• Light/Dark
  • Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.

Is 1440p a noticeable upgrade over 1080p?

  • Thread starter Deleted member 16908
  • Start date

Is 1440p a noticeable upgrade over 1080p?

  • Yes

    Votes: 1,345 89.8%

  • No

    Votes: 153 10.2%
  • Total voters
    1,498
exodus

exodus

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,942
If you want a 1440p monitor for with the Asus VG27AQ. Basically the PG279Q without USB ports and with Freesync (Gsync compatible) instead of hardware Gsync. For less than 2/3 the cost.

You can get it usually for around $560-$580 CAD.

TBH though, if your PC isn't powerful enough for 1440P/144Hz, I'd almost be tempted to recommend 1080p/144Hz instead. The increase in refresh rate is more noticeable than the increase in resolution.

What type of games do you play? That might sway things one way or the other.
 
77DELOREAN

77DELOREAN

Member
Feb 2, 2020
12
Just upgraded from a 24 inch 1080p 4ms To a 1440p 27inch 1ms with Gsync. You will see a difference for sure, way more screen real estate for UI, menus and stuff if you play MMOs. Graphics look somewhat crisper. Be aware that you might need a beefier GPU to get the same performance coming from a 1080p monitor.
 
Sanctuary

Sanctuary

Member
Oct 27, 2017
14,198
Robinson said:
You'd recommend the 27GL850, then? That's one of the models I've been looking at.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I have zero experience with the Asus that is being recommended as well, but the LG is quite a bit cheaper (through Best Buy anyway, Amazon sellers have been price gouging the hell out of it) and the main thing it lacks over it is VRR under 48hz since it's only "G-sync compatible" with FreeSync, but if you were aiming for at least 60fps with high demanding games, it shouldn't be too much of an issue I wouldn't think. I just got mine today, but after researching good 1440p monitors, this one was one that's been universally praised. Many reviews are comparing it to fast TN panels also, which was rare in an IPS panel.

For $100 more, you could get full G-sync with the Viewsonic Elite XG270QG.
edit: no sRGB mode though unlike with the LG, so your colors will be oversaturated with normal content.
 
Last edited:
Morrigan

Morrigan

Spear of the Metal Church
Member
Oct 24, 2017
34,299
GeezyAF said:
Is the 27GL83-A available on Amazon.ca? Here in the states it's a 27"/1440p/144hz/IPS monitor that goes from $320-$380 + tax.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Nope, only from 3rd party sellers for $700 CAD or so. Same thing when I look at other retailers though.

Doesn't seem like there's any 144hz monitors that aren't morbidly expensive tbh...
 
Playboi Carti

Playboi Carti

Member
Jan 1, 2018
1,263
Portugal
GeezyAF said:
If I buy a monitor with a VA panel, I have to deal with black smear, and that happens even on good VA panels.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It's not a good VA panel if it suffers from noticeable black smearing. I've had many VA displays ranging from TV's to monitors and It was always unnoticeable. My current TV set is a high end LED TV with a VA panel and black smearing is almost nonexistent. I'm not saying it doesn't exist, it's just less noticeable/common if you know what you're buying. It's also worth noting that with VA's the more expensive the display is, the less black smearing it has. For IPS panels it doesn't matter how much money you throw at it, it'll always have bad contrast ratios.

So the problem with IPS is that even 1000$+ IPS monitors can't escape from this:

AW5osGT.png
 
Zolbrod

Zolbrod

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,070
Osaka, Japan
If you showed me a screenshot and asked me if it was 1080p or 1440p, I wouldn't be able to answer.
If you put the two next to each other though, it's a noticeable difference.
 
b0uncyfr0

b0uncyfr0

Member
Apr 2, 2018
944
Im in Camp VA personally - the only thing to worry about is the black smearing and reading reviews + buying a good quality one almost negates that. I love those 3000:1 contrast ratio's.

