This!! GPU's stupid prices in an uptrend and game engines and crappy optimizations from most developers this past few years. Not looking to upgrade from 1080p @240hz for now.
Depends on the games you're trying to run. Lots of popular competitive games will push high framerates at 1440P pretty well on a mid-range card, but if you're trying to run the latest graphics showcases, you'll likely have to resort to resolution scaling tricks, unfortunately.
Exactly, how can 1440p be the new 1080p, when the majority of gamers don't have the money to upgrade to a card that can push those resolutions at a comfortable 60fps? Especially with newer titles, Unreal Engine 5 and Ray Tracing? I respect Hardware Unboxed but totally disagree.
@@CyberCluwell ray tracing is totally optional and only makes sense on high end cards. Yeah that game engine is terrible for optimization unfortunately
If your GPU is close to 10 years old then sure, otherwise if you live in the present like the rest of us the RX 6800 is just $339 new and handles 1440p high with NO upscaling.
That stat is going to look quite different in a couple of years. Though can that even be accurate? I would bet there's more than 4 % who use their TV, let alone in addition with 4k monitors.
4K sounds nice and dandy, but even my 4070 struggles to keep every game at decent framerates at 1440P. Which, IMO, for now is still the sweet spot between quality and performance.
Thank God most games are shitty, so my 3070 ti is more than enough. 1440p is easy to run when the only good games are either indie games, old games or well optimized exceptions like Bg3 and similar.
@@PinePizza Yeah, a 370 ti should handle 1440p fine. I did 7 years of 1440p on a 1080 Ti (about 80% the performance of a 3070 Ti), and towards the end I did have to turn down shadows a bit, but it worked very well.
For 1080p I agree. But 1440p, I don't know. I was quite surprised when buying my first 1440p monitor a few months ago that quite a few channels I watch (even some large ones) still only offer 1080p resolution for their videos. So I'd say 1440p is not all that common yet.
@@123Suffering456 not now yes but its as the video said, its getting more popular by day, also if you check the recent steam hardware, 1440p is the 2nd highest monitor used and increased by almost 2% and everyone else is getting negative changes
I think the issue is that the "entry-level" GPU you're supposed to be pairing with the entry-level 1440p monitor has an MSRP of $300-$400 (RTX 4060), which can be twice the cost of the monitor.
Yeah, well. For monitors this might be the case, but that doesn't matter when entry level gpu prices are above entry level monitors AND can't handle 1440p. So, for all practical purposes 1440p is NOT the new 1080p
Ah yes, conviniently ignoring the fact that upscaling looks as good as if not better than native these days. Go on, try to convince people to not buy better monitors.
@@kesamek8537 We've seen this weird push by tech youtubers before where they try and predict the market. The most popular GPUs are all 50 and 60 series cards with some being a few gens behind.
This would be great if we all payed in dollars. The first in the list, the Dell as an example, is £244 which translates to around $320 rather than the180-200 stated here. Not such a bargain
USD prices are usually also given without VAT. Not that this would account for the whole difference you pointed out, but just shows how bad of a metric it is for global pricing...
US tax is somewhere in the realm of 0-10% and does not have to be included in the advertised price, in the UK (and EU) the value added tax is roughly 20%. Still, this does not justify the over 50% markup.
help you out bro, it will come on sale, bought that exact monitor for £195 last year, and it is really good, hopefully this year even less as i want a second one now
Based on the numbers, we aren't there yet. I say in 2 years' time that will be true. The average gamer just got a grasp on upscaling, they will catch up soon.
@@DragonOfTheMortalKombatHaving to use an upscaler isn't as good of an argument as you think, because it *PROVES* that you need to run current games in a lower resolution.
Pricing for 27inch 1440p in South Africa is ridiculous. The Dell G2724D is 380 USD. LG 27GP850 is 443.40 USD ASUS XG27ACS is 454 USD OLED ASUS PG27AQDM ROG SWIFT 1534 USD still on my LG 27 1080p monitor for now.
Places outside of the US, and especially "developing markets", get the short end of the stick. Prices take many more years drop if they do at all. Which is ironic because if anyone benefits from the price drops, it's us. I'm not sure if it's local distributors refusing to drop prices because of the low volume, or because their sources for stock don't give them a break either.
It is about the GPU price and performance. There are many gamers who are still aiming for budget gaming nowadays. Yes, 1440p is getting cheaper in recent years but 23.8/24" 1080p monitor is still more affordable as well as the price for the GPU to handle it. We can start to notice some of the 1440p GPUs are becoming 1080p cards for some new single-player games as well as upcoming games this year and 2025. Unless the gamer is focusing more on competitive games or use for work or general entertainment activities (browsing the internet, watching series/movies/animation). Another thing is there are still quite many TH-cam channels are still using 1080p for the max resolution(at least the channels that I subscribed to) as well as the series/movie/animation.
Also twitch maxes out 1080p, but closed beta is testing streams at 1440p/2160p and h.265 hevc. Maybe eventually av1 will make it to testing, who knows when that will happen.
kinda wrong on the TH-cam part, a lot of people are starting to value the production of channels that are able to put out 1440p and 4K resolutions for videos, a good example is optimum
@@kennethhohenthaner2227 both of yall are wrong idiots. BOTH TH-cam AND TWITCH HAVE 1440P/2160P SUPPORT BUT NOT EVERY CREATOR BOTHERS TO UPLOAD OR STREAM IN HIGHER QUALITY!!! QUIT SPREADING MISINFORMATION BECAUSE YOU WATCH 200 FOLLOWER CHANNELS!!!
@@Nate0808nah you are just an complete moron. 1440p only works for stuff with minimal movement or it becomes pixelated mess. Twitch limits Bitrate because anything above 1080p 60fps costs way too much money for twitch with no return. You are also saying it as if a lot of bigger streamers are streaming in 1440p which is just wrong. Go to the most viewed games and look at the top 10 streamers. I only found 1080p 60fps because anything above just doesn't work
Well, even if 1440p became affordable, it became affordable in an economic downturn. People will still be highly motivated to buy 1080p. And despite that out of touch tech channels want you to believe, normal people do not feel the need to upgrade their monitors after several years. They are basically good until they break and they do not break. This is why market share will be very slow to turn and for 1440p to actually become a new norm. Also, people will get burned with all those OLED options. It is crazy how tech media tries to trick you into believing that replacing your monitor every few years is a desirable thing. It still sounds insane to me that people are fine with inevitable burn in in their desktop monitors.
Yeah but in the future you`ll be forced to run at 1080p if you have a mid range GPU Running 1080p on a 1440p screen doesn`t line up pixels so for each pixel it renders 1.3333 pixels (unlike 4k > 1080p which combines 4 pixels into 1). Also the large size monitor viewed at shorter distance will make it blurrier. The fix is to remember to display image with *Black Bars* to fix both problems
In practice, it's not too bad imo. The blurriness is more obvious in some games than others. Might depend on the AA or post-process effects they use. A lot of recent games also let you set a render scale in smaller increments to dial in how much sharpness vs performance you want, so blurry 1080 and sub-60fps 1440 aren't actually your only choices. A few games even weirdly look better at 90% render scale than 100%. But the UI always stays sharp in those games.
Running raw 1080p at 1440p does look terrible, true. But DLSS/FSR upscaling really does address this very efficiently, and looks better than I would have thought before trying it.
Checking the monitors listed they are consistently $100 more where I am so probably not yet. I am on M27Q which I got about 3 years ago for about $250 and it did not fall in price much
2 weeks ago i bought a 1440p monitor for the first time since i started gaming 8 years ago. I bought the Koorui 170hz, 1440p IPS 27inch. For £170. And my god - i never knew that HDR was so good! And the smount of screen SPACE i have?!! So good when doing university work.
I've got two 32" 1440p monitors and while the pixel density is about the same as a 24" 1080p, the size is a huge difference. I don't have to sit so close to the screen and it's great for work too. I got them second hand for just about 175€ each
Thanks for the concise explanation of the upgrade's advantages. There's been some good deals this week on Amazon, if the deals get even better for the holidays, I'm definitely upgrading.
A lot of countries have better prices than in the US though. Especially because costs of living are much higher there, less money for luxeries. Don't watch youtube trough the lens of US.
@@2greenify nah man. If you speak for the US then you're totally wrong. Prices outside US particularly here in SEA countries are way higher. For reference, you can get a 7800xt brand new there for $430 but here where I live the 7800xt costs $579 store price. We also seldom or not even see PC parts going on sale here
I know people throw a lot of flak at image upscaling, but I remember gaming before it was a thing and man, if your GPU couldn't pull off native resolution at the lowest settings, the idea of image quality became a distant dream, even dropping down to only like 80% resolution scale started getting gnarly on the aliasing. Nowadays we got DLSS/FSR/XESS quality looking damn near native at ~67% res scale, there may be some artifacts sometimes but boy do we take for granted the ability to just effortlessly put our performance in a higher GPU tier at little to no visual cost, just wasn't a thing 6+ years ago.
native resolutions still win.....you gotta have the right GPU though but its way better than shitty upscalers that just lower the image quality in order to put out more fps
you put your gpu in a higher tier after the devs have put it in lower tier because you are "supposed" to use upscaler now. the end result is they just spend less time on optimization and you pay for it. and of course, Jensen now sells you lower tier gpu for the higher one
there is a lot of unseen cost, that is the rasterization you are missing out on. DLSS is supposed to be a premium bonus, for example a game that runs at 60fps,now you get to run at 80fps, but these days devs use DLSS to get the game barely running at 60fps with horrendous frame pacing and latency
As much as I love the image clarity upgrade going from 1080p to 1440p, I have to disagree. Sure, GOOD 1440p monitors have become so affordable, but the thing is 1080p monitors have also become even cheaper these days. Plus affordable GPU that can run 1440p smoothly is such a rarity these days that most people still game on 1080p resolution anyway. And 1080p does NOT look good on a 1440p monitor. It's noticeably blurrier than just playing natively on a 1080p monitor. That's why I think 1080p monitors are still popular in 2024 over 1440p monitor. The GPUs are holding them back.
