It has long been said that 1440p 144hz is the sweet spot for balancing performance and image quality in gaming monitors. Many high end gaming monitors sport a 4k resolution while often compromising on other features. This article will examine whether there is any tangible benefit to choosing a 4k gaming monitor.
Visual Quality
When Apple introduced the concept of a “Retina Display,” they were alluding to the amount of pixels per inch required to make individual pixels indistinguishable to the human eye on the iPhone. Any pixel density greater than what was required by “Retina Displays” would be in excess. While the concept of using a set pixel density to specify the requirements of a display to be “Retina” worked for iPhones and small handheld devices, larger displays found on TVs and Monitors could maintain lower pixel densities than specified by Apple’s “Retina” specification because one would be viewing them from further a way and still be unable to make out individual pixels. Although pixels would be indistinguishable from each other on both 4k and 1440p monitors from a reasonable viewing distance on a 27″ monitor, neither monitor meets the required pixel density for Apple’s “Retina” specification. Thus, if the pixels are indistinguishable from each other on both 4k and 1440p monitors, increasing the resolution of the monitor would be an unnecessary waste of money. Here lies the issue with 4k monitors. Although both 1440p and 4k monitors should theoretically have similar image quality to each other (because both monitors’ pixels are indistinguishable from one another), 4k monitors are still sold at a much greater price and are much harder to drive graphically.
Graphical Performance
It’s no secret that Nvidia’s most recent series of high end 3000 series graphics cards were primarily targeted towards high end gamers with either 4k monitors or multiple displays. Nvidia’s highest end graphics cards retain MSRPs of over a thousand dollars and are often sold at much higher prices. These high performing GPUs are required to maintain high frame rates on 4k displays, rendering the cost of a 4k capable gaming setup much higher than a 1440p capable setup. In Tom’s Hardware’s 9 game average, the RTX 3090 (a GPU with a $1500 MSRP) averages 109 frames per second. In that same 9 game average, the RTX 3070 (a GPU with a $500 MSRP) averages 122 FPS at 1440p. Thus, by choosing the 4k option, one would be spending an additional $1000 on a graphics hard that can drive 4k games and the additional cost of a high performance 4k monitor (over a 1440p monitor) in exchange for worse gaming performance and little to no improvement in visual quality. While 4k monitors do have a use in professional workflows and content creation, 4k gaming monitors are almost always a massive waste of money. Plus, why would you waste your money on an RTX 3090 and 4k monitor when RGB Power Supply Cables Exist?
Sources:
The Overclock 