Is it just me... 1080p vs 4K Monitor Issue/Decision...

BluesFanUK · 31 Dec 2015 at 19:56

Few months back I bought my first ever 4K monitor, the Acer S277HK, was sub £400 6 months ago and looked a bargain.

First impressions - much sharper picture than your bog standard 1080p screen, and gave the impression like it dwarfed my previous AOC 23" i2369Vm monitor with a lot more space to work with on screen, though at a cost. At 27" the resolution made everything far too small, custom scaled to 130% kind of resolved the problem, but kind of beats the purpose of a 4K screen IMO and Windows doesn't scale particularly well, even in W10. I had one or two other minor problems with the Acer (there was this irritating grainy effect when you viewed it from a downward angle), so eventually passed it on.

My biggest gripe though (and I don't know if it's just me) was I genuinely couldn't tell the difference between a high quality 1080 source and a 4K one when watching videos on my 4K screen, and even less so when that same 4K video was played on my old 1080 screen (albeit at 23" rather than 27"). Take this popular example from Youtube in 4K 60fps glory. Colours appear more vibrant on the 4K screen, but the level of detail on a 1080 screen is literally the same as watching it on a 4K one. I feel duped by companies making out 4K monitors make 1080 look old and dated, it really doesn't. Gaming wise i'll presume this is a different story, though i'm not a PC gamer.

So, I now need another replacement for my old AOC. Going back to 1080 I can appreciate 4K makes icons and text sharper and more spacious, videos absolutely not, but i'd like to get back to the 27" size I had.

My dilemma - is 1440p noticeably sharper than 1080 at 27" or is the Phillips 40" the only way to go to view 4K in its true native glory? All advise welcome. Ta.

stooeh · 31 Dec 2015 at 20:17

I would not use Youtube's highly compressed video to judge how good sharp 4K is and there's not really much content unless you are playing games. I do agree that 27" is a bit small for 4K and the visual quality increase (in games) does not justify the extra rendering power needed

That being said 1440p is 1.7x 1080p and in my opinion looks way better than 1080p at 27" and to me is the optimum resolution for that size. I wouldn't mind testing 4K @ 40" when I have more GPU power available.

BluesFanUK · 31 Dec 2015 at 20:45

stooeh said:
I would not use Youtube's highly compressed video to judge how good sharp 4K is and there's not really much content unless you are playing games. I do agree that 27" is a bit small for 4K and the visual quality increase (in games) does not justify the extra rendering power needed

That being said 1440p is 1.7x 1080p and in my opinion looks way better than 1080p at 27" and to me is the optimum resolution for that size. I wouldn't mind testing 4K @ 40" when I have more GPU power available.

That's exactly my thoughts.

I use MadVR (although it's a bit pointless IMO unless you're into Anime), the GPU grunt required for it to run at 4K is obscene even with a 980ti. 1440p sounds like the middle ground between the two at least till the Pascal 980ti equivalent is released.

I understand gamers wanting such a high resolution if they have the GPU power to back it, i've seen comparisons with GTA5 online and there is more detail from 1080 to 4K, but for video editors or HTPC users it seems like a gimmick. My Oneplus One supports 4K DCI and i've settled for 1080 at 60f/s instead.

On that basis i'm either eyeing up a 27" IPS 1440 monitor with no scaling, but only if it's visibly sharper than 1080, otherwise the 40" screens from Phillips and iiyama will need to come into consideration, anything smaller is a waste of money from my recent experience.

andybird123 · 31 Dec 2015 at 20:56

Yep, I tried a 28" 4K for a while and settled on a 1440@144hz instead as on that size of monitor it was wasted really... 1080 at 27" does start to look a bit rough and 1440 is a big improvement over 1080 at that size

The Phillips 40" has PWM backlight, so I would get the iiyama rather than the Phillips if you do decide to try that route

Finners · 31 Dec 2015 at 21:01

Just got a 25" 1440p monitor today I'm surprised how many things dont scale in Windows 10. Steam/origin just look all blurry.

Needs 125% scaling on to be confortable to use. Even some web pages text are a little blurry in Windows 10 compared to 7.

Didnt think I would have any issue like this considering how long 1440p monitors have been around.

Games do look brilliant though! but coming from a TN 1080p to 1440p IPS, just the colours make the games look great.

marc2003 · 31 Dec 2015 at 21:19

The mixed views on display scaling really put me off going for 1440p on a smaller screen which is why I ended up going for the 32" BenQ in my sig. It's roughly the same PPI as 24"/1080p so it's comfortable to use even though you do have to sit back a bit to take it all in. :cool:

Now I desperately need a GPU/CPU upgrade to turn some settings up in games.

GoogalyMoogaly · 31 Dec 2015 at 21:33

andybird123 said:
Yep, I tried a 28" 4K for a while and settled on a 1440@144hz instead as on that size of monitor it was wasted really... 1080 at 27" does start to look a bit rough and 1440 is a big improvement over 1080 at that size

+1

Devrij · 31 Dec 2015 at 22:26

1440p at 27in is a good match for desktop use and resolution. 4k is nice at the 50in panel territory especially if you don't sit miles away

PCM2 · 31 Dec 2015 at 22:28

Finners said:
Just got a 25" 1440p monitor today I'm surprised how many things dont scale in Windows 10. Steam/origin just look all blurry.

