Overclock.net banner

G-Sync: 1440p 144hz or 4k 60hz? What should I go for?

46K views 56 replies 22 participants last post by  Stoogie 
#1 ·
Hello, how are you?
I know this has been asked before, but please bear with me as I am really torn...
I keep going back and forth...

My current monitor is an Asus PB278Q.
That is a 1440p monitor with 60hz refresh rate and a PVA panel.

That means that I never experienced 4k gaming, neither have I experienced gaming at higher refresh rates than 60hz.

Based on this, what would improve my gaming experience the most?
Go with a monitor like the ROG Swift that is 1440p but 144hz?
Or go with something like the Acer 280HK that is a 60hz monitor but 4k resolution?

Whats your input on this?
And I would love to hear your experiences if you switched from 60hz to 144hz or if you switched from 1440p to 4k.

Thanks in advance.

Cheers!
 
See less See more
#2 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gdourado View Post

Hello, how are you?
I know this has been asked before, but please bear with me as I am really torn...
I keep going back and forth...

My current monitor is an Asus PB278Q.
That is a 1440p monitor with 60hz refresh rate and a PVA panel.

That means that I never experienced 4k gaming, neither have I experienced gaming at higher refresh rates than 60hz.

Based on this, what would improve my gaming experience the most?
Go with a monitor like the ROG Swift that is 1440p but 144hz?
Or go with something like the Acer 280HK that is a 60hz monitor but 4k resolution?

Whats your input on this?
And I would love to hear your experiences if you switched from 60hz to 144hz or if you switched from 1440p to 4k.

Thanks in advance.

Cheers!
Depending on your graphics card horsepower 4k will be very demanding, but I think the demands to push 1440p and, over 100fps will be as demanding, if not even demanding. I moved to 144hz from 60hz, when I had the opportunity, because I wanted things to move clearly, fast and smooth (nothing else). So here are my opinions; Unless big monitors matters to you, 1440p to 4k will not be a mouth watering experience, but from 1920x1080 to 4k, definitely would, have watched games on 1440p and 4k and the difference is not huge, again monitor size might matter to you. Unless you can drive 4k very well, it will be a difficult experience. Higher resolutions will give better colors but refresh rate, in my opinion is something else.

From my experience with 144hz, I think your gaming will man up if you add 1440p to it. When I first switched to 144hz, the first thing I noticed was weight of my eyes, the mouse was freely movable(as if I have got a new mouse) and my whole body and eyes was relaxed, if you compare 60hz to 144hz you will notice there a lots of destructions on 60hz. (The smoothness of 144hz; not everyone sees it, especially in games-https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWEpIwNDeCA,(that monitor is 120hz though) so unless you're eye picky in games like Linus... To me the general feel of 144hz is real and vivid.

If you don't mind losing some of the pretty colors on an ips monitor then you will love tn 144hz, this is not the case in games though; in gaming the colors are reasonably good even on a tn panel. The rog swift I heard has reasonably good colors and viewing angles, so if you do get it you won't have to worry about colors: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XdqTIfNv2DE

Another thing was gaming experience, when you begin to push around 100fps on 144hz monitor; things will start to smooth-up, yet clearly fast! you can see things better and early, not to mention you can play better because you can aim and shoot better(I repeat it was like I bought a new mouse), you won't stop gaming on a 144hz monitor!

My experience with 144hz; gaming became a lot enjoyable, I have NOT used 4k but I have seen it against a 1440p, and not many would upgrade if it wasn't about monitor size, in my opinion.

Good luck
 
#3 ·
Honestly, Gsync aside, the Ultra Low Motion Blur that is offered on the 1440p 144hz will blow you away and transform your gaming forever. That being said Gsync is great, but not all games support it, in which case you activate ULMB instead. The gaming experience will be so satisfying with no motion blur, 4k will only disappoint you if you played both side by side and realize how much motion blur really ruins gaming.
smile.gif


Yes, I do own a 4k monitor. Yes, I have tried ULMB gaming before, and yes I currently own 1440p overclocked to 110hz.

Out of all of it, I would say 1440p ULMB is the best option hands down, honestly.
 
#4 ·
There were news indicating that 144hz 1440 IPS-Type panels were being built, which sounded really cool to me, I'm really impatient to see how those performs, and I would probably be buying one if it's really good, 4k would require so much GPU power that my PC would need to be upgraded, I mean if I get 4k, I don't wanna run low settings, though that said next year graphic cards gonna be awesome so.. we'll see, also perhaps 144hz 4k will be a thing, but yea, if you want something now, just get whatever you feels is right.
 
