Simple question, for using a PC, for work, gaming, media usage, etc. Would 4k actually be usable, I've seen a friend try to use it, but everything just looked too small for productivity, gaming or films, yeah great. But productivity is my main focus, and I know that 1440p isn't such a large resolution that you have to squint to read anything or just use the windows desktop ui.
So I decided to ask you guys, after a bit of google-ing, I'm still unsure which would be better. Obviously both have advantages and disadvantages. But for someone who writes a lot of code, and does some creative content work, which resolution would you recommend for the likes of me?
BenQ GW Series GW2765HT 27-Inch Budget 1440P IPS Monitor is best 1440p monitor. It offers WQHD 2560x1440P resolution. It comes with flicker free technology. You should try this monitor.
If you want 4K, go big with the monitor to get a reasonable PPI (like 1080p on 24"). Wendell reviewed some 40" korean monitors, check them out.
1440p UW is a cheaper alternative and perfect for movies and games. It doesn't require as much performance from your graphics card than running 4K.
The cheapest alternative is to use your current monitor upright. But this is only a solution if you're only coding. For games and watching movies this isn't very useful.
So... if you can arrange your coding IDE's panels in a for you useful way on an ultrawide to leverage the additional space, definately go for 1440p UW.
Personally, having tried Ultrawide and higher refresh rates like 144Hz, but not having tried 4K, I would guess I'd prefer higher refresh rates over the other two options.
Ultrawide was pretty enjoyable. I do miss the extra space. However, I was on a 34" 1440p UW monitor (U3415W). I feel like 4K would require 40" minimum for me because I put the monitor very close to my face. And that's getting pretty big. I've used a 1080p 55" TV as my monitor before and that pretty much sucked. I know a 4K at 40" would be notably different and better, but I feel like I don't want a bigger monitor.
The "smoothness" produced by a higher refresh rate coupled with FreeSync, in my case, is something I prefer more than having an Ultrawide monitor.
4K being "you can fit more on a single display" doesn't excite me. I'd just sooner get more monitors.
I know 40" is a minimum, one of my friends has a 40" 4k monitor, even then, everything seems too small....
I have the M340CLZ, and 1440 UW is the way to go. In terms of the experience, I agree with the other people here. 4K just isn't that exciting and you'll need scaling unless you go with a big monitor.
Yeah, from my own experience, which has been a matter of minutes... I have seen that with 4K, you need a huge monitor, and I sit pretty damn close to my current monitor(s), so the thought of having a 40" monitor right in-front of me, not thanks.... I think that a 34" UW monitor would be more than big enough IMO... I'm currently using 2 x 1080p monitors (crap quality and dodgy now and again)... So yeah, I'm not upgrading for the sake of it or for a nicer monitor, I'm doing it because my current monitors are a bit.. Odd every now and again.
Well it's good to know I'm not the only one to feel that way.
No, I totally understand where you're coming from, I remember I tried using an oddly sized 32" TV as a monitor, and it was WAY too tall, it was almost like I was exaggerating, if I had to look at something that was at the top of the screen.