As for the side colour argument - i don't look at my screen from the side, 95% of the time im sitting right infront of it. Never had any issues with input lag either, or most likely i dont notice anything different about it compared to other screens.

Ive been burnt on IPS glow before - never again.
 
Pargon

Pargon

Member
Oct 27, 2017
11,988
Playboi Carti said:
Monitor manufacturers often ignore VA because IPS and TN panels are cheaper to produce. A good VA panel will always be better than both because it's the only type of panel that can have a bit of everything. Good VA panels have good color accuracy, good black levels, good contrast and good response times at the same refresh rate of IPS and TN panels.

If you buy a monitor with a good IPS panel, you get good color accuracy and good response times but you have to deal with backlight bleeding and horrible contrast ratios.

If you buy a TN panel you get good response times and high refresh rates at a lower price but you also have to deal with mediocre color and terrible contrast ratios.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I don't know if the claim of IPS panels being cheaper to produce now is actually true, but it used to be that IPS was the premium option for LCD panels which you'd have to pay extra for - and I still would.
Except for contrast, IPS panels are better in every other way than VA panels.
VA panels only reach their rated contrast in a very narrow angle, and that angle gets narrower the higher the panel contrast is. The high contrast panels lose their contrast almost as soon as you get away from being perfectly on-axis - even slight head movements change the image in dark scenes.



The first image is an ASUS PG348Q IPS ultrawide, the right is an HP OMEN X35 VA ultrawide:
ips-viewing-angle-3vvod0.jpg
va-viewing-angle-3hvpbg.jpg


My TV has a 5000:1 native VA panel, and I still prefer my 1000:1 IPS monitor so long as there's a lamp on in the room.
In total darkness, sure, IPS contrast is not great; but neither is VA compared to OLED.

Playboi Carti said:
It's not a good VA panel if it suffers from noticeable black smearing. I've had many VA displays ranging from TV's to monitors and It was always unnoticeable. My current TV set is a high end LED TV with a VA panel and black smearing is almost nonexistent. I'm not saying it doesn't exist, it's just less noticeable/common if you know what you're buying. It's also worth noting that with VA's the more expensive the display is, the less black smearing it has. For IPS panels it doesn't matter how much money you throw at it, it'll always have bad contrast ratios.

So the problem with IPS is that even 1000$+ IPS monitors can't escape from this:
AW5osGT.png
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Over-exposed images will exaggerate any differences in contrast.
 
Serious Sam

Serious Sam

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
4,354
Are we really having a discussion about about VA monitor viewing angles? It's such a non issue for PC use. This is not a TV where entire family may sit on a couch at different angles. And whatever viewing angle deficiency there may be, far greater contrast ratio of VA and no corner glow is way superior to IPS.
 
Shadow

Shadow

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 28, 2017
4,102
I game on both a 25" 144hz 1080p TN monitor and a 27" 1440p 60hz IPS(actually a 2009 iMac being used as a monitor). The 1440p iMac display looks much much clearer and well, superior in every single way except for refresh rate.
 

slothrop

â–˛ Legend â–˛
Member
Aug 28, 2019
3,874
USA
Yeah. I'll add its also a nice improvement for general multitasking if you do anything else on your PC
 
Sanctuary

Sanctuary

Member
Oct 27, 2017
14,198
Pargon said:
Over-exposed images will exaggerate any differences in contrast.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

No shit. IPS panels do not have great contrast, but even my new one, which has a very low rating in that regard does not look as bad as what's in those images. In sRGB mode, it's practically identical to what I had been using for the previous seven years, and in WCG mode, it actually improves quite a bit over that. The only time it ever rears its ugly head is when watching media that is letterboxed. The bars are definitely not black, but then every LCD/LED has looked like that to me anyway ever since using a plasma, and even worse after going to an OLED. VA might be the best of the three primary monitor panels for contrast, but the response times, shimmering and chance for smearing aren't worth it to me.

