Which is better, 4k at 60Hz or 1440 at 144Hz

[VelikiPCguy]

As the title says, which one do you think is better overall, and why? The 4k will obviously have better image quality, but may stutter / be less smooth than the 144Hz one. Does the 4k's limited Hz also limit max fps, or is that just down to the quality of your hardware?

 

Also, can 4k monitors typically be taken down to 1440 to use more Hz (say, when playing a refresh rate-demanding title), or is Hz typically locked at 60 for them, no matter the resolution (not asking about any specific model, just generally curious)?

 

Which one would you pick, especially if your focus is on single-player games, where quick reflexes aren't *as* important (but still somewhat important, and smoothness is always nice, regardless)?

[Roswell]

I'll try to answer most of this:

 

• Refresh rate doesn't limit FPS as long as you don't have something like v-sync on.
• You can almost always pick 1440p on a 4K monitor, but it's going to make things look fuzzy because you're not downscaling in an increment of 4 to achieve a 4:1 pixel ratio. 1080p would look fine since it would be a 4:1 ratio against 4K.
• Some monitors will let you run at a higher refresh rate at lower than native resolutions. It's not super common and it depends on the exact model that you're looking at.

 

As far as which one you should get, it's truly up to your personal preference. If it was a a 27 inch or larger monitor, the difference between 4K and 1440p will be pretty noticeable. That said, the difference between 60 and 144Hz is also pretty noticeable.

[rmgdnz]

As a primarily single player gamer, I generally still prefer high refresh rate monitors. Running games like Assassins Creed at 90 or so FPS at 1440p makes them look incredible. While 4K gaming definitely does increase clarity, I feel like the lack in smoothness at 60Hz is much more noticeable. When I switch between using my PC and PS5, I definitely notice the difference. The extra smoothness of a high refresh rate monitor (given your hardware can deliver the performance) just makes all facial animations, movement, and gameplay feel so much more fluid and responsive. 

[Kilrah]

IMO 4K is nice but not necessary unless you're going with a monitor >32". 

[Doobeedoo]

Literally fing anything > 60Hz.

[jones177]

7 hours ago, NewwGuyy123 said:

As the title says, which one do you think is better overall, and why? The 4k will obviously have better image quality, but may stutter / be less smooth than the 144Hz one. Does the 4k's limited Hz also limit max fps, or is that just down to the quality of your hardware?

 

Also, can 4k monitors typically be taken down to 1440 to use more Hz (say, when playing a refresh rate-demanding title), or is Hz typically locked at 60 for them, no matter the resolution (not asking about any specific model, just generally curious)?

 

Which one would you pick, especially if your focus is on single-player games, where quick reflexes aren't *as* important (but still somewhat important, and smoothness is always nice, regardless)?

All my 1440p monitors are a fail in productivity compared to 4k so I no longer buy them.  

For 1440p gaming I use LG OLEDs.  They do a great 1440p 120hz with an the image quality better than my native 1440p monitors.

 

The best none OLED resolution I like is 3840 X 1600 on an ultrawide. Those few extra pixels over 1440p make all the difference when it coms to gaming and productivity.  

 

Most 4k monitors don't do 1440p or 1080p well. My old 2015 vintage 28" TNs are the only ones I have used that do it well. None of my VA or IPS 4k monitors can.

 

A lot of games still don't benefit from 4k since the textures they use don't show any more detail at 4k over 1440p. 

To give you an idea here is a RDR2 test. As you can see in this scene 4k is a waist. I played it at 3440 X 1440. 

 

 

[Stahlmann]

I'd definetly go high refresh rate first and resolution second. The smoother gameplay is imo much more noticeable than the sharper image. But if your hardware and budget allows for it, you can have both.

 

1440p will look worse on a 4K 27" monitor, than on a 1440p 27" monitor. The reason for that is because 1440p and 4K can't use integer scaling, so if you have a 4K monitor and need more FPS in some games, go for 1080p instead. Then the 4K monitor can just "unite" 4 pixels to be used as one. 4K is 4 times 1080p after all. You'll just have to enable "integer scaling" in your GPU drivers.

[e22big]

9 minutes ago, Stahlmann said:

I'd definetly go high refresh rate first and resolution second. The smoother gameplay is imo much more noticeable than the sharper image. But if your hardware and budget allows for it, you can have both.

 

1440p will look worse on a 4K 27" monitor, than on a 1440p 27" monitor. The reason for that is because 1440p and 4K can't use integer scaling, so if you have a 4K monitor and need more FPS in some games, go for 1080p instead. Then the 4K monitor can just "unite" 4 pixels to be used as one. 4K is 4 times 1080p after all. You'll just have to enable "integer scaling" in your GPU drivers.

hmn from my experience, 1440p on 4k 27inch still looks a lot better than than 1080p (eventhough they do definitely looks fuzzy and not as sharp as on the native 1440p)

 

The lack of pixel density due to monitor size is actually more notiecable than fuzz scaling. Also 4k is 'twice' and not '4 times' the pixels of 1080p (they are 2160p)

[Stahlmann]

Just now, e22big said:

hmn from my experience, 1440p on 4k 27inch still looks a lot better than than 1080p (eventhough they do definitely looks fuzzy and not as sharp as on the native 1440p)

 

The lack of pixel density due to monitor size is actually more notiecable than fuzz scaling. Also 4k is 'twice' and not '4 times' the pixels of 1080p (they are 2160p)

Maybe it's how my 27GN950 handles 1440p that makes it look worse. But for me 1080p with integer scaling does result in a better overall image than the blurry 1440p. Even if it does introduce more visible pixels. Especially on text the blurryness introduced by non-integer scaling with 1440p is very obvious for me.

[Stahlmann]

4 minutes ago, e22big said:

hmn from my experience, 1440p on 4k 27inch still looks a lot better than than 1080p (eventhough they do definitely looks fuzzy and not as sharp as on the native 1440p)

 

The lack of pixel density due to monitor size is actually more notiecable than fuzz scaling. Also 4k is 'twice' and not '4 times' the pixels of 1080p (they are 2160p)

Like i hinted at above, every display handles different resolutions differently. For example my C9 OLED has such good upscaling, u can barely tell the difference between 1440p and native 4K. But good upscaling is a TV thing i guess. Never had a monitor that looked any good on anything else than native res.

[e22big]

1 minute ago, Stahlmann said:

Maybe it's how my 27GN950 handles 1440p that makes it look worse. But for me 1080p with integer scaling does result in a better overall image than the blurry 1440p. Even if it does introduce more visible pixels. Especially on text the blurryness introduced by non-integer scaling with 1440p is very obvious for me.

I guess it depends on game and your monitor, I've gone through 2 LG 4k panel and in both of them I still find 1440p sharper than 1080p