I was using a RTX 2060 for 1440P for over 5 Years fine still hitting 60fps in most games. Also in more demands games DLSS was a life saver. Yes you won't MAX ultra settings but medium settings still look good in most games.
@@HifeMan 1080 Ti saw me through 7 years of 1440p. And before that 1440p was "ok-ish" on a GTX 970 before that. A 3060 12gb (overclocked) is pretty close to a 1080 Ti. 1440p has been playable, without huge spending, for a loooong time. It isn't gpu's so much as it is the fairly common desire for ray tracing (which really abuses gpu's). That, and Nvidia using vram as a gatekeeper feature to vamp the market. Ray tracing, by itself, is about a $400 "eye-candy feature" (for same fps performance), sometimes more. 4000 series somewhat addressed this, but is still gatekeeping on vram. AMD's run fantastic on raster, many 6000 series cards ace 1440p, but they likely won't have ray tracing in a good place until 8000 series. I'd argue that on a budget, 1440p without RT looks much better than 1440p with RT, and raster 1440p is plenty affordable.
I think this is where DLSS may shine though. I mean, look at it from upscaling perspective. DLSS balanced on 1440p panel will look as decent as native 1080p resolution, and DLSS quality on 1440p panel is well, slightly inferior to native 1440p. But DLSS quality on 1080p panel is just.. bad, vaseline smeared kind of bad. And honestly, all recent AAA games right now have some sort of upscaling baked in already, upscaling has become the norm. Games that do not have upscaling yet are mostly indie games that are rather light on GPUs anyway.
I've been on 1080p for almost a decade but after trying out a few other options/resolutions, I think my sweet spot is 1440p/144-165 Hz. The problem is I have to buy an adequate enough graphics card along with such a monitor, unless I get the monitor and after a while upgrade my graphics card, though that wouldn't make for a great experience...
@@dankvader420 not really getting your point. I mean you could use Vsync I guess to lock the frame rate to something lower than what you GPU is capable of. But normally frame rate fluctuates quite a bit.
That's kinda what I did when I built my new PC. I was going to play at 1080p, but my new 3060ti at the time wasn't compatible with my monitor. So I had to finally let it go and upgrade to 1440p. A year later and I'm looking to upgrade my GPU now because 8gb vram is just not sufficient enough for 1440p these days. But on the bright side, I am using my old 1080p monitor as a secondary monitor.
Monitors might have become noteworthy cheaper in the US, but the necessary GPUs to game in 1440p haven't, while the general cost of living has risen massively. I must therefore clearly contradict the assertion that 1440p is the new 1080p.
Yep. I'm from Europe and I have an ultrawide 2k monitor. Not GPU or budget friendly at all. If gaming is not your big main thing, it is just not worth it in the current economy.
@@sonicjms "perfectly fine" if you're lucky or it is a crappy thing from a strong smoker or a one used for crypto or had problems from the start but now there is no warranty... I will always avoid buying used at eBay if I can when it comes to tech products.
We hit dimishing returns with game graphics, I just hope we take a step back so we can get something like 90fps in 4k without aggresive upscaling and low/medium settings
If a majority of people cannot afford a GPU that can comfortably sustain a baseline consistent 60fps at 1440p, then it is not the new 1080p. It would be like saying 6G service has never been more affordable, when the cheapest compatible phone is $1000.
Games lately have been more CPU heavy than GPU provided your GPU isn't pinned by low Vram. I was finding my 5900X was struggling to get far above 60fps in some games, meaning the average person is likely running less than that so their GPU is probably not fully utilized.
I recently set up my son's first gaming PC and I bought him one of the 27" 4K monitors you recommended a while back. That way he can run games at 1080p or 4K DLSS Performance and it still looks really good. His GPU is fairly modest at this point...
@@kesamek8537 indeed, a vast majority of players run budget GPUs with some form of 1080p monitor (over 55%). The most popular GPUs on steam are 60 series. It's the main strength in PC gaming, you upgrade when you want.
I had a very divergent point of view while watching. I'm glad people think for themselves and do not blindly follow suggestions. Working in the tech industry having easier access to high-end hardware can make you a bit disconnected from the experience of an average user.
@@davidlandrum I looked at the comments again. I don't see people talking about stagnant games or demanding that their old cards should run anything. But I do see a lot of people saying that a new monitor in combination with their current hardware would not make a lot of sense.
did you see requirements for new games like Monster Hunter Wilds or Assassin's Creed Shadows? you need upsacaler for 1080p/60 fps at medium settings. for higher settings, you also require frame generation. a gpu like 4060 ain't gonna see 1440p even with upscaler and frame generation. you will need a 4070 and 5070 = $600-700. guess what will happen? people will go to $300 range gpu and stay at 1080p.
Can I suggest you guys do a bit of a deep dive in to GPU's, VRAM, resolution scaling, DLSS/FSR, Frame Gen, input lag etc. and how they all affect each other. Might be something worth visiting? The information you gave just seemed a little 'light' for those who may not have the most in-depth knowledge on how all of these things are connected to each other.
@@davidlandrum I'm talking about a single video that covers everything I mentioned for newbies or people needing a refresher. Everybody knows the HU guys very rarely leave a stone unturned so if they did a video that puts it all together, I think a lot of people would really appreciate that. But if you think they have done this already, then give me the date of said video.
do you get paid by monitor and GPU companies to push their expensive products? maybe when a '70 series is 400$ again and a '60 series has more than 8 gigs of vram, we'll consider 1440p but now, ill take FPS over resolution any time of the day
@@NamTran-xc2ip I have a 1080p monitor at 390 Hz that I use for competitive gaming, as well as single-player games. If the game allows it, I use higher resolutions (DSR or DLDSR); otherwise, I'm fine with dropping down to 720p upscaled to 1080p, as I unfortunately have to do in Cyberpunk 2077 to keep the FPS always above 60.
Really hoping this is the case, but take the Brazilian market as an example-1440p monitors are getting a bit cheaper, but only with VA panels. IPS monitors, on the other hand, still cost a lot more. Ironically, a 4K monitor with an IPS panel sometimes costs less than a 1440p one, even though it's only 60Hz. Still, it’s pretty good for casual gaming, watching movies and shows, and some photo editing and color work. are this happening in other parts of the world too?
I have a 32-in 1440p VA panel. Honestly, I don't think the panel type matters until you get to OLED. I personally can't tell the difference between VA and IPS in person (maybe if I have an expert pointing out the difference if I could ). Refresh rate definitely makes a difference in my opinion, I noticed right away when switching between 60 and 144 hz
Monitors prizes are not making the norm but the GPU's enabling average joe to have min 60 fps max settings on 1440p without soap dlls crap. Are we there? This guy is really dellusional.
I have a OLED 1440p Ultrawide and absolutely love it. Only drawback is the GPU needed to power this thing with heavy AAA games at high refresh rates. You'll upgrade more often.
Some interesting things that have happened in the last 2 years for $1000-1500 PC Builds I've noticed 32GB of RAM becoming the new 16GB 2TB of Storage becoming the new 1TB 8P Cores becoming the new 6P Cores 12GB of VRAM becoming the new 8GB And now 1440p becoming the new 1080p
@@RobloxianX At the start of this year, can always pop in another 16GB module if need be but the shared GPU memory is carrying so far. Also I don't play 200GB AAAA slop, mostly indie and AA games so I'm not hurting for storage space either.
if u got 8gb vram dont go for 1440p. if u sit close to ur monitor dont go 27inch. and if u sit far from your monitor you will not be able to tell the difference between a 1080p and 1440p screen due to view distance eventho ur pc will have to work harder to run the 1440p. 1080p 24inch still has its place for alot of people even if we throw money out the equation, and if we dont 1080p is still cheaper. 1080p has alot of advantages, 1440p has only 1 advantage, its up to you to decide if u wanna forgo all of that just for a 1440p monitor. and 1440p is not as great as youtubers hype it to be, its not game changing u get used to the better image quality. this is coming from someone who is using both in a dual monitor set up.
