4k 16:9 vs 1440p ultrawide

[BunnyHunter67]

I recently got an lg 34GN850-B and it has a stuck pixel. So I'm able to either return it or get it repaired. But Seeing the 4k doom benchmark got me thinking. Would 4k 144hz be a better gaming experience than a 1440p ultrawide at 144hz? I'll be getting a 3080 on launch day (Hopefully) so I'll have the gpu power for either. I mainly play fps and mobas but I really like single player story games too. Which monitor do you prefer? I've never seen a 4k desktop monitor so its hard for me to judge. I know you can't give a definitive answer as this is subjective, but what would you choose and why? Thanks!

[Sorenson]

Most of the 4k monitors out right now focus on creator type stuff. HDMI 2.1 is just coming out which allows 4k 120 (maybe 144hz with subsampling idk). The only 4k monitor I would choose for gaming would be the LG CX48. Linus pointed out that since the CX48 is OLED you could change the aspect ratio to ultrawide and have unobtrusive black borders if you wanted that for certain games. 

[OR13N]

Do you like 21:9 aspect ratio better than 16:9? Try it out, there's your answer.
If I had money, I'd stick with 21:9 for story games and 16:9 for FPS.

[BunnyHunter67]

3 minutes ago, Sorenson said:

Most of the 4k monitors out right now focus on creator type stuff. HDMI 2.1 is just coming out which allows 4k 120 (maybe 144hz with subsampling idk). The only 4k monitor I would choose for gaming would be the LG CX48. Linus pointed out that since the CX48 is OLED you could change the aspect ratio to ultrawide and have unobtrusive black borders if you wanted that for certain games. 

https://www.lg.com/us/monitors/lg-27gn950-b-gaming-monitor This would be what I would get instead. Are there just no cables right now that do 144hz 4k? 

 

[jayark1]

I'm actually in the same dilemma right now.  My decision, as of now, is between the lg 34GN850 (UltraWide [3440 x 1440]) and the 27gn950 (Standard 16:9 [4K/144]).  I was just about to pull the trigger on the said UltraWide, however, read where a lot of Multiplayer games are intentionally nerfing the FOV for UltraWide.  People are saying Dead by Daylight is supposedly "unplayable" if you have an UltraWide monitor.  My question to that is:  Unplayable, as in, you can't get it letterboxed to make it somewhat normal?  People are saying the game forces 'zoom in' and makes it difficult to play.  If anyone has any experience with that game and ultrawide, your response is certainly welcome as it's a game changer for me to make a decision.

 

Also, keep in mind that although an UltraWide may be 'only' be 1440p equivalent, the added real estate actually adds more pixels (for games that support UW), and can really push the GPU more severely than 4K, 120fps at 16:9 when trying to max out the settings in a game.  I saw a video of someone playing a UltraWide with 2080Ti at Ultra Settings and it was dipping below 60 fps at Ultra at only 1440p equivalent on UltraWide .  I know the 3080, on paper, is supposed to be more powerful, however, I'm questioning if it'll even get 80 fps at 3440 x 1440.  You may need a 3090 for that.  It should, however, play 4K 120fps realistically on a 16:9 monitor.

 

EDIT:  Just read a forum on Dead By Daylight for which people said the game doesn't even allow for letterboxed play on Widescreen.. only forcibly 'stretches' the image and people saying its cuts off their feet view in the game and there's no way to fix this.  People are saying it actually gave them a disadvantage.  Now, I know that's just 1 game (I'm sure there are many others), however, this is a deal breaker for me.  I'm sure Widescreen is phenomenal when playing games that actually support it, but I'm now leaning towards the idea of just having a monitor that I know will play ALL games natively on it. 

[Mihle]

5 hours ago, jayark1 said:

I'm actually in the same dilemma right now.  My decision, as of now, is between the lg 34GN850 (UltraWide [3440 x 1440]) and the 27gn950 (Standard 16:9 [4K/144]).  I was just about to pull the trigger on the said UltraWide, however, read where a lot of Multiplayer games are intentionally nerfing the FOV for UltraWide.  People are saying Dead by Daylight is supposedly "unplayable" if you have an UltraWide monitor.  My question to that is:  Unplayable, as in, you can't get it letterboxed to make it somewhat normal?  People are saying the game forces 'zoom in' and makes it difficult to play.  If anyone has any experience with that game and ultrawide, your response is certainly welcome as it's a game changer for me to make a decision.

 

Also, keep in mind that although an UltraWide may be 'only' be 1440p equivalent, the added real estate actually adds more pixels (for games that support UW), and can really push the GPU more severely than 4K, 120fps at 16:9 when trying to max out the settings in a game.  I saw a video of someone playing a UltraWide with 2080Ti at Ultra Settings and it was dipping below 60 fps at Ultra at only 1440p equivalent on UltraWide .  I know the 3080, on paper, is supposed to be more powerful, however, I'm questioning if it'll even get 80 fps at 3440 x 1440.  You may need a 3090 for that.  It should, however, play 4K 120fps realistically on a 16:9 monitor.

 

EDIT:  Just read a forum on Dead By Daylight for which people said the game doesn't even allow for letterboxed play on Widescreen.. only forcibly 'stretches' the image and people saying its cuts off their feet view in the game and there's no way to fix this.  People are saying it actually gave them a disadvantage.  Now, I know that's just 1 game (I'm sure there are many others), however, this is a deal breaker for me.  I'm sure Widescreen is phenomenal when playing games that actually support it, but I'm now leaning towards the idea of just having a monitor that I know will play ALL games natively on it. 