The irony too is that I'm viewing the VA panel image on an IPS, and the screenshot looks dark enough to me. In gaming it's mostly a non issue, even in horror games the perceived darkness is enough usually. I did have an IPS screen that had really bad backlight bleed in two of the corners like what is in that Injustice shot, but then I returned it for the same model that did not have that problem. Panel lottery is real across all panel types.

As far as off-axis not mattering? The second LCD type PC screen I owned was a 24'', and at the time that was kind of large (coming from a 17'') and I don't know if it was a TN or VA at the time, but it seemed like if I moved even a quarter of an inch horizontally, the image would "shift" along with me. That screen got sent back immediately. I've stuck with IPS since due to that.

EvilBoris said:
Native 1440p or reconstructed to 1440p?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Native. If reconstruction is a factor (like DLSS 2.0), then a little higher is better. Mainly for aliasing elimination though if it's even noticeable.
 
Last edited:
Jobbs

Jobbs

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
5,639
Yeah, it's quite noticeable over 1080p.

Things aren't as much of a jump from 1440p to 4k IMO. If it's a TV you can tell if it's large and you sit close to it.

For PC monitors 1440p is the sweet spot.
 
OneBadMutha

OneBadMutha

Member
Nov 2, 2017
6,059
After discovering 1440P on a 144hz monitor, I've determined that 1440 is the sweet spot for resolution. This coming from someone who also games on a 65" B7. While the blacks on the Oled are unbeatable, I dont mind giving up the resolution to get the faster input playing on a monitor. Going down to 1080P is more noticeable however.
 
Black_Stride

Black_Stride

Avenger
Oct 28, 2017
7,377
Serious Sam said:
Are we really having a discussion about about VA monitor viewing angles? It's such a non issue for PC use. This is not a TV where entire family may sit on a couch at different angles. And whatever viewing angle deficiency there may be, far greater contrast ratio of VA and no corner glow is way superior to IPS.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Has VA black smear at higher refresh rates been largely fixed, thats the main thing thats been keeping me away from going 1440p144 all the affordable ones are VA and im apprehensive of the smearing....I dont want to have a fast monitor that has smeary image.

OneBadMutha said:
After discovering 1440P on a 144hz monitor, I've determined that 1440 is the sweet spot for resolution. This coming from someone who also games on a 65" B7. While the blacks on the Oled are unbeatable, I dont mind giving up the resolution to get the faster input playing on a monitor. Going down to 1080P is more noticeable however.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

4K vs 1440p144 has been one of the things ive been debating with myself.
Are the VA 1440p144 screens good now or do I still need to spendan arm on a leg to get an IPS.
 
thenexus6

thenexus6

Member
Oct 26, 2017
7,303
UK
I just need Sony to announce full support for 1440p and I will finally bite. I use the same screen for PC and console so will grab a 1440p 144Hz and be covered for both.
 
Black_Stride

Black_Stride

Avenger
Oct 28, 2017
7,377
thenexus6 said:
I just need Sony to announce full support for 1440p and I will finally bite. I use the same screen for PC and console so will grab a 1440p 144Hz and be covered for both.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Even if the PS5 doesnt officially support 1440p
Your monitor should downsample the 4K image.

But it would be nice if it natively supports 1440p.
 
Sanctuary

Sanctuary

Member
Oct 27, 2017
14,198
Black_Stride said:
But it would be nice if it natively supports 1440p.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

What is the difference between native and non native support on a TV for 1440p? Is it just to have the TV scale the resolution instead of the GPU? Because my C8 doesn't "support" 1440p, and yet that's what I've been gaming on since I got it anyway, aside from when games actually have resolution scaling. I just set it to 4K and then drop it to 80% or so in that case.
 