@@DeadPiixxel 20 20 vision with perfect eye health. it all boils down to view distance, and thats a fact. no one in the world can notice resolution difference if u are sitting far back enough, and if ur sitting up close, chances are 27 inches is massive to sit infront of. 24 inch is the ideal monitor size to sit in front of at normal distance.
that tells you absolutely nothing. if you do a poll who owns a card above 4070 performance and you will find 80% do not. Do a poll asking who could need or wants a 4070 or above GPU and you will find 70% would want one. The point is that people change their monitor every 3-7 years. 3 years ago 1444p was over 100-200 usd more expensive than it is now 7 years ago you looked at more like 400 usd. Now you get a 1444p for the same amount as the 1ß80p monitor from 3 years ago and it has better performance in other aspects on top, all while people have gotten more money (sure inflation took that way down again, but the monitors with inflation shoudl be more like 300usd and not 180 usd, so they are even more of a steal(180 USD 3 years ago is 260USd today)
99% of games ever released will look basically the same at 1080p for lack of geometric density, lack of texture resolution, and good visual design. If your game requires 1440p to be able to see, it is probably poorly designed, like the games with yellow tape everywhere to distinguish between static, un-interactable meshes and the linear path forward. Even games now are running at 720p on console routinely using a hack to upscale fake detail in what is glorified anti aliasing. I am disappointed by the lack of 1080p options going forward, and have roll my eyes at all the people who trash talk it. It's hard to take them seriously when they don't mention what they are comparing. 1080p on a 1440p monitor is going to look worse than on a 1080p monitor because the monitor will have to upscale it, and it is standard to do so by blurring the picture. If you just got a 1440p monitor, chances are, there are a lot of other things that are better about it, like this video explains, which could contribute to perception. Everyone ignores these considerations and uncritically parrots "1440p is the sweetspot! 4k is overrated even though the jump from 1440 to 4k is bigger than 1080 to 1440!" In fact, the idea that 4k is too much is in principle the same idea that 1440p is too much. If your game was not a PS5 exclusive open world game with distant detail and no anti aliasing, 1440p is more than you need. 1080p is the definitive resolution for compatibility with existing software and the last console generation, including Nintendo Switch, and offers more performance and less temporal blur with more performant native rendering with no weird resolution switching driver hitches, etc. Switch, PS4 gen, PS3 gen will generally look better on a 1080p monitor unless you have an expensive upscaler, because they are incapable of outputting a higher signal, and there is no reason to play the PC versions of those games in 1440p or 4k for more than 30 minutes when they were designed around 1080p or sub 1080p for consoles where higher couldn't even be output. A 1080p monitor will use less power, produce less heat, have better compatibility, is lower cost, is more easily replaceable, has higher refresh rate for the money, is more compact, and at 24" is the ideal size for a desk setup 2 feet away from your eyes (for games, not productivity). That is only true, however, before the PC Master Racist hivemind gaslights the industry into thinking 1080p is obsolete and no one manufactures decent quality 1080p monitors anymore. 1440p will never be the target resolution for the mainstream now that 4k is here, which makes it even worse.
@@LordWaterBottleI upgraded from 1440P175Hz to 1440P360Hz and oh my butter I'm never going back. You can have high refresh rate and better pixel density at the same time.
I've played on both 1080P monitors and 1440P monitors. 1440P is hands-down superior. You can yap for paragraphs about how "games were designed, compatibility, temporal rendering, blah blah" but that doesn't change that 1440P looks substantially better, gives you an advantage in competitive games, and is easy enough to run that it can be pushed at much higher framerates than 4K currently can. My 1440P monitor actually allows me to run 1080P without scaling (it runs in a smaller area on the monitor), but there is absolutely zero reason for me to do so. I can play games at 1440P360Hz so why in the hell would I want to run at 1080P?
@@clanginator you can't have 1440p 360hz for the same price as 1080p 360hz though. The best you can find in 1440p at $300ish is only 240hz. If I could have a 360hz 1440p display for the same price as the 1080p 360hz display I would choose the sharper display. You have to compare the dollars. The cheapest 360hz 1440p display I can see for sale currently is $600, double the price of the 360hz 1080p display I recently purchased. They actually don't make 1080p displays that are that expensive anymore. Hell, you can get a 500hz 1080p display for $400 when it's actually in stock. If you ignore money, sure 1440p is better. But there are money factors, and it's about double for 1440p for the same refresh rate and panel tech. Maybe that's worth it to you, but for me I'd rather upgrade the homie at the same time for the same money.
I was using 1080p from 2017 till 2 weeks ago. Just bought an Acer Nitro 27 inch 1440p 180hz monitor then because I upgraded my GPU to 6800xt which is way too overpowered for 1080p and the difference is massive. I think 1080p is still good even in 2024, but when you handled a 1440p monitor its a totally different experience
Yes the prices and quality have improved greatly but 1440 is still pretty niche because the tier of graphics card you need to run it well is still prohibitively expensive. The time that 1440 really takes off is when the low end graphics cards are able to run it without any of the upscaling nonsense. If you buy a 60 class GPU to run 1440 even with upscaling the life of the GPU will be very short before having to upgrade especially as GFX memory has become more important for scaling and other features such as RT. This from a guy that has been building PC's for 30+ years and went 1440 18 months ago but had to pay about >30% more for his rig for the privilege.
1440p is the new 1080p? No. There are very good 1080p monitors that are 24”, while most 1440p monitors are 27”. Not everyone can fit a desk deep enough to comfortably use a 27” monitor. Give us 1440p 24” monitors dammit! I cannot afford a bigger apartment.
It's actually getting *more difficult* for GPUs to drive 1440p at decent framerates (in 2024, this is 100+ fps) and acceptable (read: very high or ultra) settings. It's great that 1440p monitors are affordable. It means more money to a GPU that can properly run it. But 1080p high refresh is still the best choice for anyone that can't afford a 7800XT/4070 (and honestly, they are nearly approaching 1080p territory). The way things are going, a few years from now a danged 4080 or 7900XTX will be a 1080p card.
Sorry but if you have eyes, native 1080p on a 24" looks better than 1440p upscaled from 960p on a 27", way blurrier there. Imo only jump to 1440p if you can play at 1440p native. If you can't play at 1080p native then I guess you wouldn't care either way.
there's a bigger issue. did you see the requirements for newer games like Assassin'e Creed Shadows? with $300 range gpus for 1080/60 fps at medium settings, you need upscaler. this is a must. and for higher settings, you'll also need frame generation. if you don't buy a gpu like 4070 or the 5070 you ain't gonna see 1440p. with upscalers the game devs are incentivized to not optimize the game, and now we will need upscaler for 1080p/60 fps. Assassin's Creed Valhalla on my 2019 PC has an average of 90ish fps on very high settings without upscaler. now with upscaler you're not gonna see 90 fps on very high settings. you will need an upscaler and medium settings and get 60 fps instead of 90ish. the future of PC gaming is bleak for the next years. how long it will last, i don't know.
LMAO, tell me you know nothing withot telling me. 1440p on performance mode looks better than native 1080p. With how good upscaling looks and how garbage native AA does, nobody is going to use native res in future anyways. AND consoles literally run Sub HD resolutions. Even the PS3 couldn't handle 720p. To even think that cosnsoles could do 720p back in 2004 lmao
@@DragonOfTheMortalKombat your brain is gonna explode when I tell you that consoles can run native 4k. With better game optimization. You’d need a $750 computer to get the same performance. Yea a 3060 can run 1440 60fps at medium settings with DLSS, but that’s not very impressive for like a $300 card in a $600 lmao it’s 2024 buddy. The Xbox Series S could do that for $300 total, 4 years ago
Oh boy, what a shout out back to the VX2748-2KP-MHD. That monitor is the reason why I started following HUB when I found your review xP It’s wild seeing everyone slowly transitioned to 1440p over the last 4 years too, I remember then it was still super premium tbh
We need more 1440p monitors in 24", not everyone has space on their desk for 27+, which is why I have a AOC 1440p/165hz 24" and it's very sharp at 123ppi, higher than a 27". Now if they made Mini LED or OLED in that size I would upgrade to one.
Dude just based on your fps chart comparison of 1440p to 1080p shows that by switching to a new 1440p monitor will lower my fps by 50%. Dog thats not acceptable at all. And to get the same fps you'd have to upgrade your hardware which will devastate your wallet lol
I think he's talking more about newcomers or people building a fresh PC in general. Buying the cheapest current-gen brand-new GPUs still lets you average 60 FPS at 1440p (with headroom for higher FPS by lowering settings or using upscaling, which looks way better at 1440p) while getting you the benefits of a sharper, more detailed image that at the same time looks bigger and more immersive. Obviously upgrading from an existing setup is a different story. Side note though, second-hand 6800 XTs absolutely crush 1440p and are like 300 USD/GBP/EUR. Low key goated buy this past year
A lot of people prefer higher resolution at lower settings over higher settings at a lower resolution. And yes, with like for like settings, adding 50% more pixels is going to drop the framerate about 50%, but you can get about the same fps at 1440 medium settings in most games as you do at 1080p with high settings. It's a personal preference.
@@stefannita3439 For new build it makes more sense, but still, you have cheaper monitors oh one hand, but the cost of GPUs kills the whole point of monitors getting cheaper. For me personaly i dont think is worth the extra you have to spend for better GPU. used rx 6800 xt here is more like 450$ :(
I remember the summer of the library, 2011, I biked back and forth to the library almost every day to go on the computer and talk in the new online community I joined late the year before. We didn't have internet so the library was my only option. Every now and then when I wasn't chatting I'd browse youtube to see what was up, and being it was a library, the internet was only good for the most basic of things like typing word documents, google searches, and not much else since the connection was being simultaneously shared between 30 or so other users. TH-cam was always slow so to keep the video from buffering, I'd play at 720, sometimes even dropping it to 480 or 360 when things go bad. Thought to myself and one thought I remember in particular was confusion over how anyone would ever need anything above 720. 1080 was great, but it just didn't make sense. Here I am now in 2024, almost thirteen years later (damn I'm old... :c ) and gaming on a 2k monitor at 144hz and going back is inconceivable.
I could get a 1080p gaming setup now but id rather save up and wait a couple more months to get a 1440p setup. Every time I get close to a 1080 monitor I can clearly see the pixels. I don't see how 1440p is overrated.
Just bought myself a new 240hz 1080p. Can't justify the cost of having to spend more on a GPU that can run 1440 when I only play a few hours a month. Inb4 more low imagination comments: I also work on my two 1080 monitors, with a work laptop underneath. If I play competitively, I want 240 fps to go with my 240 refresh rate. I use my PC as media station while working out (I have a gym/home office combo), it's hooked up two TVs already. I play games like RTS, 4X and shooters (including very old ones) We have a once a year LAN party, for which I supply 3 of 6 PCs.