#5 ·
Hello, thank you for your replies.

In regard to size, I currently have a 27 monitor and I am comfortable with it's size. Although a bit bigger wouldn't hurt.
smile.gif

My setup is two Gigabyte 970 G1s in SLI.
I don't think they can either push 144 fps at 1440p nor 60fps at 4k, with all settings on ultra and AA and all that.

I read here:
http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/6749/using-the-acer-xb280hk-28-inch-4k-monitor-4k-g-sync-is-g-lorious/index3.html

that it's easier for the GPU to reach 60fps at 4k, than it is to reach 144 at 1440p.

So, just so I can understand, do frames become harder to render as the framerate increases?
Because a 1440p frame is about 3.7 megapixels, while a 4k frame is about 8.3 megapixels. That is quite an increase.
So, a GTX 970 SLI will have a harder time putting 144 3.7 megapixel frames on the screen each second, than 8.3 megapixel frames just 60 times a second?

144 is 2.4 times 60.
So a card to render 144 frames is second, works 2.4 times harder than rendering 60 frames a second.
8.3 megapixels is 2.25 times more than 3.7.

So, it should be just about the same, to render 144 frames a second at 1440p, than 60 frames a second at 4k.

Or am I thinking this wrong?

Either way, with 970 SLI I could maybe do 90-100 fps on 1440P or 40-50 on 4K.
I am an eye candy whore.
smile.gif


I just don't know what would be a better bet, either for the current gaming experience, and for the future with future GPU releases...

Cheers!
 
#6 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gdourado View Post

Hello, thank you for your replies.

In regard to size, I currently have a 27 monitor and I am comfortable with it's size. Although a bit bigger wouldn't hurt.
smile.gif

My setup is two Gigabyte 970 G1s in SLI.
I don't think they can either push 144 fps at 1440p nor 60fps at 4k, with all settings on ultra and AA and all that.

I read here:
http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/6749/using-the-acer-xb280hk-28-inch-4k-monitor-4k-g-sync-is-g-lorious/index3.html

that it's easier for the GPU to reach 60fps at 4k, than it is to reach 144 at 1440p.

So, just so I can understand, do frames become harder to render as the framerate increases?
Because a 1440p frame is about 3.7 megapixels, while a 4k frame is about 8.3 megapixels. That is quite an increase.
So, a GTX 970 SLI will have a harder time putting 144 3.7 megapixel frames on the screen each second, than 8.3 megapixel frames just 60 times a second?

144 is 2.4 times 60.
So a card to render 144 frames is second, works 2.4 times harder than rendering 60 frames a second.
8.3 megapixels is 2.25 times more than 3.7.

So, it should be just about the same, to render 144 frames a second at 1440p, than 60 frames a second at 4k.

Or am I thinking this wrong?

Either way, with 970 SLI I could maybe do 90-100 fps on 1440P or 40-50 on 4K.
I am an eye candy whore.
smile.gif


I just don't know what would be a better bet, either for the current gaming experience, and for the future with future GPU releases...

Cheers!
actually, I run a lot of games at 110 frames on my overclocked 110hz 1440p 27" monitor, its simply a matter of turning AA down to x2 instead of normal x4, and maybe lower shadows or a couple other settings. and thats the whole idea of gsync, you gpu's don't have to be able to push all the way to 144 to get the full smoothness

the ULMB tech i mentioned earlier on the Asus ROG swift is hands down a transformation gaming experience... you really should get the ROG Swift imo.
 
#8 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by ryanallan View Post

I just wrote a mini review on my Acer XB280HK. Check it out.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1527467/acer-xb280hk-4k-g-sync-my-initial-impressions

Most surprising to me was that my 780Ti could stay above 60FPS on the high setting*.
Your 970 SLI will then more than likely get 90-100 FPS in the same conditions.

* Battlefield 4
That's helpful. And since my current monitor is also a PB278Q, I look forward to your more in depth comparisons.

Cheers!
 
#9 ·
Im in the same situation. I have a 1080p 27" Samsung Monitor (60Hz) i have 2 reference gtx780's 3gb. In sli. I was thinking of the BenQ 32" 2560x1440 monitor but i keep hearing how amazing the gameplay is when u play at 120hz or higher. I feel like i could get 60 fps easily on a 2560x1440. What should i do?
 
#10 ·
Also in the same position. I was fairly set on 4k until I decided to start up a game and try to find screen tearing etc to determine how much things would change with a high refresh rate/gsync... end result is that I'm completely won over on the swift. I booted up the original witcher and just focused on screen tearing during a cut scene - I had never really noticed it before but now I've done myself over because I can't ignore it.
 
