2560x1440 on a 4k monitor

[gasolin]

2560x1440 on a 4k monitor is that possible with not scalling problems?

 

32" 4k for multitasking when not gaming and 2560x1440 when gaming = i don't need a gtx 1080, i could god as low as a gtx 1060 6 since atleast half of my games are as old as the gtx 700 cards or older (grid,dirt 3,need for speed hot persuit.....)

[Princess Luna]

Why not an ultrawide? either 2560x1080p or 3440x1440p or just get a 2560x1440p from start trust me 4k is not worth it... due to the bad windows scaling you'll have the same virtual space as 2560x1440p the only gains you're getting is higher pixel density but at this point it's more than you really need... there's only so much difference from such super sampling.

 

And when you try 2560x1440p on 4k it'll look blurry and bad... always try sticking to your native resolution.

[gasolin]

4k was to get more space

[spellmanuk]

trust me on a screen that big when your sat close scaling up games sucks. I have a 24 inch 4k monitor and plugged my ps4 slim into it playing games at 1080p was so awful it game up and plugged the ps4 back into the TV. making your pixels 4x the size or in your case 2x the size can work but ive found obi works better on smaller screens since the ppt is better remember a 21" 4k screen has the same amount of pixels as a 32" screen but a lot hire density so the size of the pixels is a lot smaller meaning you can get away with more scaling the bigger the screen the less you can get away with it (unless you stand really far away)

[Princess Luna]

12 minutes ago, gasolin said:

4k was to get more space

All more reason why you should get an ultrawide 21:9 for ACTUAL more virtal space.

[gasolin]

Have to update my system info

 

System info updated

[gasolin]

Theres more space on a 32" 3840x2160 monitor that on a 34" 3440x1440 monitor