Uhd vs 4k monitor reddit. The format has come to stay.
Uhd vs 4k monitor reddit Which are 2 totally different things. 5 inch or 32 inches 16:9 should be the absolute minimum you should get for 4k uhd resolution. I use a ThinkPad X1 Extreme with eGPU with 3070, so due to the bottleneck, I don't expect any ultra performance or smooth 4K gaming. I am extremely torn between the Gigabyte M32UC 32” 4k vs a Dell 3422DWG 34” Ultra-wide for use with a Gigabyte 3080 12GB Master. Colors are vibrant, and I don't see any banding in the gradients. I am running one of the 4k monitors at 3,360 x 1,890 and I'm comfortable with that but I can run at native 4k down to 1,920 x 1,080. Nah, depends who you ask. (1440p is 2K, 1080p is FHD) QNED is a decent display technology. QHD w/ better color v. Would the UHD 770 be able to drive those three monitors, and how would the performance be? I just got a $450 LG 27 inch 4K monitor with USB-C, DisplayPort, HDMI. In practice tech like DLSS has muddied the waters for native resolution big time where running a game at the equivalent of 1440p resolution, then AI upscaled to 4K often ends up looking just as good as native 4K but with better antialiasing. I have a 32" 4k monitor at the office because I am close to it, but at home on my sim rig, I have 32" 1440P monitors because my distance from the seat to the monitor is farther than the office so it's fine for that application. Dec 25, 2024 · UHD vs. But keep in mind 27 inch is little small for 4k. I have 27 inch 4k monitors, a 27 inch QHD monitor (on a 2009 iMac) and a 27 inch 5k monitor (on a 2014 iMac), and a 25 inch QHD monitor. I'd like to hear from some of you first-hand on what your impressions were when you made the jump from 1440p to 4K yourself, whether that be with gaming, work, video production, the day-to-day- experience, etc. So you are comparing a resolution to high dynamic range. 1440 is the gaming sweet spot. I generally do like higher frame monitors as well, since the 'feel' is just better than the basic 60hz. You're right. (All the curved monitor) It has very serious ghosting issue. Yes, 4k display is the way to go. In television and consumer media, 3840 × 2160 (4K UHD) is the dominant 4K standard, whereas the movie projection industry uses 4096 × 2160 (DCI 4K). This is what 99. But I have seen a lot of posts regarding the LG27GR95QE and the new InnoCN 27M2V monitor in the past week as they have been the most recent higher end monitors released and started being received by people. In fact, they look better to me even on a 1080p monitor, which may sound ridiculous until you remember that videos are compressed, so 1080p is actually slightly-worse-than-1080p. Both monitors are great for their respective prices. I also bought an LG Ultragear 4k 144hz monitor from Best Buy for $800. 34" ultrawide monitor 3440x1440p - I'm not gaining any vertical space and don't know if the ultrawide format will make that much of a difference. 1) and I set my console to play 4k at 120hz. Games look amazing and you do not need a mortgage to buy a GPU. The Neo G9 is just 2 1440p monitors merged into 1 huge screen. Thoughts: 1080p is actually hugely AMAZING for gaming. And most wont be able to pass a blind AB comparison at standard viewinf distances. I don't have any specific model in mind. though i do agree that 1440p is the better choise for most people as 4K monitors and the hardware required to run them is still a lot more expensive. The text at 100% scaling and 100% zoom is a comfortable size. plus I traded more FPS at 165 at the time and the budget allowed for my triple monitor setup. for non OLED there is the Gigabyte M28U, a 28" 4k monitor. Makes me wish I’d bought a 27" 4K monitor instead. However, Asus is coming out with a 32" 4k OLED in the first quarter of 2024. (Btw, you can get a 32” 4K for a bit under $250. 31. 9% of people mean when they say 4k. Thanks! Sorry about that. It all comes down to this two: ASUS ROG SWIFT WQHD. I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. 32 inch 16:9 is really too tall and not wide enough. UHD 4k is a resolution. The best monitor is the 5K monitor which I run at scaled resolution. You can use vertical sync on 60hz monitor to avoid tearing, but it will increase input lag. The concern is, 4K needs more GPU power, so I will get lower framerates, will have to drop the settings, and will need to upgrade my GPU sooner to an expensive model. Not for the colour accuracy (though it's a nice bonus) but just beacuse of the DPI. > IPS or VA only, good reflection handling a big plus. > For people that have tried both, is the UHD version faster/snappier than the HD version? Thanks so much. I'm planning on using it for casual gaming, photo editing, work, and Netflix/Movies as well. In terms of scaling, I’d probably still go for 125%. In the future I might being purchasing a second matching one. 28-30 inch would be perfect sweet spot and 1440p @ 240-360 Hz would be amazing here. Keep in mind you have to spend more than double this typically to get 4k 144hz these days. Edit. LG 27UK850-W UHD 4k A$749 and 34" LG 34UM69G UltraWide 2560x1080 A$499. Sort by: The best 4k gaming monitor is the Samsung Odyssey Neo G8 S32BG85, a fantastic option with a 4k @ 240Hz refresh rate. Which means better image quality. I use a 60hz, 4K, 28" monitor as my primary work and play monitor. On a full HD monitor, it will select the 1080p stream. The 4k monitor I got (Samsung G70A) does have HDMI 2. I had a 28" 4k 60hz, downgraded to a 27" 1440p 165hz to play shooters. I have a 4k LG CX and an Odyssey G9 and gaming and desktop looks sharper on my LG CX. For gaming, unless you're gung-ho about 4K, I think you can do better for <$300, but that's just my opinion. 