Where to Next for an Upgrade Monitor-Wise? 2560x1080, 2560x1440 or 2560x1600?

[PlayStation 2]

I'm thinking about throwing some money at a new monitor here soon and I was truly wondering what I should scout for.

Should I look for an ultrawide 2560x1080 monitor? That'd be the cheapest option and while it'd be nice for some things I do, it wouldn't bode all too well for the content I produce, as nearly all of it is in 4:3.

Should I look into a 2560x1440 monitor? Middle of the road option for me, more screen real estate, but I'd likely try to keep my monitor size 27" or under, preferably 24" and at that point, the text would be quite a bit smaller. Not enough for me to be deterred, but...

Should I look into a 2560x1600 monitor? Most expensive so I'd probably shop used. Definitely more screen real estate and would play the nicest with what I do, but I'd most likely wind up with a 30" monitor and that's pretty big for my small setup.

 

I'm genuinely not sure where to go with this. I'm upgrading from a 1920x1080 television that's served me really well as a monitor, so refresh rate, HDR, adaptive sync, hell, even if it's IPS doesn't matter much to me. I'm just worried about screen space and if it's practical to go with any of those options.

[Techstorm970]

3 minutes ago, handymanshandle said:

I'm upgrading from a 1920x1080 television

How big is the TV?

[PlayStation 2]

Just now, Techstorm970 said:

How big is the TV?

22", I think. Personally, I'd want to stick to the 20-27" range.

[Techstorm970]

3 minutes ago, handymanshandle said:

I'm thinking about throwing some money at a new monitor here soon and I was truly wondering what I should scout for.

Should I look for an ultrawide 2560x1080 monitor? That'd be the cheapest option and while it'd be nice for some things I do, it wouldn't bode all too well for the content I produce, as nearly all of it is in 4:3.

Should I look into a 2560x1440 monitor? Middle of the road option for me, more screen real estate, but I'd likely try to keep my monitor size 27" or under, preferably 24" and at that point, the text would be quite a bit smaller. Not enough for me to be deterred, but...

Should I look into a 2560x1600 monitor? Most expensive so I'd probably shop used. Definitely more screen real estate and would play the nicest with what I do, but I'd most likely wind up with a 30" monitor and that's pretty big for my small setup.

Which do you want more?  Higher resolution or greater multitasking capabilities?

[PlayStation 2]

Just now, Techstorm970 said:

Which do you want more?  Higher resolution or greater multitasking capabilities?

Frankly, I think higher general resolution would benefit me more. I wouldn't be against getting an ultrawide at all, but I don't really see how I'd take advantage of it.

[Techstorm970]

5 minutes ago, handymanshandle said:

Frankly, I think higher general resolution would benefit me more. I wouldn't be against getting an ultrawide at all, but I don't really see how I'd take advantage of it.

Ultrawides are a fun idea to entertain, I agree!  But they can be hard to justify for many of us.  The 1440p standard would be your best bet if you do much gaming; 1600p could cause unforeseen issues.  Although, if you do more with the VHS tapes than you do with games, then the 1600p monitor's--err--"more square-ish" shape would be great.

 

Edit: Changed "cubic" to "square-ish."  We're talking 2D here, not 3D!  

[PlayStation 2]

Just now, Techstorm970 said:

Ultrawides are a fun idea to entertain, I agree!  But they can be hard to justify for many of us.  The 1440p standard would be your best bet if you do much gaming; 1600p could cause unforeseen issues.  Although, if you do more with the VHS tapes than you do with games, then the 1600p monitor's--err--"more square-ish" shape would be great.

Yeah, frankly, the only games I'm truly concerned about a 16:10 screen being bad are emulated games, and even then, I can live with either stretching or having black borders for that if they're 16:9 than having big ass bars on the side if I went 21:9. TF2 works just fine in 16:10 and so does Forza Horizon 4. 

[LIGISTX]

So, my two cents, I absolutely love ultrawide. Like, can't get enough of it. Now that I have it there is just no going back. Multitasking is insane (although I still run a 1920x1080 monitor vertical next to my 34" 3440x1440............... #iiscrazyorsomething) but really, the ultrawide aspect ratio is amazing for multitasking and photo editing. I shoot a d850 and use LR and PS quite a bit, and I love the width. Now, that said, its not cheap, and its hard to drive such a resolution. My GTX 1080 with a decent OC on it does fine, but I wouldn't say it slays games. It does "plenty well" especially considering I am taking advantage of gsync which is a huge piece of hardware to lean on.