#11 ·
Switching from 120hz to 144hz is a lot better. I have a 144hz monitor and you never need to push 144fps for the smoothness and responsiveness in games. The smoothness starts from around 70fps and as you go past 100fps which most current gpus can push, the smoothness of the game increases.

4k is there and getting cheaper daily, but the reason to get the swift is the back up for screen tearing, the worse experience ever other than shattering. with the rog swift you have:gsync, 1440p and 144hz they all backs each other up for great experience. When you start to experience screen tearing at 4k it will be peak for you.

The best solution for you is to get a 144hz pannel and get a 4k monitor if you can, rog swift is the balanced and if you can wait for something like 4k with gsync:it's not far away.

They say "once you make the switch to 144hz you will never go back" it's 100% true.
 
#13 ·
I have a Crossover 27 for work and graphic + icc tuned. Gaming is okay at 60Hz + a lot of blur in FPS. Most of the time I have to stand still to scan the area for enemies before I move my camera. I am not able to spot enemies with a constant moving camera in game with my Crossover IPS because of the 60Hz and respond time, it doesn't have those technical features as 120Hz+ gaming monitors.

My single GTX TITAN Hybrid modded OC is able to push most game at 60FPS Adaptive Vsync, some games would be around 100-140FPS.

Nvidia new DSR function, able to run games beyond my resolution 4k and 5k. I will tell you first single TITAN is not able to keep up the FPS without SLI even for a DX9 games like FFXIV. + Most games UI will only support up to 1440p. Beyond that, your UI is super tiny and unreadable.

I have XL2430T in the mail, it's a 24" 144Hz 1080p monitor. One for work and one for gaming. I don't need 2 giant screens, and not planning to have surround gaming as well.

Future gaming, a lot of movement I will tell you. Games are becoming more hollywood cinematic in real time. With all the explosive constant effect and movement. Sticking to a 60Hz monitor with those games. It is not going to help but making it worse that you can't really see anything clear while shaking and moving so much.

Which is why I rather go for high 144Hz monitor, keeping the visual clear.

If you want immersion, wait for Oculus Rift! I've played with it in University game studios LOL.
 
#14 ·
Im speaking from experience of owning

1. Asus PB278Q : 1440p
2. Asus PB287Q : 4K
3. PG278Q : 144hz Rog swift : current monitor

I can say hands down that the swift is the best performing of the 3 but of course with a slight trade off in terms of eye candy . The swift is an absolute balance between performance and visuals. I personally would not recommend the 4K. the scaling on windows for me was just a nightmare, everything was so small and just affected usability in a negative way. The IPS panel of the PB278Q was gorgeous and the monitor can easily be overclocked in the control panel to 85hz which is more than acceptable imo for most games. If you can afford to go for the swift then i would recommend that monitor. If not just overclock your 1440 monitor to 85hz . I would not personally recommend 4K right now for gaming. I had a 295x2 + 290x in trifire and even that amount of power was not sufficient enough to maintain a solid 60fps in the games i was playing on 4K so i downgraded ( imo it was an upgrade) to 2x 980 and a ROG Swift and I have not been happier. 130 fps + in most less demanding games and of course no stuttering or tearing and everything look gorgeous.
 
#15 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by 21cage12 View Post

Switching from 120hz to 144hz is a lot better. I have a 144hz monitor and you never need to push 144fps for the smoothness and responsiveness in games. The smoothness starts from around 70fps and as you go past 100fps which most current gpus can push, the smoothness of the game increases.

4k is there and getting cheaper daily, but the reason to get the swift is the back up for screen tearing, the worse experience ever other than shattering. with the rog swift you have:gsync, 1440p and 144hz they all backs each other up for great experience. When you start to experience screen tearing at 4k it will be peak for you.

The best solution for you is to get a 144hz pannel and get a 4k monitor if you can, rog swift is the balanced and if you can wait for something like 4k with gsync:it's not far away.

They say "once you make the switch to 144hz you will never go back" it's 100% true.
Doesn't the Acer XB280HK with G-Sync also elimates the tearing?
On my current PB278Q, I could see some tearing on games running at maximum settings with all AA and such. That was with my single 780TI.
I am still putting together my 970 SLI build to see if it improved.

Cheers!
 
#17 ·
You'll get tearing unless you have either V-Sync, G-Sync, or Free-Sync enabled.

Tearing isnt the only issue though.

With either of the above sync options you could still get studdr and lag.