Black_Stride

Black_Stride

Avenger
Oct 28, 2017
7,377
Sanctuary said:
What is the difference between native and non native support on a TV for 1440p? Is it just to have the TV scale the resolution instead of the GPU? Because my C8 doesn't "support" 1440p, and yet that's what I've been gaming on since I got it anyway, aside from when games actually have resolution scaling. I just set it to 4K and then drop it to 80% or so in that case.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Yeah its basically just what is going to do the scaling.
The GPU or the Monitor.

If the GPU handles instead of the monitor you can eliminate the chance of weird issues like unreadable HUDs or games which detect anything less than 4K as 1080p.
 
Fliesen

Fliesen

Member
Oct 25, 2017
10,251
Yes, abso-fucking-lutely. And it seems to be the sweet spot where everything looks dramatically more crisp, while at the same time, running at the native resolution at a decent frame rate is perfectly achievable for most PCs.

Right now, 4K is (imho) a waste, because whatever GPU horsepower you're throwing at driving those additional pixels could be used to get higher framerates.
 
Mathieran

Mathieran

Member
Oct 25, 2017
12,854
Probably. Downsampled 1080p was a noticeable upgrade from native 1080p when I upgraded from base PS4 to PS4 pro. I suspect that would be even better.
 
pswii60

pswii60

Member
Oct 27, 2017
26,653
The Milky Way
107 people definitely need glasses.

How you would not be able to notice the difference between 1080p and 1440p is completely baffling. It's obvious even on a tiny smartphone screen.
 
Galava

Galava

â–˛ Legend â–˛
Member
Oct 27, 2017
5,080
Thanks for this thread OP, was wondering the same thing the other day.

Been gaming at 1080p for a looong time, want to upgrade, but 4K seems so expensive still. Any good (and affordable) G-sync compatible 1440p displays?
 
Megauap

Megauap

Member
Oct 28, 2017
143
Spain
Doesn't having 2 monitors, one at 1440p 144Hz and the other at 1440p at 60Hz, make all the monitors stay at just 60Hz due to Windows incompetence?
I've been wanting to upgrade one of my 1440p 60Hz monitor to 1440p 120 or 144Hz Gsync monitor but still have not due to that fact.
 

Deleted member 2834

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
7,620
Megauap said:
Doesn't having 2 monitors, one at 1440p 144Hz and the other at 1440p at 60Hz, make all the monitors stay at just 60Hz due to Windows incompetence?
I've been wanting to upgrade one of my 1440p 60Hz monitor to 1440p 120 or 144Hz Gsync monitor but still have not due to that fact.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
No I got that exaxt setup and they run at 60Hz and 144Hz
 
Pargon

Pargon

Member
Oct 27, 2017
11,988
Megauap said:
Doesn't having 2 monitors, one at 1440p 144Hz and the other at 1440p at 60Hz, make all the monitors stay at just 60Hz due to Windows incompetence?
I've been wanting to upgrade one of my 1440p 60Hz monitor to 1440p 120 or 144Hz Gsync monitor but still have not due to that fact.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It's not that Windows 10 couldn't run monitors at different refresh rates, but if one was 144Hz and another was 60Hz, certain things like hardware-accelerated video playback on the 60Hz display could cause stuttering in games running on the 144Hz monitor.
I believe that setting the 144Hz display to 120Hz worked around this, since 120 was cleanly divisible by 60.
The latest update to Windows 10 (20H1) mostly fixed this by adding a new "hardware-accelerated GPU scheduling" option. You still don't get perfect smoothness on the secondary 60Hz display, but content on the secondary monitor should not affect smoothness of the primary 144Hz monitor now - which was the main problem.

Sanctuary said:
What is the difference between native and non native support on a TV for 1440p? Is it just to have the TV scale the resolution instead of the GPU? Because my C8 doesn't "support" 1440p, and yet that's what I've been gaming on since I got it anyway, aside from when games actually have resolution scaling. I just set it to 4K and then drop it to 80% or so in that case.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Most monitors do not accept a higher-than-native resolution and scale it down.
So if you have a 1440p monitor and the PS5 can only output 1080p or 2160p, you might be forced to output 1080p.