Makes so much sense… I recently got into the pc world and had to get a monitor. After talking with my friends and doing a much of research I landed on 27” 1440p IPs 170hz. I found a used Asus Tuf Gaming (VG27AQ1A) for $100. Could not be happier with it.
1080p will still be 1080p as long as I have the GPU that I have, because GPUs that can give me the same frames in 1440p that I get in 1080p are close to $1K. Edited for those who couldn’t comprehend.
@@cha0ss0ldier-4 this is such a silly comment. 7700XT - $400 - can do it, but spend the extra $100 and buy the 7800XT or go used and get a 6800XT/3080 7800 XT -$500 4070 - $600
I switched to 1440p shortly after a video you posted almost 4 years ago about the MSI MAG274QRF-QD. It's a great display, and I'm enjoying it ever since. 1080p is nice, but no longer for me.
I have the dell 😊 Got it early this year and it's my first 1440p monitor and it blew me away with how good it is Extremely pleased with the monitor and the quality overall
Same. 4K, even if you don't have a crazy gpu, is still very nice. Text is soooo much better than 1080p, and indie games look beautiful on such a panel.
I got a 1440p monitor in 2021 for the price and exact specs I got my 1080p monitor in 2016 (250 USD), and got a 4k monitor with the same specs 2 years later at 400 USD (got 2 other 4k monitors since).
LCD prices have been crashing lately. The Amazon Prime Day sale today has some 27" high-refresh 4K monitors for less than $350 (the Pixio Wave series and some other monitors from KTC and MSI), which would've cost you twice as much two years ago. Unfortunately GPU prices haven't been falling as quickly and a ton of people are going to end up with "midrange" 4K monitors along with midrange GPUs that can't drive them.
If anything gpu's are going the opposite direction - the price points going down the stack are going up. 60 series costs 70 series, 70 costs 80, etc. And with zero competition from AMD coming, it will get worse. These great monitors are no good if the cards needed for a good experience keep going up.
People tend to stick longer with their monitors than GPU, like you'll be surprised how many people I know who have like 4070 super and 7800xt who still use 1080p 60hz lmao.
As someone with a 3840x1600 display, i can definitely tell you, that extra resolution, having upgraded from a 1920x1200 display comes in very useful for everything that i do profesionally, and privately like playing games, even demanding games like escape from tarkov or arma 3/reforger, those extra pixels, they help, they are improving my experience more then the extra frames at a lower res.
Monitor prices making 1440p as accessible as 1080p was.
While GPU pricing is making 720p barely attainable
This!! GPU's stupid prices in an uptrend and game engines and crappy optimizations from most developers this past few years.
Not looking to upgrade from 1080p @240hz for now.
Depends on the games you're trying to run. Lots of popular competitive games will push high framerates at 1440P pretty well on a mid-range card, but if you're trying to run the latest graphics showcases, you'll likely have to resort to resolution scaling tricks, unfortunately.
@@clanginator Gamers just complain because they can.
absolutely why I still haven't moved into 1440p like come on guys
@@TheReferrer72 600$ or more for midrange gpu that can only run esports on high refresh and we're supposed to be happy?
Am convinced they let cats type in the names of these monitors bruh
@@pockether it wouldn't surprise me one bit
bruh
They probably name them, knowing he'll have to say the names.
That actually explains a lot.
eventually they will have to use symbols
If only GPUs follow this trend...
well 3060 and 4060 can do decent 60fps with custom setting
@@narutonagato95 60fps is a console to me this is PC 120-144 or nothing
@@DeadPiixxel This
Exactly, how can 1440p be the new 1080p, when the majority of gamers don't have the money to upgrade to a card that can push those resolutions at a comfortable 60fps? Especially with newer titles, Unreal Engine 5 and Ray Tracing? I respect Hardware Unboxed but totally disagree.
@@CyberCluwell ray tracing is totally optional and only makes sense on high end cards.
Yeah that game engine is terrible for optimization unfortunately
Monitors: 1440p is the new 1080p
GPUs: 1080p (upscaled from 720p)
If your GPU is close to 10 years old then sure, otherwise if you live in the present like the rest of us the RX 6800 is just $339 new and handles 1440p high with NO upscaling.
@@anitaremenarova6662 Heck my 2060 was handling 1440P fine.
No. With games engines like UE5, 480p with AI upscaling is the new 1080p... 😂
Silent Hill 2 and The Finals: cool story bro
Truuuuu lmao
fake 4k
Not only UE5. To play RDR1 at max you need a 2070 tier card!
We are living in an era where games are internally rendered at 720p, upscaled to 1440p and claimed to be “true” 2K gaming experience
It's NOT a Monitor choice, it's a "GPU Problem" to drive 1440p ! 😰
this haha.. sometimes 8gb vram just isn't going to cut it for 1440p
@ivanfiguera8100 8gb is not enough for anything. Warhammer 3 uses more then 8gb on 1080p
He addressed that
It's not
DLSS, FSR and driver upscaler exist
@@thor.halsli iirc upscalers reduce VRAM usage right?
steam
1080p: 56%
1440p: 22%
2160p: 4%
I suspect most of those 1440p are laptops
Forgot to count ultrawides into the 1440p category, with them it's 25% and growing.
That stat is going to look quite different in a couple of years. Though can that even be accurate? I would bet there's more than 4 % who use their TV, let alone in addition with 4k monitors.
4K sounds nice and dandy, but even my 4070 struggles to keep every game at decent framerates at 1440P. Which, IMO, for now is still the sweet spot between quality and performance.
Ultrawide monitors: 0.2% ☠️
if your GPU can handle it..
Thank God most games are shitty, so my 3070 ti is more than enough.
1440p is easy to run when the only good games are either indie games, old games or well optimized exceptions like Bg3 and similar.
@@PinePizza Yeah, a 370 ti should handle 1440p fine. I did 7 years of 1440p on a 1080 Ti (about 80% the performance of a 3070 Ti), and towards the end I did have to turn down shadows a bit, but it worked very well.
@@PinePizza What does most games are shitty mean?
There are so many good games out there I have not got the time to play them all.
720p isnt HD anymore even on youtube, 1080p and 1440p is the new HD
One could even argue that if everyone is at minimum using 1080p screens, that 1080p is actually now Standard Definition (SD)
@@TearsInReign Exactly. That's how 1080p feels to me now.
For 1080p I agree. But 1440p, I don't know. I was quite surprised when buying my first 1440p monitor a few months ago that quite a few channels I watch (even some large ones) still only offer 1080p resolution for their videos. So I'd say 1440p is not all that common yet.
@@123Suffering456 not now yes but its as the video said, its getting more popular by day, also if you check the recent steam hardware, 1440p is the 2nd highest monitor used and increased by almost 2% and everyone else is getting negative changes
@@TearsInReign Fail. So is 480p going to be ultra-low definition? You guys are clowns.
TAA it’s the worst. Everything is blurry af when moving.
I think the issue is that the "entry-level" GPU you're supposed to be pairing with the entry-level 1440p monitor has an MSRP of $300-$400 (RTX 4060), which can be twice the cost of the monitor.
Yeah, well. For monitors this might be the case, but that doesn't matter when entry level gpu prices are above entry level monitors AND can't handle 1440p. So, for all practical purposes 1440p is NOT the new 1080p
This is the correct analysis.
@@kesamek8537 For AMD users i guess.
Ah yes, conviniently ignoring the fact that upscaling looks as good as if not better than native these days. Go on, try to convince people to not buy better monitors.
@@kesamek8537 No it's not, RX 6800 costs $339 and can easily run 1440p high.
@@kesamek8537 We've seen this weird push by tech youtubers before where they try and predict the market. The most popular GPUs are all 50 and 60 series cards with some being a few gens behind.
This would be great if we all payed in dollars. The first in the list, the Dell as an example, is £244 which translates to around $320 rather than the180-200 stated here. Not such a bargain
In the US they pay tax after. And if trump wins election he's adding a 30% tariff on top
USD prices are usually also given without VAT. Not that this would account for the whole difference you pointed out, but just shows how bad of a metric it is for global pricing...
US tax is somewhere in the realm of 0-10% and does not have to be included in the advertised price, in the UK (and EU) the value added tax is roughly 20%. Still, this does not justify the over 50% markup.
help you out bro, it will come on sale, bought that exact monitor for £195 last year, and it is really good, hopefully this year even less as i want a second one now
@@JakeySuraniI don’t think that’s true
Someday he'll have to make a '4K Is The New 1440p' video
True. It already is for me. Upscaling from 1440p to 4K if necessary is very effective, and 4K monitors don't start at $1K like they used to. 🤷🏿♂️
In less than 5 years, based on how fast monitor prices are dropping
Based on the numbers, we aren't there yet. I say in 2 years' time that will be true. The average gamer just got a grasp on upscaling, they will catch up soon.
Next time there is an Amazon sale probably!
Gonna be a while, 4k is still VERY hard to run even with a 4090 if you run top settings in AAA titles.
Budget 1440p monitors won't really matter as long as there is no affordable GPUs that can handle this reolution.
Stop crying GPUs and start using Upscalers. Especially the ones from Intel and Nvidia.
RX 6800 is $339 brand new, think again. You can get used 4070 for cheap as well.
@@anitaremenarova6662That GPU gets outdated for 1440p by next year.
@@DragonOfTheMortalKombatHaving to use an upscaler isn't as good of an argument as you think, because it *PROVES* that you need to run current games in a lower resolution.
@@sujimayne No it won't, it has enough power and VRAM to easily be able to play 1440p high/optimized for the next 4-5 years.
