin]

I use a 27" 1080p display and I'm fine with it (it isn't "horrible" or anything) however it is noticeably not as good as 1440p (also have a 27" 1440p iMac, which was mine but has now replaced the slightly older family iMac). For most people, I would recommend 1440p if you can afford it, OR a 24" screen if you can only afford 1080p. However, there are reasons to go with a 27" 1080p screen, because the resolution you need in order to be unable to see pixels ("retina" resolution) is dependent on the distance you sit from the screen - after all, people have massive 1080p TVs without complaining about poor pixel density. I play a lot of racing sims, so when I'm sitting in my racing setup I sit further away from the screen than people normally would. As a result, the screen looks perfectly fine. When playing "mouse and keyboard games" (in other words, not racing games) I can see the pixels but it's not so bad it bothers me - in fact I generally don't notice if I'm not looking for it. I think people tend to make it seem worse than it is.

[I/O]

I use a 27" 1080p display and I'm fine with it (it isn't "horrible" or anything) however it is noticeably not as good as 1440p (also have a 27" 1440p iMac, which was mine but has now replaced the slightly older family iMac). For most people, I would recommend 1440p if you can afford it, OR a 24" screen if you can only afford 1080p. However, there are reasons to go with a 27" 1080p screen, because the resolution you need in order to be unable to see pixels ("retina" resolution) is dependent on the distance you sit from the screen - after all, people have massive 1080p TVs without complaining about poor pixel density. I play a lot of racing sims, so when I'm sitting in my racing setup I sit further away from the screen than people normally would. As a result, the screen looks perfectly fine. When playing "mouse and keyboard games" (in other words, not racing games) I can see the pixels but it's not so bad it bothers me - in fact I generally don't notice if I'm not looking for it. I think people tend to make it seem worse than it is.

It's not a fair comparison with the imac display. Regardless of resolution, the imac panel is a A+ premium binned very high quality panel with pristine color reproduction and contrast with amazing black levels and brightness.

[skywake]

This chart is about right IMO:

 

I don't have a 1440p monitor or anything higher than 1080p. However when I sit at my desk about 1m from my two 22" 1080p monitors? They're pretty damn decent. I also know that when I sit 3m back from the spare 32" 1080p TV it's fantastic. The chart says that 720p content should also looks decent? Well I can barely tell the difference on that set. However my 50" set that I also sit around 3m back from? It really needs 1080p content to shine.

 

So I think I can say with confidence that if I got a monitor that was bigger than around 25" and used it in the same way I do the ones I have now? I'd have to make sure it was 1440p.

[Almercenary]

I run a 1440p 27inch and I was recently playing on a 1080p. You can 100% tell the difference. Any lower maybe not, but IMO it is worth the money

[Imabigmac]

@Texhnlyze

 

This is a tough one, frankly if you already have a 23 or 24 inch good quality monitor you probably won't see much of a difference between the two, perhaps you would spot some differences but you will really have to be looking for them and in the heat of battle of BF4 you won't really notice it, but aimless walking around in skyrim yea that pile of rock might have a few less jaggies. However given most if not all 1440p monitors are 27" you would most certainly "feel" a difference, the increased screen size is pretty darn nice for RTS games and when you have 25 chrome tabs. For FPS games the size increases doesn't really help IMO, especially when in something BF4 you really want a smooth experience rather than best possible looking environment, even with a 970 and 1440 its hard to push at steady 50fps in BF4 all the time. So a performance hit like this really starts to show that 1440p really all that great for all FPS games. That said other less demanding titles where MSAA can be cranked up take bioshock infinite the performance hit really doesn't matter unless your monitor is refreshing faster than 60Hz. 

 

So as with anything I would suggest you try to see one in a store or at friends house before buying so you can compare yourself, if this like in most cases isn't possible continue with internet research. I don't regret my purchase of a 1440p monitor a year ago other - than the extra HP needed to run it. (780ti) and despite having it sit beside my 1920x1200 Dell I still play everything on my 1440p. 

 

Anyway my 2 cents. 

[I/O]

A nice high quality 1080P panel is better than a lower quality 1440P panel. Resolution is not everything especially if the quality of the pixels are being sacrificed upon.

[Vedge]

Ya watching a movie like The Dark Knight Imax version in 21:9 native aspect ratio would be amazing. Also games would be much more immersive with all that extra viewing area.

 

yay games in 55 FOV on an even wider screen.. #PCmasterrace...

 

On a serious note - I'd love to get one of those IPS screens linus reviewed

[I/O]

yay games in 55 FOV on an even wider screen.. #PCmasterrace...

 

On a serious note - I'd love to get one of those IPS screens linus reviewed

isn't 55 FOV really narrow ? I thought the higher the FOV number the more viewing area you can see ?