Black_Stride said:
Are the VA 1440p144 screens good now or do I still need to spend an arm on a leg to get an IPS.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Vertical alignment is inherently worse than in-plane switching for everything but contrast, and I would be surprised if its flaws are ever actually fixed before we move on from LCD displays altogether.
 
Sanctuary

Sanctuary

Member
Oct 27, 2017
14,198
Pargon said:
Most monitors do not accept a higher-than-native resolution and scale it down.
So if you have a 1440p monitor and the PS5 can only output 1080p or 2160p, you might be forced to output 1080p.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I know that in terms of trying to go higher than native, but I'm talking about lower than native. The LG OLEDs before the C9 are said to "not support" 1440p, and yet I've been using that resolution no problem. If it's not actually supported, then what is happening? It's not being displayed at 1080p. Or as I previously asked, is this just a matter of display scaling vs GPU scaling?

edit: Nevermind. I thought the conversation was about Sony screens for some reason.
 
Last edited:
FernandoRocker

FernandoRocker

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
7,987
MĂ©xico
Speaking about monitors. Monoprice just released this one a couple of days ago. Do you think it looks good for the price? I'm considering purchasing it when/if it drops to $600 USD.


tjix7hjl.png


BAfZ6dZl.png


The Monoprice 43" CrystalPro™ Curved Ultra-Wide Monitor features an expansive 3840x1200 Double Full HD (DFHD) resolution and a super ultra-wide 32:10 aspect ratio for a massively wide field of view for everything from spreadsheets to games and movies. Equivalent to two 24" 16:9 monitors side-by-side, its unique combination of resolution and aspect ratio in a single, continuous panel are ideally suited to replace dual-monitor setups without the annoyance of bezels obstructing the view. An ergonomic 1800R curvature greatly enhances immersion and reduces any potential eye strain.

Also a powerful performer, the Monoprice 43" CrystalPro™ Curved Ultra-Wide Monitor combines a high 120Hz refresh rate and AMD® FreeSync™ technology for a blazing fast, tear-free multimedia and gaming experience. Samsung® Quantum Dot Color® technology provides more vibrant, natural color while VESA® DisplayHDR™ 400 certification satisfies the display industry's standard for true 8-bit image quality, peak luminance of 400 cd/m2, higher contrast ratio, and wider color gamut.

One DisplayPort® 1.2, one HDMI® 2.0, and two HDMI® 1.4 video inputs, plus an audio output, provide a host of connectivity options.

The Monoprice 43" CrystalPro™ Curved Ultra-Wide Monitor features an A grade panel and is backed by our 1-Year PixelPerfect™ guarantee.

Specifications:
  • Screen Size: 43"
  • Video Inputs: 1x DisplayPort® 1.2, 1x HDMI® 2.0, 2x HDMI® 1.4
  • Panel Technology: VA
  • Panel Model: Samsung® LSM430YP01
  • Curvature: 1800R
  • Aspect Ratio: 32:10
  • Resolution: 3840x1200 Double Full HD (DFHD)
  • High Dynamic Range (HDR) Support: VESA® DisplayHDR™ 400
  • Refresh Rate: 120Hz
  • Response Rate: 4ms GTG
  • Adaptive Sync: AMD® FreeSync™1.0
  • AMD® FreeSync™ Refresh Rates: DisplayPort 1.2: 50 ~ 120Hz; HDMI 2.0: 50 ~ 120Hz; HDMI 1.4: 50 ~ 75Hz
  • Typical Brightness: Up to 400 cd/m2
  • Typical Contrast Ratio: 3000:1
  • Viewing Angles (H/V): 178°/178°
  • VESA® Mount Size: 75x75mm
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
 
Pargon

Pargon

Member
Oct 27, 2017
11,988
Sanctuary said:
I know that in terms of trying to go higher than native, but I'm talking about lower than native. The LG OLEDs before the C9 are said to "not support" 1440p, and yet I've been using that resolution no problem. If it's not actually supported, then what is happening? It's not being displayed at 1080p. Or as I previously asked, is this just a matter of display scaling vs GPU scaling?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
thenexus6 was saying they would like Sony to support a 1440p output from the PS5 because they have a 1440p monitor, not that they want their TV to support a 1440p input.