Now if only 4k capable GPU prices were the same as 1440p capable gpus five years ago huh
Pricing for 27inch 1440p in South Africa is ridiculous.
The Dell G2724D is 380 USD.
LG 27GP850 is 443.40 USD
ASUS XG27ACS is 454 USD
OLED
ASUS PG27AQDM ROG SWIFT 1534 USD
still on my LG 27 1080p monitor for now.
Try Wootwares new wootvision monitors they’re pretty well priced for SA. R4.3k for 27 inch 1440p 180 Hz IPS
look on the used market.
Places outside of the US, and especially "developing markets", get the short end of the stick. Prices take many more years drop if they do at all.
Which is ironic because if anyone benefits from the price drops, it's us. I'm not sure if it's local distributors refusing to drop prices because of the low volume, or because their sources for stock don't give them a break either.
@@cieranholmes Are those any good though? I've seen them and the price is tempting but the quality is...unknown
Hey! At least they are cheaper than in Argentina 😅
It is about the GPU price and performance. There are many gamers who are still aiming for budget gaming nowadays.
Yes, 1440p is getting cheaper in recent years but 23.8/24" 1080p monitor is still more affordable as well as the price for the GPU to handle it.
We can start to notice some of the 1440p GPUs are becoming 1080p cards for some new single-player games as well as upcoming games this year and 2025.
Unless the gamer is focusing more on competitive games or use for work or general entertainment activities (browsing the internet, watching series/movies/animation).
Another thing is there are still quite many TH-cam channels are still using 1080p for the max resolution(at least the channels that I subscribed to) as well as the series/movie/animation.
Also twitch maxes out 1080p, but closed beta is testing streams at 1440p/2160p and h.265 hevc. Maybe eventually av1 will make it to testing, who knows when that will happen.
kinda wrong on the TH-cam part, a lot of people are starting to value the production of channels that are able to put out 1440p and 4K resolutions for videos, a good example is optimum
@@kennethhohenthaner2227 both of yall are wrong idiots. BOTH TH-cam AND TWITCH HAVE 1440P/2160P SUPPORT BUT NOT EVERY CREATOR BOTHERS TO UPLOAD OR STREAM IN HIGHER QUALITY!!! QUIT SPREADING MISINFORMATION BECAUSE YOU WATCH 200 FOLLOWER CHANNELS!!!
@@Nate0808nah you are just an complete moron. 1440p only works for stuff with minimal movement or it becomes pixelated mess. Twitch limits Bitrate because anything above 1080p 60fps costs way too much money for twitch with no return. You are also saying it as if a lot of bigger streamers are streaming in 1440p which is just wrong. Go to the most viewed games and look at the top 10 streamers. I only found 1080p 60fps because anything above just doesn't work
@@s4yto As I said, "at least the channel that I subscribed to". That's why I didn't say ALL channels.
Me watching this video in 1440p 😎
As a 1080 peasant, I am missing out on some fine detail in the stubble.
Me watching in 144p
Hey Jarrod 👋
On a $90 KTC H24T27 monitor?
Me watching this video in 4k on an OLED 😎 (am now broke, send food plz)
Well, even if 1440p became affordable, it became affordable in an economic downturn. People will still be highly motivated to buy 1080p. And despite that out of touch tech channels want you to believe, normal people do not feel the need to upgrade their monitors after several years. They are basically good until they break and they do not break. This is why market share will be very slow to turn and for 1440p to actually become a new norm.
Also, people will get burned with all those OLED options. It is crazy how tech media tries to trick you into believing that replacing your monitor every few years is a desirable thing. It still sounds insane to me that people are fine with inevitable burn in in their desktop monitors.
People are easily influenced, that's why we have influencer channels like this one.
I love how mad third worlders become at tech channels aimed at the west when they recommend stuff out of their price range😂
@@magnus69 Do you see that often? I'm glad that you are sharing that, but it was a bit random.
Yeah but in the future you`ll be forced to run at 1080p if you have a mid range GPU
Running 1080p on a 1440p screen doesn`t line up pixels so for each pixel it renders 1.3333 pixels (unlike 4k > 1080p which combines 4 pixels into 1). Also the large size monitor viewed at shorter distance will make it blurrier.
The fix is to remember to display image with *Black Bars* to fix both problems
In practice, it's not too bad imo. The blurriness is more obvious in some games than others. Might depend on the AA or post-process effects they use.
A lot of recent games also let you set a render scale in smaller increments to dial in how much sharpness vs performance you want, so blurry 1080 and sub-60fps 1440 aren't actually your only choices. A few games even weirdly look better at 90% render scale than 100%. But the UI always stays sharp in those games.
Integer scale x2 from 720p it was the original HD resolution back in the early 2000s xD
Running raw 1080p at 1440p does look terrible, true.
But DLSS/FSR upscaling really does address this very efficiently, and looks better than I would have thought before trying it.
Switched to 1440p 9 years ago, never came back to 1080p after. 😄
I went to 1440p in 2015, went back to 1080p in 2017 and been there ever since. Found 27" wasn't my style.
Getting an 1440p monitor is like getting high refresh rate monitor...you can't go back
switched to 4k , never came back to 1440p after. :D
Switched to 4k oled 3 years ago. Never came back to 1440p after.
@@griffin1366 27 is to small
Checking the monitors listed they are consistently $100 more where I am so probably not yet. I am on M27Q which I got about 3 years ago for about $250 and it did not fall in price much
That's a given in my area aswell, just recently got the G27Q for €220 and it had been consistently at the 290-320 range up until the day i bought it.
my AOC 24G2 has been solid. bought from this channels info.
What great timing! My 1440p 180Hz monitor (XG27ACS) just came in this morning
Good choice imo. Enjoy!
Great resolution and refresh rate .
2 weeks ago i bought a 1440p monitor for the first time since i started gaming 8 years ago.
I bought the Koorui 170hz, 1440p IPS 27inch. For £170.
And my god - i never knew that HDR was so good! And the smount of screen SPACE i have?!! So good when doing university work.
Still rocking 1080p.
dlsdr buddy
Same. 1080p native for life. No fake resolutions or fake frames.
I'm waiting for the day when dirt-cheap OLED monitors will take the place of current premium LCD monitors
I've got two 32" 1440p monitors and while the pixel density is about the same as a 24" 1080p, the size is a huge difference. I don't have to sit so close to the screen and it's great for work too. I got them second hand for just about 175€ each
I remember watching youtube 240p back in 2010 it feels like luxury, but now 720p looks like garbage
Thanks for the concise explanation of the upgrade's advantages. There's been some good deals this week on Amazon, if the deals get even better for the holidays, I'm definitely upgrading.
If only cheap GPUs could handle 1440p
they can.
They can. I used an RX590 for 1440p and it worked fine. You can buy that GPU for £60 now.
Yeah also 8gb vram is another issue for 1440p. It’s basicallly not enough
if only you watched the video
Optimization skill issue.
I bought my current monitor the ViewSonic vx2758-2kp-mhd based of your reviews at the time in 2020. It's still serving me well. Thanks Tim.
I switched from my old Dell CRT to a 1080p 24" monitor, in 2018!
most people don't live in US, you know? The prices around the world are much higher. So if your monitor costs $200 in US it can be easily 300 euros.
A lot of countries have better prices than in the US though. Especially because costs of living are much higher there, less money for luxeries.
Don't watch youtube trough the lens of US.
@@2greenifyi live in Dubai and you're wrong! Pretty much all electronics here are 25-50% more expensive than in the US
Doesnt mean prices everywhere arent decreasing
IMO hard to beat the value of the KTC H24T27 with the pixel density and 100hz refresh regardless of whether you're paying $90, $120, or $240.
@@2greenify nah man. If you speak for the US then you're totally wrong. Prices outside US particularly here in SEA countries are way higher. For reference, you can get a 7800xt brand new there for $430 but here where I live the 7800xt costs $579 store price. We also seldom or not even see PC parts going on sale here
I know people throw a lot of flak at image upscaling, but I remember gaming before it was a thing and man, if your GPU couldn't pull off native resolution at the lowest settings, the idea of image quality became a distant dream, even dropping down to only like 80% resolution scale started getting gnarly on the aliasing. Nowadays we got DLSS/FSR/XESS quality looking damn near native at ~67% res scale, there may be some artifacts sometimes but boy do we take for granted the ability to just effortlessly put our performance in a higher GPU tier at little to no visual cost, just wasn't a thing 6+ years ago.
native resolutions still win.....you gotta have the right GPU though but its way better than shitty upscalers that just lower the image quality in order to put out more fps
@@AMP889 yes but it's still worth getting 40+ fps and seeing that mountain in the distance at 2km distance a little less sharp lol
you put your gpu in a higher tier after the devs have put it in lower tier because you are "supposed" to use upscaler now. the end result is they just spend less time on optimization and you pay for it. and of course, Jensen now sells you lower tier gpu for the higher one
there is a lot of unseen cost, that is the rasterization you are missing out on. DLSS is supposed to be a premium bonus, for example a game that runs at 60fps,now you get to run at 80fps, but these days devs use DLSS to get the game barely running at 60fps with horrendous frame pacing and latency
100%. I'll take the minor compromises for upscaling in return for more FPS and better graphics settings in a heartbeat. It's more than worthwhile.
As much as I love the image clarity upgrade going from 1080p to 1440p, I have to disagree. Sure, GOOD 1440p monitors have become so affordable, but the thing is 1080p monitors have also become even cheaper these days. Plus affordable GPU that can run 1440p smoothly is such a rarity these days that most people still game on 1080p resolution anyway. And 1080p does NOT look good on a 1440p monitor. It's noticeably blurrier than just playing natively on a 1080p monitor. That's why I think 1080p monitors are still popular in 2024 over 1440p monitor. The GPUs are holding them back.
