Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Best 4k 144hz display?

At 27 inches 4k doesn't make sense. It's just not a big enough display that you need that amount of pixels. It is still hard for cards to even do high refresh 4k so you would really just be better of getting a VERY good 1440p screen instead of this just good 4k one and not really get much more out of it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, mattdmg said:

If I wanted a good 144hz 4k display would this be my best option?

Really the only good one in the market is 27GL850 by LG, and even that it just DOESNT MAKE SENSE AT ALL. I would rather go get myself a 1440p 240hz at what they retail for 4K144hz.

Remember to press quote to get a response from someone! | Check people's edited comments! Press F5 to do so! | Remember to press that check mark on the right answer that solve your problem! | React to your heart, not peer pressure!

 

"Wow, you want me to say ara ara? Really?"

- Clock Girl

Self Introduction and Current Rig

 

🏳️‍⚧️ Rights

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, jaslion said:

At 27 inches 4k doesn't make sense. It's just not a big enough display that you need that amount of pixels. It is still hard for cards to even do high refresh 4k so you would really just be better of getting a VERY good 1440p screen instead of this just good 4k one and not really get much more out of it.

it could still useful if you need to sit really close to the screen though (you also get a significantly sharper image than 1440p, even at 27 inch)

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, e22big said:

it could still useful if you need to sit really close to the screen though (you also get a significantly sharper image than 1440p, even at 27 inch)

I mean I am on a wacom cintiq 27qhd hugging the screen constantly and 1440p is really just plenty even up close :p.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, SorryClaire said:

Really the only good one in the market is 27GL850 by LG, and even that it just DOESNT MAKE SENSE AT ALL. I would rather go get myself a 1440p 240hz at what they retail for 4K144hz.

The 27GL850 is a 1440p display, not 4K

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, jaslion said:

I mean I am on a wacom cintiq 27qhd hugging the screen constantly and 1440p is really just plenty even up close :p.

Depend on what do you mena by 'upclose', I have been to both 1440p and 4k and a feet and less the lack of pixel density in 1440p is starting to become noticeable, you also started to see some rough edge in text. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, e22big said:

Depend on what do you mena by 'upclose', I have been to both 1440p and 4k and a feet and less the lack of pixel density in 1440p is starting to become noticeable, you also started to see some rough edge in text. 

It's a drawing tablet I literally have it in my face for hours at a time :p.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, jaslion said:

It's a drawing tablet I literally have it in my face for hours at a time :p.

well, that's because it's a small display, even a 1080p display would have more pixel desnity than 4k at 13 inch and smaller

 

it's not just the size of image either, it's literally have more or at least as much pixels as a 4k screen, if you put a 1080p phone screen and cut it into a 27 inch it will easily be 5k or larger display (and likewise, a 48 inch 4k TV is more like a 24 inch 1080p display cut into 48 inch size)

 

At least that's what I understood, when looking upclose, a 1080p phone pixel looks pretty much the same or smaller than a 4k 32 and 27 inch monitor

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, e22big said:

well, that's because it's a small display, even a 1080p display would have more pixel desnity than 4k at 13 inch and smaller

 

it's not just the size of image either, it's literally have more or at least as much pixels as a 4k screen, if you put a 1080p phone screen and cut it into a 27 inch it will easily be 5k or larger display (and likewise, a 48 inch 4k TV is more like a 24 inch 1080p display cut into 48 inch size)

 

At least that's what I understood, when looking upclose, a 1080p phone pixel looks pretty much the same or smaller than a 4k 32 and 27 inch monitor

It's a 27inch in 1440p display drawing tablet. It is not small at all.

 

Pixel density is all that matter really. A pixel density of 85 is considered enough for anything if viewed from 30cm away a 27 inch 1440p screen has one of 109.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, jaslion said:

It's a 27inch in 1440p display drawing tablet. It is not small at all.

 

Pixel density is all that matter really. A pixel density of 85 is considered enough for anything if viewed from 30cm away a 27 inch 1440p screen has one of 109.

Ah I see that make a bit of sense

 

I've got to disagree on the PPI though, while 1091-107 is arguably good enough for most, it doesn't deliver the optimum performance, in game and photo editing it might be ok but text could look a lot better at 130+ PPI.

 

I also don't know how can you miss the very visible pixels when viewing at 30ft and less, it's especally visible on white static scene (like browsing website.)

Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, e22big said:

Ah I see that make a bit of sense

 

I've got to disagree on the PPI though, while 1091-107 is arguably good enough for most, it doesn't deliver the optimum performance, in game and photo editing it might be ok but text could look a lot better at 130+ PPI.

 

I also don't know how can you miss the very visible pixels when viewing at 30ft and less, it's especally visible on white static scene (like browsing website.)

You stop seeing the pixels. The brain just stops focusing on it the moment you stop focusing on it and it becomes fine. I'm currently sitting 40cm away and I honestly could not tell you the difference between my wacom or asus proart 4k part from the slightly different colours they produce (the wacom is older so old screen tech and accuracy is only 91% instead of 99 of the proart) that and the windows ui scaling issues.

 

The only reason I got the 4k proart was because someone got rid of it for 250 because of ui scaling issues in autodesk, zbrush and substance painter. Which I also have but I got my wacom to work on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had a LG 27GN850, which is 1440p 144Hz. Now i have a 27GN950, which is 4K 144Hz. The difference is really noticeable imo. Anyone who says it's not never tried it. With around 160 ppi, text and small objects just become much, much clearer. And simply not being able to make out individual pixels is a huge immersion bonus for me. The higher resolution also helps to bring out more detail from high resolution textures. Yes, 1440p is "fine", but if you ever had a 4K 27" screen to compare to, then 1440p at 27" is just not that sharp.

 

But as the others pointed out already, at this price point you could also go for a 1440p 240Hz monitor. Depending on the games you play it might make more or less sense to look into that.

Current Specs:

CPU: AMD Ryzen 5 5600X - Motherboard: ASUS ROG Strix B550-E - GPU: PNY RTX 3080 XLR8 Epic-X - RAM: 4x8GB (32GB) G.Skill TridentZ RGB 3600MHz CL16 - PSU: Corsair RMx (2018) 850W - Storage: 500 GB Corsair MP600 (Boot) + 2 TB Sabrent Rocket Q (Storage) - Cooling: EK, HW Labs & Alphacool custom loop - Case: Lian-Li PC O11 Dynamic - Fans: 6x Noctua NF-A12x25 - AMP/DAC: FiiO K5 Pro - OS: Windows 11 preview - Monitor: ASUS ROG Swift PG35VQ - Mouse: Logitech G Pro + Powerplay - Keyboard: Logitech G915 TKL - Headphones: Beyerdynamic Amiron Home - Microphone: Antlion ModMic

 

Temperatures @steady state: Furmark + CinebenchR23 running for 1 hour. Fans @850RPM. Pump @1600RPM.

Water: 37°C

CPU: 73°C

GPU: 54°C

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×