709 vs rec. Display Port is probably best for 4k, but not every TV has a DP. Like the monitor size won’t be more then 32” (probably be like 28”) and I’d sit literally a foot away from my monitor, but this doesn’t change the fact it’ll look way better then my current monitor. Hdr 600 vs hdr 1000 has nothing to do with sustained 100 percent window. Speaking from experience 4k at 60 frames<1440 at120. Ultrawide gains more users than 4K/UHD if you look at Steam HW Survey. Somewhat bright room, indirect light. Before that, any such high resolution panels were exceptionally rare but correctly referred to as UHD if 3840x2160 or 4K if 4096x2160. In television and consumer media, 3840 × 2160 (4K UHD) is the dominant 4K standard, whereas the movie projection industry (cinema) uses 4096 × 2160 (DCI 4K). So now, i searched some monitors in the web and found two types fitting my filters. These 27/28 4K monitors are just a marketing gimmicks. Dell G3223Q UHD 144hz. I'd go for 1440p unless the 4k monitor was very large. Dec 9, 2023 · A 4K display is great for productivity but for gaming the difference is not all that you might be led to believe it is. He might not even have a 4k Blu-Ray player that supports HDR. Build quality is rock solid, I really love the fit and finish. So right now I have a m28u monitor and I’m running a 7900xtx and 7700x. They're not the best for gaming, since they typically top out at 60 Hz and aren't necessarily designed for low latency, but for productivity they're fantastically sharp and have a ton of screen real estate. I would like to see more 28-30 inch monitors 27" seems kinda small these days but going 32 is too big for many as well. The simple answer is no, a 4K monitor running at 1440p will not look as good as a native QHD monitor. You want more when gaming so that while you may not notice a difference in game all of the frames in-between are going to be smoother. I am considering a new monitor now, 4K vs 1440p wide 21:9. I'm a developer during the day with some light gaming during the night and really wanted high refresh rate so I went from 4k 60hz to 1440p 165 Hz (both 27") and actually couldn't bare looking at text in windows/IDEs/browsers etc. 60% work (text based, emails, slides, zoom calls), 40% gaming > Text clarity is important. UHD refers to 3840×2160 which is four times the resolution of Full HD, QHD refers to 2560×1440 which is four times the resolution of HD. Now that I've been using my 3090 and 4k 144hz monitor for a few months I feel like sharing my thoughts. 4K screens are not supposed to be run at 100% scaling, it's supposed to be used at 150-200%, so you get the same UI/desktop size as a lower res screen but with the benefits on and extremely more clearer Currently, i have another monitor, a cheap Asus 4K Monitor with TN. My options appear to be: Choosing QD-OLED and Refresh (but not 4K) - and going with the Alienware 34" AW3423DW. Plus two single monitor arms for max flexible positioning and minimal footprint on my I am looking for a new monitor. Is it worth investing for the 4K Blu-ray's to watch movies on, or will the high bitrate 1080p Blu-rays be sufficient enough to watch on my 1440p monitor. I’m wondering if I should get a monitor like the m32u, which is 4k UHD 144hz 1ms response time, or something like the LG 27GS95QE, which is 1440p Oled 240hz 0. So should i take a 4K Monitor with 60 Hz, around 350 cd/m2, with acceptable colours and accuracy, or should i take the QHD monitor with 165 Herz and a definitively better picture quality. Is the upgrade in quality (that's technically being downscaled anyway) worth the extra investment in 4K Blu-ray? I have a 14" 4K laptop aswell as a 27" and 42" 4K monitor and i have not encountered really any major issues with scaling on windows or wayland. For gaming, if there's a significant price differential get 1440p. 5" screen height. Does someone own both of them or used them both? Texts are sharp (I sit at 0. You probably won't find many monitors with that ratio. Depends on how badly you need 4k vs. It remains to be seen if an IPS 4k will be as much of a difference. Xps line has great 1080 panels and longer battery life. Media just look better on VA monitors. My desk is 30x60 inches and I'm looking into purchasing either a 32" LG 4k or Philips/Dell 43" 4K. you click on a user-interface element, and you get the result faster at a higher refresh rate. However I am obsessed with changing to OLED. ) For me it’s totally worth it. 03ms monitor. 