I was using a RTX 2060 for 1440P for over 5 Years fine still hitting 60fps in most games. Also in more demands games DLSS was a life saver. Yes you won't MAX ultra settings but medium settings still look good in most games.
@@HifeMan no one spending money building a new pc wants to hit 60fps max and not being able to run anything in a few years lol
@@HifeMan 1080 Ti saw me through 7 years of 1440p. And before that 1440p was "ok-ish" on a GTX 970 before that. A 3060 12gb (overclocked) is pretty close to a 1080 Ti. 1440p has been playable, without huge spending, for a loooong time.
It isn't gpu's so much as it is the fairly common desire for ray tracing (which really abuses gpu's). That, and Nvidia using vram as a gatekeeper feature to vamp the market.
Ray tracing, by itself, is about a $400 "eye-candy feature" (for same fps performance), sometimes more. 4000 series somewhat addressed this, but is still gatekeeping on vram. AMD's run fantastic on raster, many 6000 series cards ace 1440p, but they likely won't have ray tracing in a good place until 8000 series.
I'd argue that on a budget, 1440p without RT looks much better than 1440p with RT, and raster 1440p is plenty affordable.
I think this is where DLSS may shine though. I mean, look at it from upscaling perspective. DLSS balanced on 1440p panel will look as decent as native 1080p resolution, and DLSS quality on 1440p panel is well, slightly inferior to native 1440p. But DLSS quality on 1080p panel is just.. bad, vaseline smeared kind of bad. And honestly, all recent AAA games right now have some sort of upscaling baked in already, upscaling has become the norm. Games that do not have upscaling yet are mostly indie games that are rather light on GPUs anyway.
@@HifeManplay with mods on some games with medium and enjoy the issues
16% of steam is 1440p 57% is 1080p, don't lie
Wish movie streaming has 1440p like TH-cam.
I've been on 1080p for almost a decade but after trying out a few other options/resolutions, I think my sweet spot is 1440p/144-165 Hz. The problem is I have to buy an adequate enough graphics card along with such a monitor, unless I get the monitor and after a while upgrade my graphics card, though that wouldn't make for a great experience...
Don't forget about VRR being a thing. It helps quite a bit smoothing things out till you can get a better GPU.
@@craigdeeter8042 True but I'd rather have a constant refresh rate than it going up and down if that makes any sense.
@@dankvader420 not really getting your point. I mean you could use Vsync I guess to lock the frame rate to something lower than what you GPU is capable of. But normally frame rate fluctuates quite a bit.
That's kinda what I did when I built my new PC. I was going to play at 1080p, but my new 3060ti at the time wasn't compatible with my monitor. So I had to finally let it go and upgrade to 1440p. A year later and I'm looking to upgrade my GPU now because 8gb vram is just not sufficient enough for 1440p these days. But on the bright side, I am using my old 1080p monitor as a secondary monitor.
Monitors might have become noteworthy cheaper in the US, but the necessary GPUs to game in 1440p haven't, while the general cost of living has risen massively. I must therefore clearly contradict the assertion that 1440p is the new 1080p.
check prices in other regions, GPU are still lot cheaper than for example in Europe...
Yep. I'm from Europe and I have an ultrawide 2k monitor. Not GPU or budget friendly at all.
If gaming is not your big main thing, it is just not worth it in the current economy.
Never buy a GPU new, used RX 6800s go for around 300$ on ebay and game at 1440p perfectly fine
@@sonicjms "perfectly fine" if you're lucky or it is a crappy thing from a strong smoker or a one used for crypto or had problems from the start but now there is no warranty... I will always avoid buying used at eBay if I can when it comes to tech products.
@@BenjaminWagener excuses, excuses, excuses
With all the crap cards, 1440p upscaled is the new 1080p
After reading the comments. I realize I am one of the few people that do not use AA or anything like that lolz
1080p is the new 1440p the way game optimization is going.
1440p will be the new 1080p when it’s readily available in a 24” - 25” size
There’s no point, 1080p is fine for that size
no lol
@@EjayT06 no
@@bobleman2792 uh yes
@@EjayT06 just use a week 24 1440p
watching this video in 240p
On a Nokia??
love your pp
We hit dimishing returns with game graphics, I just hope we take a step back so we can get something like 90fps in 4k without aggresive upscaling and low/medium settings
My wallet says NOPE
If a majority of people cannot afford a GPU that can comfortably sustain a baseline consistent 60fps at 1440p, then it is not the new 1080p.
It would be like saying 6G service has never been more affordable, when the cheapest compatible phone is $1000.
RX 6700 XT is under 250$ on ebay, RX 6800 is around 300$, these will do just fine at 1440p, never buy a GPU new
Games lately have been more CPU heavy than GPU provided your GPU isn't pinned by low Vram. I was finding my 5900X was struggling to get far above 60fps in some games, meaning the average person is likely running less than that so their GPU is probably not fully utilized.
@@mttrashcan-bg1ro please tell me which games are struggling to run at more than 60 fps with a ryzen 5900x...
no, way too many compromises. try again when you dont have to choose between the higher refreshrate or the higher resolution.
I recently set up my son's first gaming PC and I bought him one of the 27" 4K monitors you recommended a while back. That way he can run games at 1080p or 4K DLSS Performance and it still looks really good. His GPU is fairly modest at this point...
After reading some comments, I have the distinct feeling that your point of view diverges from your viewers.
From reality too.
@@kesamek8537 indeed, a vast majority of players run budget GPUs with some form of 1080p monitor (over 55%). The most popular GPUs on steam are 60 series.
It's the main strength in PC gaming, you upgrade when you want.
I had a very divergent point of view while watching. I'm glad people think for themselves and do not blindly follow suggestions.
Working in the tech industry having easier access to high-end hardware can make you a bit disconnected from the experience of an average user.
A lot of broke gamers out there. Complaining about stagnant games and thinking their 1660 should run everything.
@@davidlandrum I looked at the comments again. I don't see people talking about stagnant games or demanding that their old cards should run anything.
But I do see a lot of people saying that a new monitor in combination with their current hardware would not make a lot of sense.
The biggest pain updating to 1440p is that my GPU struggled to support it and you can't really go down to 1080p. That said DLSS should help with that.
did you see requirements for new games like Monster Hunter Wilds or Assassin's Creed Shadows? you need upsacaler for 1080p/60 fps at medium settings. for higher settings, you also require frame generation. a gpu like 4060 ain't gonna see 1440p even with upscaler and frame generation. you will need a 4070 and 5070 = $600-700. guess what will happen? people will go to $300 range gpu and stay at 1080p.
Can I suggest you guys do a bit of a deep dive in to GPU's, VRAM, resolution scaling, DLSS/FSR, Frame Gen, input lag etc. and how they all affect each other. Might be something worth visiting? The information you gave just seemed a little 'light' for those who may not have the most in-depth knowledge on how all of these things are connected to each other.
They do. 🤣
@@davidlandrum I'm talking about a single video that covers everything I mentioned for newbies or people needing a refresher. Everybody knows the HU guys very rarely leave a stone unturned so if they did a video that puts it all together, I think a lot of people would really appreciate that. But if you think they have done this already, then give me the date of said video.
@@thornstrikesback There’s no way that can be a single video. You’re gonna have to dive into their playlists.
if only gpus doesn't cost an arm.
do you get paid by monitor and GPU companies to push their expensive products? maybe when a '70 series is 400$ again and a '60 series has more than 8 gigs of vram, we'll consider 1440p
but now, ill take FPS over resolution any time of the day
Tbf, it's not his fault if you're only considering Nvidia. 🤷🏿♂️
@@LucidStrike amd isnt much better either
Still going strong with 1080p baby! No going up for the next 2 years.
As long as we keep getting 400+ {yourCurrency} GPU’s with only 8GB of VRAM.. no. 720p is the new 1080p because you’ll need DLSS.
if there was a ~400{myCurrency} GPU with 8GB of VRAM this would be a steal, but I agree. 12 or even 16GB should be the new entry point.
Oh yeah, 720p upscaled to 1080p is what I'm using in Cyberpunk 2077 Path Tracing with my RTX 3080 12 GB for 60+ fps gaming.
@@Z3t487 You use 3080 for 1080p?
@@NamTran-xc2ip
I have a 1080p monitor at 390 Hz that I use for competitive gaming, as well as single-player games. If the game allows it, I use higher resolutions (DSR or DLDSR); otherwise, I'm fine with dropping down to 720p upscaled to 1080p, as I unfortunately have to do in Cyberpunk 2077 to keep the FPS always above 60.
RX 6800 and used 4070: "Allows us to introduce ourselves."
i hope we see more 24,5" 1440p screens
Really hoping this is the case, but take the Brazilian market as an example-1440p monitors are getting a bit cheaper, but only with VA panels. IPS monitors, on the other hand, still cost a lot more. Ironically, a 4K monitor with an IPS panel sometimes costs less than a 1440p one, even though it's only 60Hz. Still, it’s pretty good for casual gaming, watching movies and shows, and some photo editing and color work. are this happening in other parts of the world too?
You don’t need 1440p monitor gpu has dldsr upscaling n the image is way better even on 1080p monitor
I have a 32-in 1440p VA panel. Honestly, I don't think the panel type matters until you get to OLED. I personally can't tell the difference between VA and IPS in person (maybe if I have an expert pointing out the difference if I could ).
Refresh rate definitely makes a difference in my opinion, I noticed right away when switching between 60 and 144 hz
Obi-Wan Kenobi : "1440p Is The New 1080p" (waves hand)
Monitors prizes are not making the norm but the GPU's enabling average joe to have min 60 fps max settings on 1440p without soap dlls crap.