 

Reeling this back in to your original post though, I would go for as much resolution as you can get for your budget. For content creation and multitasking, there is nothing better than resolution. Your RX 580 will have a hard time gaming at anything over 1080p, but if that isn't a huge concern I wouldn't let that be a stopping point. My secondary PC is a 2560x1440 gsync acer predator deal, and honestly that does great as well. I do the same work on it, its just at a different location and not my main machine. For reference, it gets about the same level of performance with a GTX 1070 in it... It doesn't "smash" games, but it does totally fine.

 

I would very much consider anything with adaptive sync as that will help gaming out tremendously. Honestly, until you experience adaptive refresh, you just can't understand how nice it is. It really does make a notable difference.

[Techstorm970]

Just now, handymanshandle said:

Yeah, frankly, the only games I'm truly concerned about a 16:10 screen being bad are emulated games, and even then, I can live with either stretching or having black borders for that if they're 16:9 than having big ass bars on the side if I went 21:9. TF2 works just fine in 16:10 and so does Forza Horizon 4. 

Yeah, usually it's the indie games that you have to worry about more in that regard.

[LIGISTX]

I should have been more clear there, I play mostly AAA titles that are relatively new. I will list a few to give you a feel:

 

Doom 2016

PUBG

CSGO

Wildlands

Metro Last Light Redux

BF V

BF 1

 

Those are the sorts of titles that I run, and while my rig can easily do it, on the newer of the games I am not maxed out. Resolution is hard to drive while gaming, just something to consider.

[PlayStation 2]

1 minute ago, LIGISTX said:

So, my two cents, I absolutely love ultrawide. Like, can't get enough of it. Now that I have it there is just no going back. Multitasking is insane (although I still run a 1920x1080 monitor vertical next to my 34" 3440x1440............... #iiscrazyorsomething) but really, the ultrawide aspect ratio is amazing for multitasking and photo editing. I shoot a d850 and use LR and PS quite a bit, and I love the width. Now, that said, its not cheap, and its hard to drive such a resolution. My GTX 1080 with a decent OC on it does fine, but I wouldn't say it slays games. It does "plenty well" especially considering I am taking advantage of gsync which is a huge piece of hardware to lean on.

 

Reeling this back in to your original post though, I would go for as much resolution as you can get for your budget. For content creation and multitasking, there is nothing better than resolution. Your GTX 580 will have a hard time gaming at anything over 1080p, but if that isn't a huge concern I wouldn't let that be a stopping point. My secondary PC is a 2560x1440 gsync acer predator deal, and honestly that does great as well. I do the same work on it, its just at a different location and not my main machine. For reference, it gets about the same level of performance with a GTX 1070 in it... It doesn't "smash" games, but it does totally fine.

 

I would very much consider anything with adaptive sync as that will help gaming out tremendously. Honestly, until you experience adaptive refresh, you just can't understand how nice it is. It really does make a notable difference.

Hmm...

Yeah, personally, I couldn't see me doing too much with an ultrawide now that I think about it; I do a bit of cover art cleanup and restoration and even 16:9 is fine for that, although the resolution could be a bit higher.

Also, small correction: I've got an RX 580, not a GTX 580. I've done 2160p gaming on my card and was quite floored at what it could do at that resolution. It's not a big enough concern, anyway; as stated in an earlier post, TF2 does just fine at the resolutions I need it to, 4K included and I can emulate whatever I want to at high resolutions. That's good enough for me gaming-wise.

[LIGISTX]

1 minute ago, handymanshandle said:

Hmm...

Yeah, personally, I couldn't see me doing too much with an ultrawide now that I think about it; I do a bit of cover art cleanup and restoration and even 16:9 is fine for that, although the resolution could be a bit higher.

Also, small correction: I've got an RX 580, not a GTX 580. I've done 2160p gaming on my card and was quite floored at what it could do at that resolution. It's not a big enough concern, anyway; as stated in an earlier post, TF2 does just fine at the resolutions I need it to, 4K included and I can emulate whatever I want to at high resolutions. That's good enough for me gaming-wise.

Yea, sorry, I meant RX, not GTX. GTX 580 is old AF... I had a GTX 470 OCed 45% that did about 580 performance back in the day. Today..... that would be total garbage haha. Actually still have that 470

 

Anyways, yea. If the res doesn't scare you, I would definitely go that route. Resolution is king, at everything imo.

[PlayStation 2]

Just now, LIGISTX said:

Yea, sorry, I meant RX, not GTX. GTX 580 is old AF... I had a GTX 470 OCed 45% that did about 580 performance back in the day. Today..... that would be total garbage haha. Actually still have that 470

 

Anyways, yea. If the res doesn't scare you, I would definitely go that route. Resolution is king, at everything imo.

Alright, I'll likely dig into 2560x1600, then.