2k is the sweet spot for gaming anyway as modern hardware can't push super high refresh rates on 4k max settings on actual demanding games. I see that Alienware is releasing a 1440p and a 4k oled in the beginning of January, along with asus releasing a 4k oled by then as well. 8x Retina or whatever that give more screen space and still look good. And I tried for example The Last of Us Part 2 on it and even though they say the game is 1440p it still was better and more clear on the 4k 32 inch display. All new games support it really. I am building a workstation at home. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns. I knew going in that it would be stretched 1080p and that doesn't bother me. That's going to give you a bit of a 4K-like feel, and you may be able to save some GPU power on anti-aliasing too, not that it's a huge difference. IMO the only problem with the 4K display of the XPS 15 is the glare that could cause eye strain. 4, HDMI2. Good enough I don't mind and I'm picky as a designer. Get the Reddit app Scan this QR code to download the app now. I game using Geforce Now (4K, 120FPS, HDR) > Anything over 120FPS overkill. Or check it out in the app stores Have a dell 32 curved 4K uhd monitor btw Share Add a Comment. The 4k is nicer, but the FHD being more matt works better with background light. Which one would you buy if you were in my place? Of course, if you happen to use some ancient shit for work, you should stick to 100%, but the vast majority of users would get many more pros than cons from scaling. Excellent viewing experience. Simplified by KnyteTech 4K = 3840 × 2160 (named for the approximately 4k horizontal resolution) UHD = Ultra HD = 4K = 3840 × 2160 QHD = more commonly known as WQHD = a mid-point between 1080p and 4K = 2560 x 1440 qHD = quarter HD = 1/4 1080p resolution = 960 x 540 Hi everyone, I just want to know if it's really that much better since I currently own a Sony xbr900e (was top of the line other than OLED when i purchased). 4k OLED options are a plenty. For productivity, go dual. In the realm of high-definition displays and content, UHD vs 4K are two terms that often overlap. UHD is 4k and vice versa. The text is extremely small, the Windows scaling sometimes doesn't work, and it being a desk display, it strains my eyes compared to my 27 inch 1440 monitor Overall: good productivity monitor, not sure I'd use it as a primary gaming monitor. But if you're placing your laptop in front of the monitor, go with 38" ultrawide. 4K 16:9 can resolve more fine detail, 1440p ultrawide will show more view to the sides. After getting my hands on a 3080, I'm considering making the leap from 1440p to 4K. My last screen was an Acer and also 4k and about 2 years old, terrible HDR, 60hz, freesync compatible and priced at approx £350 at the time. I wish I waited for couple of months to make this purchase as they have just launched two new variants of the Clarity Monitor - Clarity Pro with inbuilt webcam and the touchscreen variant. So say “I have a 4K monitor” is wrong, because isn’t 4K but UHD. If you use your new monitor with a computer at all than the 34" ultrawide is the way to go for sure. Choosing OLED and 4K (but not refresh) - and going with the LG C2 42-inch evo Higher peak brightness of 1000+ nits (vs 100 nits for SDR) More contrast necessary to maintain tonality across the increased dynamic range Wider color gamut (sRGB vs. No ghosting, 1ms response time. Similarly; I've had a 4k 9530, FHD 9570 and 9500 - prefer the FHD. A normal monitor at same price range usually gives better color, brightness and contrast ratio. I really would like one with g-sync and more then 1080p (and if possible high Hertz), but there aren't that many available. Despite all the research I am still unable to make up my mind between these two monitors (this is one of the most important decisions of my life, lol). Came from 32 inch 4K/UHD 16:9 and immersion is far better with the Ultrawide. It's next to impossible to find any remaining stock of the Alogic Clarity 27-Inch 4K Monitor from here in Australia, sold out everywhere, and even then only a handful of retailers were selling the Monitor to begin with, so in general sadly it seems to be a hard item to track down. 1440p at 27" is just perfect as a monitor on desk, don't let the hipsters to tell you otherwise. Neither is perfect and it's upto you on what downside you want to live with. Obviously it's partially subjective. UHD vs. a high refresh rate monitor. I have one. Overall its awesome. 1ms(GTG), DP1. I have a 28 inch 4k 60 hz Asus monitor but is a TN panel then I bought a 32 Inch 4k 144 hz monitor in 2021 and tried in 2022 a 27 inch 1440p Asus. When I get back home I’ll try messing around with the All that being said, I'm not sure there is a monitor out there that is a better value, trying to find another name brand monitor with these kind of specs is an exercise in futility. Another piece to consider is pixel density and nits, which go a long way in a screen being "stunning". I like the 2010 iMac 27 as well and use the 4k monitor at native resolution. 50% daylight at least. Clearity -> 2160p vs 1440p (137 ppi vs 110 ppi) I have decided to choose between these two, as they are available in my region. 99 - $200 = $839. Edit: Fixed 2023 typo Get the Reddit app Scan this QR code to download the app now Two things: Curved monitor or flat? Also is 4k or UHD worth it compared to 2560x1440(both at least My preference is with the 4K monitor from a general usability standpoint. Without going into the technical stuff…. Personally, I would go with a higher end QHD monitor than UHD. After 5 month and switching back and fourth between any dual/ tripple monitor setup imaginable. The monitors both have good connectivity (displayport, usb-c, hdmi), both with FreeSync and are both matched 14. With the current GPU situation this is really a concern. The iMac 5k panel is the nicest. I like the idea of best of both worlds and bang for buck. White uniformity is also an issue, but not so terrible as view angles. I did not like it. I agree that a dual monitor setup is better than a single one, but resolution has nothing to do with it. Sure, we'll all make that jump to 4k eventually. In the market for a 4K monitor but not exactly keen on spending $500+ right now. 44 votes, 91 comments. It's a pity that there are not many 4K 32" monitors out there with built-in KVM. true. ACER XB280HK UHD I want something futureproof so i tend to get the 4k Acer. I use 27" 1440p/240Hz. But don't forget that on the 4K display the text will appear a way more crisp and, as a result, more legible. I was curious what people think of this monitor, i seemed to have impulsive bought at MSRP and so far love it. That's not the benefit of a 4K screen. For a perfect QHD downscale, you'd need another odd resolution UHD native screen, which is 2880p. Monitor manufacturers probably now consider gamers as their main target audience, and are unable to figure out that high refresh rate is useful in nongaming scenarios (a. Also if you're having your laptop to the side of the monitor I would go with the 32" for less sideways neck movement. Here's the thing. If it will be your only monitor, get the 4k, as OLEDs aren't amazing as the only monitor (text rendering, having to be careful about burn in, etc). If you're gonna have 2 monitors, OLED all the way (with the second being an IPS or something similar) If you use 2x scaling with the 4K screen, the screen real estate will be literally the same as on the FHD screen. electriQ 27" 4K UHD 144Hz. » LG 27GN950-B – 144hz native, considered to be pretty top notch. 1440p is not UHD its QHD. 99 and I am tempted to get it. Which would be good choice for YouTube. The other reality of it is that 4k gaming isn't great because you sacrifice a lot of fps. And also for less sizes for productivity purposes like reading. I am looking to get a computer with a UHD 770. The format has come to stay. DCI uses a bit more pixels so it might be a bit better if you want stabilized 1080p on YouTube or use cropped footage for instance. Dec 28, 2024 · 2560×1440 vs 3840×2160 – Which One Should I Choose? Not sure if you should get a monitor with 4K UHD or WQHD resolution? Here's everything you need to keep in mind before deciding! Sep 24, 2024 · 4K vs 1080p – Is UHD Worth The Upgrade? 4K Ultra HD (UHD) comes with four times as much screen real estate than 1080p, but it also has its drawbacks. Based on someone else’s comments, I set my hz on the console to 60, and the whole screen had a purplish tint to it. However, I have three monitors, one with a resolution of 5120x2160, one with a resolution of 3820x2160, and one with a resolution of 1920x1080. You would not get you to 4k, it gets you the consumer 5k resolution. However, their applications can vary across different devices and fields. I was considering UHD but I heard 4k does not make much difference until you hit 30"+. Most people are gonna try to sell u the UHD but in reality both have good calibration UHD will only benefit to those that need it for specific work cases and it’ll just look fancier. 4k monitors usually have lesser latency compared to 4k TVs unless it's a higher end model. Generally HDMI 1 will support a 4k signal, but 2-4 might not, if you even have them. I really want OLED, 4K, and at least 144hz refresh. Ultimately it comes down to preference. Here's the ultimate comparison. Yes, the text isn't as smooth as 4kbut it's pretty darn good. I'm currently struggling between a WQHD monitor and a UHD 4K monitor. So, a 4k TV doesn't always have inputs that support 4k. What I'm torn about is which to get. 2160p (refered to as UHD) is the most commonly used (4K TVs are actually 2160p, not full 4K) and scales down better to 1080p or 720p (4 to 1 and 9 to 1 respectively). Dolby Vision on the other hand is HDR. 1 (I double checked that the HDMI was set to 2. The color and display makes you feel like you're in it At the end if the day you're just trading horizontal space for vertical. From what I heard the Samsung has a 350nit sustained window compared to lgs 480. Hi! I am looking for a 32" 4K monitor. I've got 28" and 43" 4k monitors too (also software dev), so the FHD is similar sort of pixel size to the 28". The main benefits are much better text and UI sharpness and typically better characteristics of the panel in other areas, like color accuracy, gamut, better contrast, lack of PWM etc. In case of 4K, Netflix has 1080p and 2160p streams, but no 1440p. a. They both have their ups and down. I need a Monitor to view YouTube and Netflix I see UHD monitor and 4K UHD monitors…. 