Are we there?
This guy is really dellusional.
I have a OLED 1440p Ultrawide and absolutely love it. Only drawback is the GPU needed to power this thing with heavy AAA games at high refresh rates. You'll upgrade more often.
Some interesting things that have happened in the last 2 years for $1000-1500 PC Builds I've noticed
32GB of RAM becoming the new 16GB
2TB of Storage becoming the new 1TB
8P Cores becoming the new 6P Cores
12GB of VRAM becoming the new 8GB
And now 1440p becoming the new 1080p
2TB ssd is the minimum
@@mr.electronx9036 Yeah, before a 1TB SSD was. That's what I'm trying to say here. For premium gaming, minimums have gone from X to Y.
I have $1500+ rig and only 16GB RAM with 1TB storage, so far no issues.
@@anitaremenarova6662 When did you build it?
@@RobloxianX At the start of this year, can always pop in another 16GB module if need be but the shared GPU memory is carrying so far. Also I don't play 200GB AAAA slop, mostly indie and AA games so I'm not hurting for storage space either.
I just got that LG ultra gear 27850 for 167 at Best Buy this past weekend. Few years ago it was the best 1440 nano IPS monitor on the market. Crazy.
if u got 8gb vram dont go for 1440p. if u sit close to ur monitor dont go 27inch. and if u sit far from your monitor you will not be able to tell the difference between a 1080p and 1440p screen due to view distance eventho ur pc will have to work harder to run the 1440p. 1080p 24inch still has its place for alot of people even if we throw money out the equation, and if we dont 1080p is still cheaper. 1080p has alot of advantages, 1440p has only 1 advantage, its up to you to decide if u wanna forgo all of that just for a 1440p monitor. and 1440p is not as great as youtubers hype it to be, its not game changing u get used to the better image quality. this is coming from someone who is using both in a dual monitor set up.
Then your eyes are crap
@@DeadPiixxel 20 20 vision with perfect eye health. it all boils down to view distance, and thats a fact. no one in the world can notice resolution difference if u are sitting far back enough, and if ur sitting up close, chances are 27 inches is massive to sit infront of. 24 inch is the ideal monitor size to sit in front of at normal distance.
Because it looks like 1080p with MSAA. Give your thanks to blurry TAA and UE4 and 5
the only problem is they keep make to small monitors need to be + 30 inch everytime
Do a poll and you'll find 80% of pC gamers still have 1080p monitors.
56% on Steam.
that tells you absolutely nothing.
if you do a poll who owns a card above 4070 performance and you will find 80% do not. Do a poll asking who could need or wants a 4070 or above GPU and you will find 70% would want one.
The point is that people change their monitor every 3-7 years. 3 years ago 1444p was over 100-200 usd more expensive than it is now 7 years ago you looked at more like 400 usd.
Now you get a 1444p for the same amount as the 1ß80p monitor from 3 years ago and it has better performance in other aspects on top, all while people have gotten more money (sure inflation took that way down again, but the monitors with inflation shoudl be more like 300usd and not 180 usd, so they are even more of a steal(180 USD 3 years ago is 260USd today)
90% of people in 3rd world countries are still on 1080p
@@ChiekoGamers Exactly.
@@AlphaHorst Yep. Most PC users have hardware that's less powerful then a current Gen console.
99% of games ever released will look basically the same at 1080p for lack of geometric density, lack of texture resolution, and good visual design. If your game requires 1440p to be able to see, it is probably poorly designed, like the games with yellow tape everywhere to distinguish between static, un-interactable meshes and the linear path forward. Even games now are running at 720p on console routinely using a hack to upscale fake detail in what is glorified anti aliasing. I am disappointed by the lack of 1080p options going forward, and have roll my eyes at all the people who trash talk it. It's hard to take them seriously when they don't mention what they are comparing. 1080p on a 1440p monitor is going to look worse than on a 1080p monitor because the monitor will have to upscale it, and it is standard to do so by blurring the picture. If you just got a 1440p monitor, chances are, there are a lot of other things that are better about it, like this video explains, which could contribute to perception. Everyone ignores these considerations and uncritically parrots "1440p is the sweetspot! 4k is overrated even though the jump from 1440 to 4k is bigger than 1080 to 1440!" In fact, the idea that 4k is too much is in principle the same idea that 1440p is too much. If your game was not a PS5 exclusive open world game with distant detail and no anti aliasing, 1440p is more than you need. 1080p is the definitive resolution for compatibility with existing software and the last console generation, including Nintendo Switch, and offers more performance and less temporal blur with more performant native rendering with no weird resolution switching driver hitches, etc. Switch, PS4 gen, PS3 gen will generally look better on a 1080p monitor unless you have an expensive upscaler, because they are incapable of outputting a higher signal, and there is no reason to play the PC versions of those games in 1440p or 4k for more than 30 minutes when they were designed around 1080p or sub 1080p for consoles where higher couldn't even be output. A 1080p monitor will use less power, produce less heat, have better compatibility, is lower cost, is more easily replaceable, has higher refresh rate for the money, is more compact, and at 24" is the ideal size for a desk setup 2 feet away from your eyes (for games, not productivity). That is only true, however, before the PC Master Racist hivemind gaslights the industry into thinking 1080p is obsolete and no one manufactures decent quality 1080p monitors anymore. 1440p will never be the target resolution for the mainstream now that 4k is here, which makes it even worse.
You are my spirit animal. I upgraded from 27" 1440p 144hz to 24" 1080p 360hz and oh my butter I am never going back.
@@LordWaterBottleI upgraded from 1440P175Hz to 1440P360Hz and oh my butter I'm never going back.
You can have high refresh rate and better pixel density at the same time.
I've played on both 1080P monitors and 1440P monitors. 1440P is hands-down superior. You can yap for paragraphs about how "games were designed, compatibility, temporal rendering, blah blah" but that doesn't change that 1440P looks substantially better, gives you an advantage in competitive games, and is easy enough to run that it can be pushed at much higher framerates than 4K currently can.
My 1440P monitor actually allows me to run 1080P without scaling (it runs in a smaller area on the monitor), but there is absolutely zero reason for me to do so. I can play games at 1440P360Hz so why in the hell would I want to run at 1080P?
@@clanginator you can't have 1440p 360hz for the same price as 1080p 360hz though. The best you can find in 1440p at $300ish is only 240hz. If I could have a 360hz 1440p display for the same price as the 1080p 360hz display I would choose the sharper display.
You have to compare the dollars. The cheapest 360hz 1440p display I can see for sale currently is $600, double the price of the 360hz 1080p display I recently purchased. They actually don't make 1080p displays that are that expensive anymore.
Hell, you can get a 500hz 1080p display for $400 when it's actually in stock.
If you ignore money, sure 1440p is better. But there are money factors, and it's about double for 1440p for the same refresh rate and panel tech. Maybe that's worth it to you, but for me I'd rather upgrade the homie at the same time for the same money.
I was using 1080p from 2017 till 2 weeks ago. Just bought an Acer Nitro 27 inch 1440p 180hz monitor then because I upgraded my GPU to 6800xt which is way too overpowered for 1080p and the difference is massive. I think 1080p is still good even in 2024, but when you handled a 1440p monitor its a totally different experience
@11:00
HUB: Mainstream models struggle to render at 1080p 60hz.
My 4070: struggling to run Silent Hill 2 at 1080p 60hz.
Yes the prices and quality have improved greatly but 1440 is still pretty niche because the tier of graphics card you need to run it well is still prohibitively expensive. The time that 1440 really takes off is when the low end graphics cards are able to run it without any of the upscaling nonsense. If you buy a 60 class GPU to run 1440 even with upscaling the life of the GPU will be very short before having to upgrade especially as GFX memory has become more important for scaling and other features such as RT. This from a guy that has been building PC's for 30+ years and went 1440 18 months ago but had to pay about >30% more for his rig for the privilege.
1440p is the new 1080p? No. There are very good 1080p monitors that are 24”, while most 1440p monitors are 27”. Not everyone can fit a desk deep enough to comfortably use a 27” monitor. Give us 1440p 24” monitors dammit! I cannot afford a bigger apartment.
Not everyone can manage space.
There is one going for 200 on amazon I think. Koorui maybe?
@@stephenryan4065 also from Titan Army.
Well, start you own monitor company. You and other 20 customers would buy it. You'll make a fortune.
@@monsterboomer8051 Funnily enough some guy had enough with AMD and NVIDIA gpus so they made their own gpu
It's actually getting *more difficult* for GPUs to drive 1440p at decent framerates (in 2024, this is 100+ fps) and acceptable (read: very high or ultra) settings. It's great that 1440p monitors are affordable. It means more money to a GPU that can properly run it.
But 1080p high refresh is still the best choice for anyone that can't afford a 7800XT/4070 (and honestly, they are nearly approaching 1080p territory). The way things are going, a few years from now a danged 4080 or 7900XTX will be a 1080p card.
Sorry but if you have eyes, native 1080p on a 24" looks better than 1440p upscaled from 960p on a 27", way blurrier there. Imo only jump to 1440p if you can play at 1440p native. If you can't play at 1080p native then I guess you wouldn't care either way.