No matter how you look at it, a game running 3440x1440 is easier to run than what 4K is.

[Totalimus]

6 hours ago, jayark1 said:

I'm actually in the same dilemma right now.  My decision, as of now, is between the lg 34GN850 (UltraWide [3440 x 1440]) and the 27gn950 (Standard 16:9 [4K/144]).  I was just about to pull the trigger on the said UltraWide, however, read where a lot of Multiplayer games are intentionally nerfing the FOV for UltraWide.  People are saying Dead by Daylight is supposedly "unplayable" if you have an UltraWide monitor.  My question to that is:  Unplayable, as in, you can't get it letterboxed to make it somewhat normal?  People are saying the game forces 'zoom in' and makes it difficult to play.  If anyone has any experience with that game and ultrawide, your response is certainly welcome as it's a game changer for me to make a decision.

 

Also, keep in mind that although an UltraWide may be 'only' be 1440p equivalent, the added real estate actually adds more pixels (for games that support UW), and can really push the GPU more severely than 4K, 120fps at 16:9 when trying to max out the settings in a game.  I saw a video of someone playing a UltraWide with 2080Ti at Ultra Settings and it was dipping below 60 fps at Ultra at only 1440p equivalent on UltraWide .  I know the 3080, on paper, is supposed to be more powerful, however, I'm questioning if it'll even get 80 fps at 3440 x 1440.  You may need a 3090 for that.  It should, however, play 4K 120fps realistically on a 16:9 monitor.

 

EDIT:  Just read a forum on Dead By Daylight for which people said the game doesn't even allow for letterboxed play on Widescreen.. only forcibly 'stretches' the image and people saying its cuts off their feet view in the game and there's no way to fix this.  People are saying it actually gave them a disadvantage.  Now, I know that's just 1 game (I'm sure there are many others), however, this is a deal breaker for me.  I'm sure Widescreen is phenomenal when playing games that actually support it, but I'm now leaning towards the idea of just having a monitor that I know will play ALL games natively on it. 

Pretty sure you can just change your resolution to 2560x1440 in windows, have black bars and then launch Dead by Daylight and everything will be a-okay.

DbD is the main game I play as well and am currently on a 1440p 27'' screen and I wish I could have an ultrawide. 

[jayark1]

1 hour ago, Mihle said:

No matter how you look at it, a game running 3440x1440 is easier to run than what 4K is.

I would think the added "Field of View" actually taxes the GPU more than "Resolution".  In theory, it requires more processing for more real estate to display what's going on within your draw distance combined with added FOV Left to Right.  The GPU essentially has to process "more" of the game activity.  If the game is simply "stretched", then it's not really a performance hit.  But natively adding "more" of the actual game itself would require much more performance.  Am I wrong?

[jayark1]

2 hours ago, Totalimus said:

Pretty sure you can just change your resolution to 2560x1440 in windows, have black bars and then launch Dead by Daylight and everything will be a-okay.

DbD is the main game I play as well and am currently on a 1440p 27'' screen and I wish I could have an ultrawide. 

If that's the case, then at that point does the quality of the picture and performance look better, worse, or the same if playing on a 1440p/144hz 16:9 monitor vs UltraWide 144hz with the Windows changed resolution?

[Totalimus]

5 hours ago, jayark1 said:

If that's the case, then at that point does the quality of the picture and performance look better, worse, or the same if playing on a 1440p/144hz 16:9 monitor vs UltraWide 144hz with the Windows changed resolution?

Performance does not get affected negatively, it increases since there are less pixels to render. Even on 16:9 monitors some people play a game like Counter-Strike: Global Offensive with blackbars by choosing a 4:3 resolution. You'll be just trimming some screen real estate.

[e22big]

20 hours ago, Sorenson said:

Most of the 4k monitors out right now focus on creator type stuff. HDMI 2.1 is just coming out which allows 4k 120 (maybe 144hz with subsampling idk). The only 4k monitor I would choose for gaming would be the LG CX48. Linus pointed out that since the CX48 is OLED you could change the aspect ratio to ultrawide and have unobtrusive black borders if you wanted that for certain games. 

I think you can actually reach full 10 bit 144hz 4k natively with HDMI 2.1, you can already do 4k 120fps 10bit with DP 1.4a. HDMI 2.1 offers 42.6 Gbps bandwith, those numbers are much higher than DisplayPort 1.4 25 Gbps.

 

https://www.tomshardware.com/features/displayport-vs-hdmi-better-for-gaming

[e22big]

20 hours ago, BunnyHunter67 said:

I recently got an lg 34GN850-B and it has a stuck pixel. So I'm able to either return it or get it repaired. But Seeing the 4k doom benchmark got me thinking. Would 4k 144hz be a better gaming experience than a 1440p ultrawide at 144hz? I'll be getting a 3080 on launch day (Hopefully) so I'll have the gpu power for either. I mainly play fps and mobas but I really like single player story games too. Which monitor do you prefer? I've never seen a 4k desktop monitor so its hard for me to judge. I know you can't give a definitive answer as this is subjective, but what would you choose and why? Thanks!

I personally prefer 4k but for fast pacing gaming, you won't really be noticing much of the increased sharpness, especially in 27inch form factor. However, if you're coming from a larger 1440p monitor (like 32inch and larger) you will notice a significant increased in image quality going from 1440p to 4k. Although for slower pace game like turn base and RTS, 4k made a massive different. 

 

At the  end of the day, however, ultrawide aspect ratio made a much bigger different. But if you, like me, you aren't found the ultrawide ratio that impressive, going 4k made a lot more sense for RTX 3080 imo