1, 144 Hz, 1ms, Full Smart Platform, 3840x2160, HDR400, USB Hub, Displayport, Freesync Premium Pro (Some strong reviews, mentions of strong Black levels but seems to only be more like a thick TV and is Curved) 4K » ASUS TUF Gaming VG289Q1A – 4k, 60hz, freesync, good entry level 4k gaming monitor. So I was playing 1440p at 120hz on my old BenQ monitor. I have been looking for a 4k ips and qhd oled monitors. High dynamic range. Yes, 4K is the resolution used in the cinema meanwhile the UHD is used for monitors and TVs. Otherwise, go with 4k 27-inch monitor S2722QC. 4K monitors are more $$$ than UHD monitors If you can get yourself a 24–25'' QHD monitor, that's going to give you a monitor of the same size as the average FHD monitor but with a much higher resolution, a higher PPI. 4K refers to any resolution that is approximatly 4000 pixels wide. » LG 34GP83-AB - IPS, one of the fav on reddit. I’m using a 27" 1440p monitor at 125% scaling and there is no way in hell I’ll go back to those ugly 100% fonts. 3840 × 2160p (pixels). I have this for my home desktop setup. Better than iPS, VA, and TN displays. DCI-P3, or rec. Sometimes the common resolutions that fill the gaps are referred to with a plus; for instance 1600x900 is considered HD+, 3200x1800 is QHD+, and 5K is UHD+. No mention of HDR(High Dynamic Range) at all. My hot takes and recommendations for the LG 27GP850-B vs LG 27GL83A-B vs LG 27GN800-B vs LG 27GL850-B, 4 monitors in the 1440p 144hz+ IPS category upvotes · comment r/ASRock Seems to be a happy middle ground between the two, a 32" 4K curved monitor. For anything else (especially for software developers, accountants), the difference between 4k vs 1440p is huge. KTC 42 Inch 4K OLED Gaming Monitor, 3840x2160 UHD White Monitor, 138Hz, 0. The 4K display scaled at 200% has the same real estate than the FHD at 100%. I'm stuck between the M28u and the M32U People keep mentioning 32 inch as the "sweet spot" for 4k, and I want to know if there is actually any visual difference between the two other than one being a different size and having more screen real-estate. The bastardized 2K terminology is a much more recent trend… It only started showing up in last 4-5 years… mostly with a few gamer monitor manufacturers, and then on Newegg. Samsung UJ590 32" UHD 4K QLED Monitor. Look at the horizontal resolution (which determines 2k,4k,5k etc. I’ve seen a few videos explaining the differences: input lag, 4:4:4 colour sampling etc, but how noticeable are these things? I’ve seen a few 60Hz 4K TVs which in theory is perfectly fine for me. Full HD is also a resolution of 1920 x 1080p. Im currently running a radeon 6600XT but will be upgrading to the radeon 7900 XT shortly (mainly upgrading to future proof). LG 34WK650-W 34" UltraWide 21:9 IPS Monitor. 4k is useless at 15 inch. If you have space for it, a cheapish 43-inch UHD TV can make a great productivity monitor. Tried to get used to it for 6 months but eventually sold the 1440p165hz and went for the best of both worlds, 4k144hz 28". My recommendation would be to get a good 1440p 144-165hz monitor as the PS5 now supports native 1440p. For computer monitors, both UHD and 4K offer superior image quality compared to standard HD screens. The monitor can connect to wifi (5Ghz) from a different room and OTT video runs fast at 4k. If you have extra budget, see Samsung Odyssey G9 to get 140hz and 49 in 4K » ASUS TUF Gaming VG289Q1A – 4k, 60hz, freesync, good entry level 4k gaming monitor. If you search 4k resolution on wikipedia you will see that 3840 x 2160 (UHD) is also the dominant consumer resolution while 4096 x 2160 is the dominant cinema resolution. I also have a 27" 4k 3840x2160 monitor - at 125% scaling, this is good for charts or images, but text is too small for sustained reading. If you really really need extra real estate then a secondary monitor works wonders. Hdr I think works in highlights which yes Samsung will have a brighter sun in a video but not the whole monitor if that makes sense. UHD is Ultra High Definition, sometimes referred to as Quad Full HD, its 4 times 1080p, or 2160p (4K). (LG 27UK850-W) It looks amazing at 2x Retina (1080 points high, 2160 pixels high), and the system display control panel lets me select a range of resolutions like 1. I've been hunting for a good 4k monitor for awhile now and didn't want to jump into mini-led or oleds yet until the market matures further. Yes. By the way, do not buy a CHEAP gaming monitor that use VA panel. Most mobile devices only resort to 3x to deal with the use of pentile screens. 