Needs 125% scaling on to be confortable to use. Even some web pages text are a little blurry in Windows 10 compared to 7.

Didnt think I would have any issue like this considering how long 1440p monitors have been around.

Games do look brilliant though! but coming from a TN 1080p to 1440p IPS, just the colours make the games look great.

Have you tried a 27" WQHD monitor out of interest? It's also interesting that you note 'Origin' looks blurry. The latest non-beta client for Origin refuses to scale at all. I don't know if bad scaling is better than no scaling.

Finners · 31 Dec 2015 at 22:37

PCM2 said:
Have you tried a 27" WQHD monitor out of interest? It's also interesting that you note 'Origin' looks blurry. The latest non-beta client for Origin refuses to scale at all. I don't know if bad scaling is better than no scaling.

I havent used a 27" 1440p monitor if im honest. My client is scaling but I've switched it off now. Prefer a slightly smaller window but in focus than blurry chats.

I'm just surprised DPI scaling is still an issue. Feel sorry for the guys that buy the smaller 4k monitors as it must be even worse.

Are you on windows 7,8 or 10. In 7 mine doesnt scale but in 10 it tries.

PCM2 · 31 Dec 2015 at 22:54

Finners said:
I havent used a 27" 1440p monitor if im honest. My client is scaling but I've switched it off now. Prefer a slightly smaller window but in focus than blurry chats.

I'm just surprised DPI scaling is still an issue. Feel sorry for the guys that buy the smaller 4k monitors as it must be even worse.

Are you on windows 7,8 or 10. In 7 mine doesnt scale but in 10 it tries.

I'm using Windows 10. I think they were experimenting with scaling (albeit bad) with the newer beta clients of Origin, but the most recent official release definitely doesn't use scaling for me.

BluesFanUK · 1 Jan 2016 at 19:36

I've spent most of today looking up monitors. Never used to have that problem.

Seems for every good monitor you find, there's always one flaw that makes you question the purchase.

As of right now, this looks the ideal solutions to me:
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/benq...l-widescreen-led-monitor-black-mo-111-bq.html

Anyone got the monitor? 4K, 32", AHVA Panel, ergonomically adjustable and all the necessary ports (minus HDMI 2.0, which is a non issue with DP and Mini DP if you have a modern GPU).

Thoughts?

crinkleshoes · 2 Jan 2016 at 23:56

For me, there is no advantage to 4K @ 40"... that's pointless. It is identical to the pixel size of a 20" 1080p monitor... might be easier for some of you to see... but the physical size of a 40" on a desk is prohibitive. I wanted an image quality improvement, rather than just more of the same.

27" is a bit too small for my eyes, otherwise I like the physical monitor size.

And like others, I find the scaling options of windows poor...

32" sits the best for me... The BenQ was a good contender... but the Dell P3216Q has better colours / backlighting.

I've been using 15.6" laptops with 1080p screens for 5+ years... the pixel size is perfect for me at normal viewing distances.

So 31.5-32" 4K monitor is just right... I can use it at 100% scaling yet it's not excessively large.

I'm happy with my purchase... I'm sure the BenQ would be great too.

tipes · 3 Jan 2016 at 13:02

BluesFanUK said:
I've spent most of today looking up monitors. Never used to have that problem.

Seems for every good monitor you find, there's always one flaw that makes you question the purchase.

As of right now, this looks the ideal solutions to me:
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/benq...l-widescreen-led-monitor-black-mo-111-bq.html

Anyone got the monitor? 4K, 32", AHVA Panel, ergonomically adjustable and all the necessary ports (minus HDMI 2.0, which is a non issue with DP and Mini DP if you have a modern GPU).

Thoughts?

I am using one of these screens, and I am delighted with it. I have always personally believed that 32" size is about perfect for 4K res, whilst not being stupidly big for a desktop. I would personally say go for it, but be aware some people have experienced the odd vertical flashing on this screen. I have been lucky with mine and it appears to be ok. Overall a great choice of 4K monitor imho.

Mark

BluesFanUK · 4 Jan 2016 at 13:38

... and Overclockers have put the price back up £100 to £690. Great.

Amazon were the next best at £635, a £45 premium on what I could have spent yesterday!

@crinkleshoes - the Dell UP3216Q looks a brilliant monitor, but it's not worth an additional £200-300 over the BenQ.

BluesFanUK · 15 May 2016 at 17:37

Thread bump - Got a temp AOC Q2577PWQ monitor (25" 1440p). It's just dawned on me how utterly pointless 4K monitors are (at least below 32" anyway).

No scaling required, more work space, doesn't dominate my desk and everything is notibly sharper, at a fraction of the cost of a 4K monitor.

Videos still look no different on either 1080/1440/4K, think that depends entirely on the source itself, MadVR also helps bridge any gap that may be there, but i'm assuming the difference only becomes clearer once you go past the 30" mark.

Not a gamer, but I did try Assassins Creed on my old 1080 monitor and the 1440 one. The resolution appears to make a difference here, and for good measure I tested the old 4K monitor I gave to my dad just to be sure. There's a bigger gap between 1080 to 1440 than there is between 1440 to 4K.

I'm probably going to keep this one for the next couple years. Perhaps when <32" 4K monitors come down in price, have DP1.3 w/ HDCP 2.2 and Volta is released I might see the benefit, until then, it's a gimmick and a seriously expensive mistake in 2016.