High FPS reduces the apparentness of these effects, but they're still happening.
 
#18 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gdourado View Post

Doesn't the Acer XB280HK with G-Sync also elimates the tearing?
On my current PB278Q, I could see some tearing on games running at maximum settings with all AA and such. That was with my single 780TI.
I am still putting together my 970 SLI build to see if it improved.

Cheers!
Any G-sync enabled monitor will definitely help screen tearing, 144hz on the other hand, is also great for reducing screen tearing. (I prefer 144panels because they mostly comes with lower input lag and responds times). When using a 144hz monitor, if your gpu is able to push between 70fps to just over 144fps, you will hardly experience screen tearing. Where I have notice screen tearing is when my gpu is pushing between 400fps-2000fps, these frams are too high and the tearing isn't enough or consistent for you to quite the game.
When using a fast-panel (144hz), more fps is good for better gaming experience. The only time you will experience shuttering is when you've switched to 144hz and pushing around 40-50fps or lower, at that fps rate the shuttering can be pretty bad and you will end up reducing the refresh rate or ending the game. This is why most people ends up with dual gpus to be able to guarantee over 70fps(with eye candy stuff turn on), the demands to feed faster panels can be similar to pushing 4k@60hz, depending on how the person wants to see the game, obviously(everything on ultra, all eye candy stuff turned on high).
When I reduce my settings to high, from ultra, I can get around, 115fps consistently, in cod ghost, at this fps the gameplay is simply outstanding!
 
#20 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by ryanallan View Post

You'll get tearing unless you have either V-Sync, G-Sync, or Free-Sync enabled.

Tearing isnt the only issue though.

With either of the above sync options you could still get studdr and lag.

High FPS reduces the apparentness of these effects, but they're still happening.
You pretty much never experience tearing on 120+ Hz.

IMO Freesync and Gsync are for people running low fps. Making these features perfect for 4K gaming with the current GPUs.

Vsync is just completely useless. Input lag/Mouse delay. Should always be disabled unless the game engine requires it (very very rare).
 
#21 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by lexlutha111384 View Post

I'm gaming at 60hz on a 1080p panel with two 780s (overkill) and I decided to go with the BenQ XL2720Z. I have heard great things about it. 144hz and 27" what do u guys think?
Have you considered stepping up to 1440p with those GPU's ?
 
#23 ·
Yeah, played several games at 144Hz. Like BF4, the motion and seeing enemies around my area is clear and sharp. I can detect enemies while moving.

I wasn't able to see anything while moving on my 60Hz 1440p monitor. Honestly, I can't stand the BLURS! It's crazy how much different it is side by side both of the monitor one at 144Hz and other 60Hz!

Don't ask for video because it will never shows. Got to see it in your own eyes! I'll say go for 144Hz. The 4k resolution is not worth it, unless you are working with a lot of documents opened, stocks or designs.
 
#24 ·
120-144 Hz is amazing when the fps is above 100 (imo).
When it dips into the 80s you start losing the advantage and for me it's not very different from 60 fps on 60 Hz.

If you can mainstain 100+ fps most of the time it's very nice.
But some games are limited to 60 fps, some of them are Rage, Wolfenstein New Order, The Evil Within. All using id Tech 5 engine. Terrible engine.. I think The Crew is also locked at 60.
 
#25 ·
Advice for res or hz

If you're a consistent gamer you must get a fast panel (120hz+), if you occasionally play games res over 1080p is ideal for you, period.
 
#26 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by djriful View Post

Yeah, played several games at 144Hz. Like BF4, the motion and seeing enemies around my area is clear and sharp. I can detect enemies while moving.

I wasn't able to see anything while moving on my 60Hz 1440p monitor. Honestly, I can't stand the BLURS! It's crazy how much different it is side by side both of the monitor one at 144Hz and other 60Hz!

Don't ask for video because it will never shows. Got to see it in your own eyes! I'll say go for 144Hz. The 4k resolution is not worth it, unless you are working with a lot of documents opened, stocks or designs.
Do you consider yourself an above average FPS player? And have around 20% accuracy at least?

I played a lot of FPS games on my Dell 1440p@60hz and I seem to do quite well, i'd consider myself well above average in battlefield, as well as any other FPS I put time into. Did going to 144hz(120hz) actually increase your skill? Anyone good gamers actually make that change from 60hz to 144hz and notice a night a day difference in play? I kind of really like the colors of the IPS screen over the TN, so it makes me wonder if I would even play any better than I already do. My only gaming monitor option would be the ROG Swift (need that 1440p), but all those QC issues are a real turn off.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top