1, USB3. I think cost was probably the biggest reason people weren't LG Ultragear 32GR93U UHD 144hz. The other thing is making sure your PC supports a 4k signal. Great for watching 4k movies or 4k YouTube videos. 4k at 60 is good for watching TV not for playing games. it’s totally worth the price. 24in 1080p 144hz - » LG 24GN650-B - IPS, fast response time, 144hz, HDR10. The reason for this being is that UHD cannot perfectly downscale to QHD, but it can perfectly downscale to FHD because the pixels can scale perfectly. Personally I wouldn't get either a non-OLED screen anymore as well as I would not buy a tiny 4K monitor to put it on the desk. I sold my 2080ti for $900 and managed to get my hands on a 3090. But from what I gathered from that article, 4k is the standard of how it's filmed and Uhd is the consumer standard which in actuality is 3840x2160, but Netflix is taking the time to specify one title being 4k hdr and another 4k uhd and that still doesnt tell me weather they're referring to how it was filmed or how it's watched. 32" 4K monitor - I'm afraid that everything will look too small and scaling kinda defeats the purpose (correct me if I'm wrong). I just don't think it'll be standard for a while for gaming. I ran a 4k OLED and QHD LED laptops at the same time last year, and the 4K just made the QHD look horrible all around. Besides it there's also HDR 10, 10+, HLG and other less known. Next best option, 2 x 1440p monitors at the same size. At 150% you get very poor scaling, at 200% you get effectively 1080p over 27/28 inches, way too large and you lose all the real estate purpose of UHD. Using 32" with 15" is uncomfortable as well, I think you will use only the monitor, if not 4k wouldn't help anyways. The answer is, "it depends". Top-tier displays and great sound systems take advantage of the benefits of 4K HDR Blu-rays. Dual 32" 4k is really the sweet spot. There are only two 32" monitors with KVM switch as far as I know. On a 4K monitor, it will automatically select the 4K (2160p) stream. If you're talking about 3. And of course slightly-worse-than-4K looks better, as it looks more like nearly-perfect-1080p if you have a 1080p monitor. So recently i spent what is really not a whole lot of money on this budget monitor, I found this on sale for £350 though its MSRP is £450. Remember monitors aren't just resolution, a 4K monitor with crap brightness/contrast/colour range and viewing angle is going to look worse than a good 1440p screen with high brightness/contrast, the full sRGB spectrum and Hey r/monitors, . 4K Monitor. Hi, purchased Alogic's Clarity Monitor two months back. It's an excellent feature, above all if you have a laptop with USB-C and a desktop computer all sharing the same screen, keyboard and mouse with minimal cables. The computer has 3 x DisplayPort sockets. 99 is a great alternative to the 42" LG C2 that got down to $799. It's all situation based. Hi everyone, I was wondering if I could get some user insight into 4k monitors. YMMV, but they look much better to me. Getting 8+ish hours on FHD and 6ish hours on UHD Bezels - plastic on FHD, glass/screen on UHD (see images) Display/Color - Both are absolutely amazing with display and color. Indeed, lack of modern high-refresh rate 24″ 4K monitors is nonsense. I am a casual gamer and play a mix of FPS, RPG and AAA single player games. Wouldn’t wanna squint my eyes at everything. If you have extra budget, see Samsung Odyssey G9 to get 240hz and 49in or Alienwaire AW3423DWF for OLED, 175hz 4K For a good list compiled by a redditor, see here for considerations and recommendations » BenQ EX2710U – 4k, 144hz, poor HDR. Is it really 144hz? Yes the fhd model screen brightness measurement are a lot higher than the UHD. Both are IPS but miss the 4k resolution a lot. 2020) When you're looking for an HDR-worthy display, these 3 things are what you need from your display, not whether or not it's IPS/VA/QLED. UHD is the properly scaled 16:9 version of 4k which is 3840 x 2160p. I have 17 inch 4k and it's still useless. for 1440p you have the new LG 27GR95QE, and the upcoming Asus variant. It's getting better, it is. Other 4k 240hz oled are all out of stock in my country. You won't regret it, spend the extra money! Tripple Monitor isn't really efficient, you will naturally tend to only focus on two monitors and the third one will be neglected. Get the Reddit app Scan this QR code to download the app now Dell G3223Q 32" Inch 4K UHD (3840x2160) Gaming Monitor, 144Hz, IPS, 1ms 1080p 60 vs 4k 144 is Small story. If your are used to working with two 1440p monitors, a single 4K monitor will be sharper, but will feel cramped. I know little about monitors so this is one of the contributing factors to this dilemma. I can also screen share (android) to this monitor as well. g. For 144hz, see Gigabyte 4K or LG 27GN950-B. He was comparing resolutions of 4k UHD(Ultra High Definition) vs 1080. Suppose you want to watch Netflix on that monitor. 