2560 x 1080p ultrawide or 2560 x 1440p for gaming?

Moving from gaming on T.V to monitor. Which one should I buy?

Personally I'd stick with 1440p you'll be able to find it cheaper and 21:9 support in games is pretty shoddy.

1 Like

go with 1440p love my monitor everything looks beautiful at 2k

I would look for 1440p 144hz over a 1080p ultrawide.
If it were a 1440p ultrawide that can do 100Hz then it would be pretty close, and I would look for per game support of 21:9 to make the final decision.

Do you have a set budget for the monitor? And what are your system specs?

Money is not really an issue. The only thing is I only have a 980 ti. and I don't want to shell out another $650 on top of the $ I'm already shelling out for the monitor. So if a single 980 ti can't run it well (60 fps) at native resolution, I don't want it.

1 Like

I run most things at 4k with a single 980. You will be fine with a 980ti at 1440p even if its ultrawide.

ok cool thanks

I'm using a 980 TI with 1440p I max out everything with low antialiasing at 60 fps except games like Witcher 3 which is one of the few that goes below 60fps but is still very much playable at max settings.

For fast FPS then I'd be looking at 2560x1440 144-160Hz. For a more usable windows desktop + RPGs, MOBAs etc. I like my 3440x1440 Acer X34 but for pure gaming and maximum screenage the Acer 35" Z35 2560x1080 200Hz has go tto be worth a look.

I'd consider one of those (Z35) just for my racing sim seat setup. In fact now you've got me thinking again!

Depends what your personal preference is. If you want it purely for gaming and nothing else, the Z35 from Acer would be a good way to go. If you spend a lot of time web browsing, doing school work/work, or productivity tasks then i'd definitely recommend either a high refresh gsync panel like the XB271hu or Asus PG279q - 2560x1440 at 144+hz. Best of both worlds would be the X34 but that's expensive and you'd need a 980 ti to really take advantage.

Personally i'd go for either the X34 or a 27" panel to keep that PPI up.

1440p is beautiful, although I know ultrawide is nice, you will probably have to tinker with it more to get it to work and some games might not work at all.

The difference between 2560x1080 and 2560x 1440 isn't that large in terms of performance as I can run games at exactly the same settings on both my Ultrawide at 2560x1080 and my 4K monitor at 1440p and the FPS is pretty much exactly the same on both and I have a GTX 970.

Its realy a personal thing.
Basicly the best you could do, is going to a shop in which you could watch both monitors options yourself.
to see what you like the most.

Try both and figure it out for yourself. If you listen to everyone's opinion and go one way you'll always wonder what if you went the other. I've owned all of them personally. 2560x1080 2560x1440 and 3440x1400. Personally the best for me is my current 3440x1440. But if all you do is play games and desktop space isn't a huge concern then a 2560x1080 would be great for games. Also 21:9 support is really good. Don't listen to other people. Yes someone's the HUD is 16:9 on the 21:9 screen but I've only ever played like game that would do 21:9

1 Like

I don't understand why ultra-wides became popular, personally. If they had abnormally-wide resolutions then they could make more sense or even a lower price point.
2560x1080 has the same width as 2560x1440 so what's the benefit on trimming off nearly 400 pixels from the bottom, other than saving VRAM? You're losing real estate but pay extra.
If you stick an older game on your PC the chances of having native 21:9 support are practically non-existent. By comparison, Battlefield 1942 works fine at 2560x1440 (with an unofficial patch).

I am going to say the 1440p one too.

Gaming for resolution unfortunately is just dropping anything that is not 16:9. All the glorious options PC is know for are being stripped out one by one thanks to console ports. I run a 4:3 monitor and a lot of modern games don't work right on it. Real shame.