0-20k Is 1440p really worth it if you are comfortable with 24" ?

Status
Not open for further replies.
30fps101

30fps101

Contributor
i currently have 2x 24" 1080p g24f monitors and I feel like it has enough space for me to work with. And I see lot of people saying 27" 1440p is the best spot, but in paper isn't enough difference in PPI between them for me.
I haven't experienced 1440p at 27" in person(have tried 32", way too big for me got neck pain) so can you guys please leme know is it really worth upgrading if you are comfortable with space 24" offers ?

FYI my chair is around 80cm from the monitor.
 
No, 1440p is not a significant upgrade over 1080p. 1440p is the new 1080p. 27 inch is the new standard desktop monitor that is why it is selling a lot. Not as an upgrade but as a new standard. You can buy it when you want to buy a new monitor. Currently, your g24f is already a HRR monitor so there is no need to upgrade. The difference in size and resolution is not that significant.
4k is a huge upgrade though.
 
Last edited:
I would say 27" 1440p is recommended a lot as there are a lot of good option that are pretty cheap so would make sense to pay a little more to go bigger but given that isnt the case for you its not really worth the cost for the little extra imo. I upgraded from 23" 1080p 60 Hz to 27" 1440p 170 Hz as I felt the pixel density was a bit low and needed extra space for office multitasking and the refresh rate upgrade alone was worth the price for me.
 
Simply said OP If you are happy and satisfied with what you have ignore opinions and use what you got OR go 4k not 1440p.
 
30fps101 said:
FYI my chair is around 80cm from the monitor.
Click to expand...
Viewing distance should be the primary factor in choosing what size the screen should be. Everything else is secondary. For eg, you would not want a 15" phone, because you always look at it from less than a hand's length away. Ignore the "new standard size" arguments - it is just meant to make you buy the latest product, not what you actually need.
  • The farther you sit from the display, the bigger it needs to be
  • The bigger the display, the more pixels it needs to have
  • The more pixels it has, the sharper the images look, but for gaming, you need a more powerful GPU
Since you are familiar with DPI, a 24" 1080p has the same DPI as 32" 1440p or a 48" 4k display. Basically, from the same distance, let's say 80cm, all 3 displays will appear equally sharp. The difference is their physical size. Ideally your monitor should be placed at a distance of (1.5 x the diagonal size), else you will feel like you're in the first row of a cinema.

If you want a sharper display, increase the resolution but not size.
24" 1440p willl be a huge upgrade to you, but 27" 1440p isn't really worth it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: eternoMind, warman and Stronk
For most people with regular vision and a normal seating posture against a PC monitor (about 18”), the difference between 1440p and 1080p on a 24” monitor will be very apparent.
Although the difference between 4K and 1440p on a 24” will be somewhat subtle.

I currently use a 24” and a 32” display in different rooms. Both are 4K because i am bit of a sucker for high PPI.
I definitely would not recommed a 1440p for 27” although for a 24”, i would say you can’t go wrong with either 1440p or 4k.
Personally though, I would still take a 4K for 24” too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Stronk
1440p is best suited for a 27" PC monitor. A 24" monitor won't do much , unless your eyes too sensitive to pixels. I use LG UltraGear GL850 27" which has 1440p resolution. You will feel the difference. the screen are is huge. And pizel density is perfect.
 
  • Like
Reactions: warman
Almost 2 years ago, I upgraded from 1200P to 1440p, 24 inch Monitor to 27. And yes there was difference which i could see. Recently upgraded from 27 inch to 48 inch TV. Its also my Work Monitor, plus gaming buddy with Ps5. 4K is a great upgrade but depends if all the content you're are watching is in 4K or not.
 
27" 1080p apparently has low ppi, so 1440p is needed.

When I jumped from 24" 1080p to 27" 1440p, changes weren't noticeable during upgrade, just that I got a bigger display, until I temporarily had to use 24" 1080p again as a primary monitor. The difference is not night & day, but was noticeable to me.

If you want a 27" monitor, yes 1440p is worth it.
 
The difference to me was very noticeable not only in terms of the ppi but also the real estate, for example when stacking windows side by side.
 
I would go for 27 inch 1440p 144hz. I had got one in covid for 27k from amazon. acer. Many vendors adviced against it saying acer has horrible after sales service, and maybe it does, but i havent had a problem with the monitor for 2.5 years
 
Upgraded from 24inch 1080p to 27inch 1440p. It was a big upgrade for me. Both monitors are from Acer with ips panel but it feels as if even the colours are much better.

I still have a 24 inch as a second monitor, personally, I see huge difference between them. I however also personally thinks 27 inch too big. I wish 24 inch 1440p was a common thing.
 
OMEGA44-XT said:
Real estate was surely noticeable when I upgraded but not ppi. I'm sure 27" 1080p will look bad.
Click to expand...
Yeah the change in ppi may not not feel the same for everyone. But I still have the older monitor in another room, connected to another PC. Whenever I use it, it just feels archaic. I upgraded to a 34" 1440p ultrawide which has way better colors than the other 2 monitors but the ppi is same as the 27" inch one. But then, my LG C1 looks better than the 3 monitors. It is a neverending cycle. I don't really have an answer for what is 'worth it'.
 
aniket.cain said:
Yeah the change in ppi may not not feel the same for everyone. But I still have the older monitor in another room, connected to another PC. Whenever I use it, it just feels archaic. I upgraded to a 34" 1440p ultrawide which has way better colors than the other 2 monitors but the ppi is same as the 27" inch one. But then, my LG C1 looks better than the 3 monitors. It is a neverending cycle. I don't really have an answer for what is 'worth it'.
Click to expand...
OLEDs are in a different league in terms of picture quality, but it needs to get even more affordable & an even lower chance of burn-in.
 
  • Like
Reactions: warman
OLED burn in is no joke. You are pretty much relegated to using dark wallpapers too because colourful ones have higher chance of burn in and they cause higher battery drain (on a mobile device). And the burn in serves as a cruel reminder forever.
 
Nevermore said:
OLED burn in is no joke. You are pretty much relegated to using dark wallpapers too because colourful ones have higher chance of burn in and they cause higher battery drain (on a mobile device). And the burn in serves as a cruel reminder forever.
Click to expand...
That's why you get extended warranty like I did for 4 years.
 
Nevermore said:
OLED burn in is no joke. You are pretty much relegated to using dark wallpapers too because colourful ones have higher chance of burn in and they cause higher battery drain (on a mobile device). And the burn in serves as a cruel reminder forever.
Click to expand...
I don't know about monitors/TV but I've exclusively used AMOLED phones for 10+ years, and even the oldest one currently has no burn in issues. Perhaps the static UI like Windows button/TV channel logo is a problem for bigger screens.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Stronk
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom