I have seen Wendell rave about the advantages of 4K 40'' as being a perfect rez size combo. I'm in the UK and I'm going to be building a new workstation/gaming rig in a few weeks. I currently have a four year old Iiyama 27'' 1920x1080 monitor that is showing it's age.
Overclockers.co.uk have an interesting 40'' 4k monitor at £548 including tax. I know my way around PC hardware but monitors for some reason are a bit of a mystery.
95% of my time will be running Linux on the desktop. 5% for gaming, Oh yea I'll be using my 980Ti to drive this thing. I'm not sure I can justify a new card for the 5% gaming I do. The 980Ti will have to last a couple more years I can always run at 1920x1080 if she starts to struggle.
Yes resolution 4K with the size 40" make much more sense for work (in my case much of text work) than for example 27" 4K (that I have too) - mainly in regards to the pixel size.
MVA panel - not as good as IPS, but much better than TN.
WORK - cons
The size 40" makes it sometimes uncomfortable for work with at closer distances (normal office 0.5m to 0.75m distance - something that feels natural for 27" 1440p monitor). So while 4K resolution at 40" makes more sense, I found it sometimes distracting to work with. My main monitor for work is - and for long will be - 27" 1440p. My main issue with 40"4K is with the angles of the screen edges (I guess curved monitors make sometimes sense for office work). Maybe it would work better for me if I wouldn't divide the screen in the way that I have main area of 2560x1440 in the lower bottom part of the screen, and leftover areas on the top, right and top right (I do not like to work with applications randomly overlapping each other). It might be my personal experience - but likely it is something to think about before making the decision.
MVA panel - IPS might be better for the above issue. But IPS would be only little better at color distortion not the shifted perspective from the angle (rectangles becoming shaped like trapes).
WORK - overall
My opinion is that 40" 4K is still better than 27" 4K for textual work. But I always prefer dual 27" 1440p.
MEDIA - pros
very good for watching 4k content.
MEDIA - consa
none
GAMING - pros
4K
GAMING - cons
4K (only 60Hz - but only if your graphics card can handle it). I prefer smother experience on 1440p 144Hz (but it depends on games ofc.)
Other comments
Since I'm switching this monitor between my main workstation and laptop dock, I observed annoying behavior regarding the input selection and detection. First, it works best with DisplayPort. All other ports in regards to switching to them or auto detecting, work award. Its a annoying feedback loop (or lack of it) between monitor and graphics card/OS - monitor see no activity on the input it powers its self off and do not inform a graphics card that there is a monitor on the line and that causes monitor not being an option to being enabled in the system. Overall it works by either 1. switching manually via (pilot) monitor to the specific input, that maybe, maybe not, will be detected by the laptop/computer as new monitor being detected. 2. In 25% cases I must switch monitor to the input (vie pilot) then power it off (by pressing power button for 10sec) and then powering it on.
It might be issue of the monitor firmware with combination of Windows/drives behavior but it annoys me a lot. And issue do not exists while not switching the inputs.
(only 60Hz - but only if your graphics card can handle it). I prefer smother experience on 1440p 144Hz (but it depends on games ofc.)