3x is usually excessive at desktop distances with RGB stripe displays, but Dell does sell a 280-something ppi 8K monitor if you want to give it a whirl (for several thousand dollars and no HDR support). My old Laptop needs to struggle with this monitor for its 4k and 43 inch. s. but whenever you do get a 4k screen you'll notice another big jump :) » LG 34GP83-AB - IPS, one of the fav on reddit. Im looking to upgrade my main monitor to 32in from a 24in 1080P 144hz. UHD w/ obviously more detail. I have four 27 inch monitors on my desk right now: Dell Ultrasharp 2718Q, 2720Q which are 4k panels, a 2010 iMac 27 (1440p) and a 2014 iMac 5k. Much worse contrast, black levels, etc. That’s a 21-24” or so monitor at UHD 4K. Sometimes you may find it written as #### x 2100p, were 2100p can be referred as 4K. Get the Reddit app Scan this QR code to download the app now [Monitor] HP OMEN 27k UHD 144Hz Gaming Monitor, 4K UHD Display (3840 x 2160), IPS Panel, 99% sRGB, 95 fwiw I've got a great 1440p monitor with hdr and it's great for gaming - haven't run a 4k disc through it but I've played 4k content at 1440 and it totally looks better than 1080p. Consider a 5K display-- sharper, with enough room to work. I’ve not tried 32” monitor at 4K, but based on my current experience on the 27”, I think I can go with 32”, will just push the monitor back a little. This means that it needs to select which stream it sends you. And colour gamut is also better unless it is a higher end TV around 1L. 99 in the past. There are others like the Dell 27" S series that are 4K and better for productivity, but also a little more expensive ($330ish?). Hi all, so I have two monitors, one being 1440p and the other being 4k, both ips. 7 to 1 metre distance from Monitor). I currently use three 23" 1080p monitors and I'm looking to upgrade to 4K. RCA isn't something you want for 4k either, but I'm assuming your not using that. UHD means 4K which is preferable for 32" and above TVs snd Monitors. So I got rid of mine and got a 32in 4K monitor running at 100%. 4k is better but 1080 isn't that far behind. For better 4k gaming, see GIGABYTE M27U or LG 27GN950-B Thinking of buying two 27 or 32 inch monitors for programming, after going through this sub I understand that ideally one should aim for a 4K monitor, you know PPI, but I read that at 27/28 inches text becomes too small and needs scaling which causes issues. Currently have 24" HD 1920x1080 and 1920x1200 monitors with a Windows PC. Even if I'm planning to upgrade to something like 7900 XT now. 5k OLED for the UHD display: UHD advantages: Better contrast Better color coverage higher resolution much faster response time (2 ms vs 30+ ms for the IPS panels) means no ghosting FHD advantages: much better battery life (around 4 hours when watching videos on the xps 15 by my research) Look at it this way. They’re hitting around 550-650 nits UHD measurement varies around 489-549 nits. Your not going to find a monitor branded towards gaming with anything else. I need a monitor now and waiting that long is not an option. . And of course better battery life. I had been following 4k 144hz monitors for years, and this was the first one I found for under $1k. I currently have a LG 38" ultrawide ( its essentially 4k ultrawide, had a Acer predeator before this one ) and a LG 32" UHD monitor. Practically I have a 24” 1080p 60hz monitor rn, and I wanna get a ps5 with a 4k monitor. Problem is I dunno if it’s worth it. The viewing difference is blatantly obvious. If you have money to play with its almost certainly better spent on a really good 1440p display than a mediocre 4K display. Easy enough to find it in service menu (which can be unveiled on HP by holding menu button for a few sec while turning on monitor). ) of 2560 x1440p and double it. Welcome! For PC's and general gaming, here's a good compilation thread or see below for the most frequently recommended taken from reddit posts. 99 The 42" 4K OLED for $839. I look for your suggestions. 4K: Applications. (this must be the first 4k monitor i have seen make it past 60hz OC) But still it felt just as choppy as 60hz for me. k. I tried gaming on the monitor and that was just awful at 60hz. for 4k, you have Asus PG42UQ, LG C2 42", (no 32" 4k OLED at the present time). Personally, the best middle ground would be two 27" 4k panels, uk600/650 for close to the same price as either of these monitors. 