4K 144hz vs 1440p 144hz vs 4K 60k

[Vadersoul]

I currently have an MSI MAG271c and am looking for an upgrade. It’s 2 years old right now and although I have been happy with it, I am looking for something new.

This is a 27in 1440p 144hz model and my first foray into high refresh rate gaming. I would hate to go back to lower refresh rate and am spoilt by the LTT point of view that Refresh > Res

My budget is in the £300-400 range and for this I can go over budget a bit and get a 27 inch 4K/144hz

Or could get a 32in 4K 60hz or a 32in 1440p 165hz

I run a 5700 gt with a ryzen 7 3700x

The type of gaming I play is MMORPG, strategy, builder games and avoid FPS, sports or racing (which I know are key genres for refresh rate)

My initial concerns are that
a) current non-enthusiast builds can barely handle 4K/60 let alone 4K/144
b) whilst the new amd GPU and CPU releases are hinting at being capable of 4K gaming, this hasn’t been proved yet and even thinking about an upgrade to these doesn’t guarantee results
c) existing advice for 4K gaming involves upscaling to get the performance needed
d) the detail factor for 4K vs 1440p is negligible on a 27-32in display, and more noticeable on larger, console/tv gaming setups

However I am a bit lost with all the advice out there and would appreciate some feedback.

If I get a 4K/144hz am I overpaying for having to end up lowering settings or running in 1440p anyways until incase hardware catches up?

Is getting a 4K/60 even feasible without a system upgrade for me?

If it is feasible, is the loss of the higher refresh rate worth the upgrade to higher detail?


If I can get some good ideas on this, I can decide what to do, and without any better advice to contradict what my gut is telling me (the tech isn’t there yet and if I buy now, I will end up overpaying just for having something for the future) then my plan would be to upgrade to a 32in 1440p 165hz for an inch upgrade rather than a resolution one.


Any good advice?

 

[EsaT]

You can lower settings like antialiasing to compensate for higher resolution and smaller pixels or even use lower resolution with scaling.
But unlike CRTs allowing higher refresh rate when running them at below native resolution that doesn't apply to LCDs.
So refresh rate is something you can't correct if its low in monitor.
Hence wouldn't compromise on that, or not upgrade at all.


And high refresh rate panels are just starting to appear in 32" size.

d) the detail factor for 4K vs 1440p is negligible on a 27-32in display, and more noticeable on larger, console/tv gaming setups

If anything console peasants/couch potatoes have less need for pixels, because of usually long viewing distances and small image angular size.
It's that angular/apparent size which defines how many pixels do any good, not physical size.

 

[Vadersoul]

To be fair, the more I researched this, the more I kept coming back to the fact my existing monitor is smart and I should stay put.

Msi Optix Mag271cqr, the price has remained solid for the two years I have had it, hasn’t really dropped in price since and whilst I could spend another 300-500 to get a 32in 165hz upgrade with MSI or the ASUS Tuf 32in 144hz with ELMB, it just feels like either option is a bit more size for not much more benefit.

Feels like the thing I am waiting for is 4K 144hz and until the gpus come that can drive decent ++60hz visuals, I reckon I’m overpaying just to have a new toy.


Things might change with the BigNavi release, once the benchmarks bed down for that it would be good to see how far they can take a 4K panel but everything points to
- 4K gaming isn’t there yet without super enthusiast builds
- 144hz > 60hz for everything
- 240hz only matters for FPS