Eh I need at least a 32"
brainded comment
Maybe if you're using fsr
"gpus are moving towards higher resolutions" yeah right
nvidia bus width would like to differ
there's a bigger issue. did you see the requirements for newer games like Assassin'e Creed Shadows? with $300 range gpus for 1080/60 fps at medium settings, you need upscaler. this is a must. and for higher settings, you'll also need frame generation. if you don't buy a gpu like 4070 or the 5070 you ain't gonna see 1440p. with upscalers the game devs are incentivized to not optimize the game, and now we will need upscaler for 1080p/60 fps. Assassin's Creed Valhalla on my 2019 PC has an average of 90ish fps on very high settings without upscaler. now with upscaler you're not gonna see 90 fps on very high settings. you will need an upscaler and medium settings and get 60 fps instead of 90ish. the future of PC gaming is bleak for the next years. how long it will last, i don't know.
Unless you play on consoles. Then 720p with upscaling is the new 1080p.
Gaming in 2024 with resolutions from 2004.
Even on consoles 720p with upscaling is the new 1080p
Same with a 3060 or 4060
@@kennyoffhenny 3060 can easily do 1440p if you have the 🧠 to use it especially since it has 12gb of vram.
LMAO, tell me you know nothing withot telling me. 1440p on performance mode looks better than native 1080p. With how good upscaling looks and how garbage native AA does, nobody is going to use native res in future anyways. AND consoles literally run Sub HD resolutions. Even the PS3 couldn't handle 720p. To even think that cosnsoles could do 720p back in 2004 lmao
@@DragonOfTheMortalKombat your brain is gonna explode when I tell you that consoles can run native 4k. With better game optimization. You’d need a $750 computer to get the same performance. Yea a 3060 can run 1440 60fps at medium settings with DLSS, but that’s not very impressive for like a $300 card in a $600 lmao it’s 2024 buddy. The Xbox Series S could do that for $300 total, 4 years ago
Oh boy, what a shout out back to the VX2748-2KP-MHD. That monitor is the reason why I started following HUB when I found your review xP
It’s wild seeing everyone slowly transitioned to 1440p over the last 4 years too, I remember then it was still super premium tbh
1080p in 24 inch will always be goated
Nah 1080p 17 inch is.
1080p at 24" is very pixelated. It's not even good for your eyes to have a monitor that pixelated.
We need more 1440p monitors in 24", not everyone has space on their desk for 27+, which is why I have a AOC 1440p/165hz 24" and it's very sharp at 123ppi, higher than a 27". Now if they made Mini LED or OLED in that size I would upgrade to one.
No it isn't. The cheapest 27inch 1080p monitor is less then AU$150. The cheapest 1440p monitor is around AU$380.
Currency issue buddy the internet runs on either USD or Euros 😂😂😂
you made the mistake of living in expensive country
Perfect timing. Just ordered a Dell G2724D on sale for $180. 165hz, free sync, g sync IPS panel. Should be a huge upgrade over my dual 1080p monitors.
Unfortunately 1440p gpu's are the new 4k gpu's in pricing.
I just got 240hz, QD-OLED, 99% DCI-P3, 1440p at 27 inches for $600. While not dirt cheap, that's insane for the tech packed into it.
Dude just based on your fps chart comparison of 1440p to 1080p shows that by switching to a new 1440p monitor will lower my fps by 50%. Dog thats not acceptable at all. And to get the same fps you'd have to upgrade your hardware which will devastate your wallet lol
I think he's talking more about newcomers or people building a fresh PC in general. Buying the cheapest current-gen brand-new GPUs still lets you average 60 FPS at 1440p (with headroom for higher FPS by lowering settings or using upscaling, which looks way better at 1440p) while getting you the benefits of a sharper, more detailed image that at the same time looks bigger and more immersive. Obviously upgrading from an existing setup is a different story.
Side note though, second-hand 6800 XTs absolutely crush 1440p and are like 300 USD/GBP/EUR. Low key goated buy this past year
upscale bussy
A lot of people prefer higher resolution at lower settings over higher settings at a lower resolution. And yes, with like for like settings, adding 50% more pixels is going to drop the framerate about 50%, but you can get about the same fps at 1440 medium settings in most games as you do at 1080p with high settings.
It's a personal preference.
@@stefannita3439 For new build it makes more sense, but still, you have cheaper monitors oh one hand, but the cost of GPUs kills the whole point of monitors getting cheaper. For me personaly i dont think is worth the extra you have to spend for better GPU.
used rx 6800 xt here is more like 450$ :(
finally you recognize my Dell G2724d. you have been ignoring it for ages
What about 1440p 24" Monitors 🤔
I remember the summer of the library, 2011, I biked back and forth to the library almost every day to go on the computer and talk in the new online community I joined late the year before. We didn't have internet so the library was my only option. Every now and then when I wasn't chatting I'd browse youtube to see what was up, and being it was a library, the internet was only good for the most basic of things like typing word documents, google searches, and not much else since the connection was being simultaneously shared between 30 or so other users.
TH-cam was always slow so to keep the video from buffering, I'd play at 720, sometimes even dropping it to 480 or 360 when things go bad. Thought to myself and one thought I remember in particular was confusion over how anyone would ever need anything above 720. 1080 was great, but it just didn't make sense.
Here I am now in 2024, almost thirteen years later (damn I'm old... :c ) and gaming on a 2k monitor at 144hz and going back is inconceivable.
1440p is overrated, games are badly optimized these days you need a very good gpu and thats with upscaling
Tell me you don't have 1440p hardware without telling me you don't have 1440p hardware.
I could get a 1080p gaming setup now but id rather save up and wait a couple more months to get a 1440p setup. Every time I get close to a 1080 monitor I can clearly see the pixels. I don't see how 1440p is overrated.
@@All_SportGGyou can still see pixels with a 1440p monitor at 27"
G2724D is the goat, offers a lot for an IPS monitor around $180 generally on sale, have seen it for lower too
Just bought myself a new 240hz 1080p. Can't justify the cost of having to spend more on a GPU that can run 1440 when I only play a few hours a month.
Inb4 more low imagination comments:
I also work on my two 1080 monitors, with a work laptop underneath.
If I play competitively, I want 240 fps to go with my 240 refresh rate.
I use my PC as media station while working out (I have a gym/home office combo), it's hooked up two TVs already.
I play games like RTS, 4X and shooters (including very old ones)
We have a once a year LAN party, for which I supply 3 of 6 PCs.
If you play a few hours a month why even have a pc just play on console. A lot cheaper.
What is your GPU? 1440p capable GPUs really aren't expensive nowadays. RX 6800 is just $339 and used 4070 you can snag for like $399 or less.
Few hours a month ? Then why did you even spen the money on some trash monitor when you could've just hooked up to a TV instead.
Updated my comment to answer your questions.
Makes so much sense… I recently got into the pc world and had to get a monitor. After talking with my friends and doing a much of research I landed on 27” 1440p IPs 170hz. I found a used Asus Tuf Gaming (VG27AQ1A) for $100. Could not be happier with it.
1080p will still be 1080p as long as I have the GPU that I have, because GPUs that can give me the same frames in 1440p that I get in 1080p are close to $1K.
Edited for those who couldn’t comprehend.
1k?
A $500 7800xt or 4070 can easily handle 1440p high refresh
@@cha0ss0ldier-4 this is such a silly comment.
7700XT - $400 - can do it, but spend the extra $100 and buy the 7800XT or go used and get a 6800XT/3080
7800 XT -$500
4070 - $600
@@Christian_Mino if your lucky in my case i got a 7900 gre for 400$
Urm, learn hardware and then you’ll realise you’re rather wrong
@@Christian_Minoyou're silly
I switched to 1440p shortly after a video you posted almost 4 years ago about the MSI MAG274QRF-QD.
It's a great display, and I'm enjoying it ever since.
1080p is nice, but no longer for me.
now most games run at 1080p with dlss performance
LMAO what kind of an atrocity you have to run at such low resolutions.
What graphics card are you using? A 2050?
I have the dell 😊
Got it early this year and it's my first 1440p monitor and it blew me away with how good it is
Extremely pleased with the monitor and the quality overall
Skipped the stopgap resolution and jumped directly to 4K.
I did as well - went from 1920x1200 straight to 4k and never looked back.
Same. 4K, even if you don't have a crazy gpu, is still very nice. Text is soooo much better than 1080p, and indie games look beautiful on such a panel.
I got a 1440p monitor in 2021 for the price and exact specs I got my 1080p monitor in 2016 (250 USD), and got a 4k monitor with the same specs 2 years later at 400 USD (got 2 other 4k monitors since).
Also want to say I got the extra 2 monitors moreso for productivity for work.
i remember when 144hz tn panels were expensive lol, I had 1 monitor for watching movies etc with calibrated colors and a 144hz tn for gaming
LCD prices have been crashing lately. The Amazon Prime Day sale today has some 27" high-refresh 4K monitors for less than $350 (the Pixio Wave series and some other monitors from KTC and MSI), which would've cost you twice as much two years ago. Unfortunately GPU prices haven't been falling as quickly and a ton of people are going to end up with "midrange" 4K monitors along with midrange GPUs that can't drive them.
DLSS is a must for 4k gaming. 4K DLSS Balanced should have similar performance to native 1440p while looking considerably better.
If anything gpu's are going the opposite direction - the price points going down the stack are going up. 60 series costs 70 series, 70 costs 80, etc.
And with zero competition from AMD coming, it will get worse. These great monitors are no good if the cards needed for a good experience keep going up.
People tend to stick longer with their monitors than GPU, like you'll be surprised how many people I know who have like 4070 super and 7800xt who still use 1080p 60hz lmao.
As someone with a 3840x1600 display, i can definitely tell you, that extra resolution, having upgraded from a 1920x1200 display comes in very useful for everything that i do profesionally, and privately like playing games, even demanding games like escape from tarkov or arma 3/reforger, those extra pixels, they help, they are improving my experience more then the extra frames at a lower res.