As for why 1440p support on a TV matters:
HDMI 2.0 has the bandwidth to support 1440p120 or 4K60 with an 8-bit RGB/4:4:4 signal.
If the TV does not support a 1440p input you would be limited to only 60Hz when the GPU is scaling 1440p to 4K, and would have to drop down to 1080p for 120Hz.

There are also devices like the Marseille mClassic which has limited processing power and is only able to upscale 1080p60 games to 1440p60.
It can only scale 24/30Hz signals to 4K (note: this means a 30Hz signal, not a 30 FPS game).
 
squall23

squall23

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,764
A lot of games startup initially on 1080p by default so then I have to change the resolution every time and it's always so noticeable.
 
Shake Appeal

Shake Appeal

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,883
The LG 27GL850-B (or 27GL83A-B) are still the best all-around monitors under $500, if you can ever find them in stock.

1440p, 144Hz, IPS, FreeSync, low-response mode (or bad HDR, if you care for that), and you get an LG panel instead of some AU Opronics bullshit.

(The VG27AQ is also great, but you're rolling the dice on panel QA a little.)
 
Last edited:

Deleted member 4212

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
9,872
Shake Appeal said:
The LG 27GL850-B (or 27GL83A-B) are still the best all-around monitors under $500, if you can ever find them in stock.

1440p, 144Hz, IPS, FreeSync, low-response mode (or bad HDR, if you care for that), and you get an LG panel instead of some AU Opronics bullshit.

(The VG27AQ is also great, but you're rolling the dice on panel QA a little.)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I just got a 27GL83A-B in the mail today! It's amazing. It has been in stock in Amazon for a few days at $380: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07YGZL8XF/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o02_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

They must have gotten a huge production surge because I've had these on a watchlist for about a month and could never get one in time, but they've been available for the past few days.

Anyway, my old monitor setup was a 4k 32" monitor at 60hz and a 1080p 60hz monitor. This new one at 1440p/144hz is miles better than both. Honestly I can only slightly tell the difference between 4k and 1440p, but the difference between 1440p and 1080p is large. The refresh rate is far more important, as others have said. Even just moving my mouse around on the desktop - the refresh rate is noticeably better. I never want another 60hz screen.

I almost wish I could get rid of the 4k monitor and get another one of these, but I guess the 4k one will be better for console games.
 
OP
OP

Deleted member 16908

Oct 27, 2017
9,377
Aquavelvaman said:
I just got a 27GL83A-B in the mail today! It's amazing. It has been in stock in Amazon for a few days at $380: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07YGZL8XF/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o02_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

They must have gotten a huge production surge because I've had these on a watchlist for about a month and could never get one in time, but they've been available for the past few days.

Anyway, my old monitor setup was a 4k 32" monitor at 60hz and a 1080p 60hz monitor. This new one at 1440p/144hz is miles better than both. Honestly I can only slightly tell the difference between 4k and 1440p, but the difference between 1440p and 1080p is large. The refresh rate is far more important, as others have said. Even just moving my mouse around on the desktop - the refresh rate is noticeably better. I never want another 60hz screen.

I almost wish I could get rid of the 4k monitor and get another one of these, but I guess the 4k one will be better for console games.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Thanks for the heads up! I wasn't quite sure if I wanted to drop $500 on the GL850, but for $380 I think I'll pull the trigger.
 
Shake Appeal

Shake Appeal

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,883
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.