4k is 4096x2160 or 17:9 which is the film projection size standard. My monitor has a dead pixel that I can’t fix, but I have it under warranty so I can return it. An ultrawide might work, but macs don't play nicely with ultrawides--allegedly. Recently I've been playing a lot of console games on my ps5 so I've been using my 4k. Its most popular types of products are: Soundbars (#1 of 43 brands on Reddit) I recently bought a 32 inch 4K monitor. Digital television and digital cinematography commonly use several different 4K resolutions. My monitor history: Used a cheap 1080p 60hz IPS for 5 years-> PG279Q 1440p 165hz IPS for 1 year (RMA issues) -> back to that old 1080p for a month -> now currently driving a LG 27GN950 160hz 4k monitor. Great step up from my 27in 1440p 144hz monitor that runs on both Windows and M1 Macs. Im trying to decide between the Asus XG32AQ at $530 (1440p) or the asus XQ32UQ at $870 (4k). I use (simultaneously) two 4K monitors @75Hz for gaming rdr2 on full ultra settings, GPU 4K sync’d @70Hz to match the monitors. I love it, I love maxing out games with my new GPU but I feel like it is such a hassle to use it as a primary monitor when doing daily tasks. As someone who owned a 1440p 144hz monitor and a 4k 144hz now, for editing/grading video and photo buy the one that has the better color space and panel. Using 3440x1440 on the QD-OLED as we speak. While you still need a high-end graphics card to reach its max refresh rate, it’s at least a good choice if you plan on upgrading your PC and don’t want to buy a new monitor in the future. It seems like you can only get two out of three of those things at the moment. 5) Samsung Odyssey G7 LS28BG700EPXXU 28" 4K UHD Smart Gaming Monitor with Speakers - HDMI 2. Photo: https://ibb. Besides the fact that the 4K is 4096x2160 pixel and the UHD is 3840x2160 pixel. productivity) too: e. The 165hz refresh rate is a nice thing to have, but the 60hz refresh rate is perfectly serviceable. 4K resolution is resolution around 4000 pixels wide. Wish these reviews would indicate what revision & panel their monitor came with, makes a huge difference. You should know that some games are also restricted, this is the case of Apex which limits to 300FPS so even with 360Hz, you cannot play at more than 300FPS. I'm in the market for a 4k 144hz monitor to pair up with my 3080ti. Right now Alienware has its AW3423DWF for CAD 999. Big question is will you have a second monitor with it. I currently have a 1440p 60Hz 5ms monitor so the change should already be more than enough moving to a 4K 240Hz 0. If you are a fast scrolling person, go with 100hz monitor at QHD display resolution. Never looked back. I bought this monitor to play competitive fps in 1080p at a high refresh rate and to play my 4k resolution single player games, but I found that I prefer my mainstay competitive game, which is Apex, in 4k even if it was slightly advantageous to roll with the 1080p. So far, so good. I am really confused between the 4K(2160p) text clarity vs the extra 3" horizontal space in the wqhd (1440p). 1080p is cheaper and you can disable any scales. I will be programming, reading, and occasionally gaming with my PS4. I really want to buy an LG Cx since I hear it's amazing for gaming and my sony doesn't support 120Hz at 4k. After using the Apple's 5k display for a while, I'd never get a 4k monitor that is over 27-28", simply because the text looks horrible after you've gotten used to something much better. Monitor has dead pixels on arrival (backed by 2 comments) Monitor has scratches and damage out of the box (backed by 2 comments) Monitor has issues switching between inputs (backed by 1 comment) According to Reddit, Samsung is considered a reputable brand. So, if you want to spend $500+ and just want a nice cheaper 4k monitor explore this territory. IMO, for consumption ultra-wide > dual monitors. If you want your monitor's image to look pretty, going for an IPS with good HDR is useless, the horrible black levels, lower color gamut and bad contrast will make It look dull anyway. co/wccthBw. For a 4k monitor you'll often need to use DPI scaling to make the user interface actually usable and pro video apps often don't play nicely with DPI scaling. This difference widens if you're watching 4k content. Even though it's as demanding to drive as 4k, it cannot compare to a native 4k in visuals. 03ms response Yes pixels will be smaller using 4K/UHD at 32 inch but most people won't be able to run games at 100+ fps at this res. In Ultrawide, you have AW3423DW/F and Samsung G85SB. 4K Blu-ray discs are more for home theatre enthusiasts who already have great equipment. I want to buy several 27" monitors. Come on, IPS isn't necessarily better. 0, 90W USB Type-C Reverse Charging, 2 * 8W Built-in Speakers, HDR, VESA, G42P5 - $1039. You can notice 4k, but not that much. View angles are just bad, even if you're sitting almost 80cm+ from the monitor, the corners are visibly darker. I already have an 48 inch c2 oled tv, but i don’t really use it because of the size. Once you use a 4k monitor, I guarantee you will never want to go back to 1440p. 4K makes sense if you've got an actually big screen next to your desk, for those immersive single player games. I managed to overclock it to 70hz which was a solid OC for a 4k monitor. It seems like the Google TV UHD (4K) has a little bit more memory in the hardware, but I'm not sure that it's the limiting factor. The 2k 27" monitor still looks good for course, but it's definitely more "blurry" when compared to 4k @ 27", which is not surprising because 109 PPI vs 163 PPI is a big difference, so I don't know what people are talking about saying it's not a noticeable upgrade over a 2k monitor. bspfh fmqojr gjwcnbl nizl jdnjxk uccatw uiltua wjbaq vcerg xdwy