When will 1440p be mainstream and commonly used?

[Chomiq]

Why would you ever have something against it? if you don't have the hardware it's your choice to use it.

See the catch here is that you yourself said "4K" in regards to consoles, as in they're inferior. You have nothing against DLSS and FSR, which also produce "fake" 4K. And yet image reconstruction techniques started on consoles. Only later was DLSS and FSR developed. Nvidia needed tensor cores to enable DLSS and yet something like PS4 was able to pull off checker-boarded rendering without any special hardware.

 

[GreiverBlade]

2560x1440p heck even 2880x1620p is "my" mainstream since a couple of years now ...

3k is enough, to the point that is see no real incentive to go 4k even with DLSS and FSR, technically i do not see any disadvantage to stay at 2.5k/3K versus 4k
for a TV maybe ...

as for the poll 2022 would be my generic answer (since 1440p monitor are becoming cheaper and cheaper and even a 1070 could drive 2.5k in most game, ok granted more 40ish to 60ish fps )
but 2017 would be the personal answer (and it was even cheap at that time, 299~ )

 

[DoH!]

2027

 

[64K]

For anyone with a GPU that can handle 1440p I can attest that it's definitely worth it to upgrade from 1080p.

Years ago I went from a 27 inch 1080p monitor to a 27 inch 1440p monitor and the difference in picture quality was very noticeable. The picture was much crisper on 1440p. I can never go back to 1080p. If I were playing modern games I would need more than my 2070 Super for high frame rates in some games though.

 

[BMfan80]

64K:

Consoles lead the way. FSR and DLSS have made that GPU rush redundant, with modern midrange GPU's being 4K capable thanks to them.

But they aren't really doing 4k if they are lowering the res and then the image is being upscaled to look like 4k.

I have to play Cyberpunk with FSR 2.1 which means my card at high settings can't do 4k.
I actually miss the option to just lower the res by how ever many % you need, think I used to run at 85% res and it played at 60fps 90+% of the time.

 

[P4-630]

@whereismymind slap a new fan on that 1050Ti before it dies!!....

 

[Tropick]

For anyone with a GPU that can handle 1440p I can attest that it's definitely worth it to upgrade from 1080p.

Years ago I went from a 27 inch 1080p monitor to a 27 inch 1440p monitor and the difference in picture quality was very noticeable. The picture was much crisper on 1440p. I can never go back to 1080p. If I were playing modern games I would need more than my 2070 Super for high frame rates in some games though.

I can definitely second this.

Just last year I finally ditched my old 60Hz 1080p panel for an AOC CQ27G2 144Hz 1440p display and the difference is night and day. A lot of that can probably be attributed to the refresh rate increase but I was able to knock MSAA down to 2X in most games without a noticeable loss in quality because the raw resolution is just that much higher. 1080p certainly isn't bad, but I would definitely consider it the barrier to entry for gaming these days.

 

[Calenhad]

I have been using 1440p monitors since '15 iirc. I got two 27" 240Hz 1440p monitors today. And I have no urgent need to go 4K anytime soon. In fact I am waiting on local availability of a nice 21:9 1440p oled monitor for my next upgrade.

I have a 4K oled tv, which is great. I just don't see the need for 4K monitors anytime soon.

 

[64K]

I have been using 1440p monitors since '15 iirc. I got two 27" 240Hz 1440p monitors today. And I have no urgent need to go 4K anytime soon. In fact I am waiting on local availability of a nice 21:9 1440p oled monitor for my next upgrade.

I have a 4K oled tv, which is great. I just don't see the need for 4K monitors anytime soon.

4K TV is indeed great. 4K for gaming......not so much. You would be stuck in a never ending expensive rapid upgrade cycle to keep up with games getting constantly more demanding. If you are willing to constantly throw money at 4K gaming GPUs then it's great but the vast majority won't do it and they probably never will.

 

[Assimilator]

Why would anyone not go 4K or 5K on a new monitor purchase?

I build a new PC about 3 years ago and all of the decently-priced 4K monitors were stuck at 60Hz. Every Black Friday since then, including the one that's just passed, I've checked and the decently-priced 4K monitors are still stuck at 60Hz. Until that changes I will stick with my 1440p screens.

 

[Solaris17]

I want to go out in the weeds here and say that along with all else that was said, put simply, I think monitors are just too big. I personally wont go above 27" and thats with a 4k display. The expense climbs a lot more imo when looking for higher rez at smaller dimensions; but I dont think most gamers are migrating from 1080p quickly because the "token" streamer boi setup is 2 monitors and a mic boom on a standard 50-60" desk.

From what iv seen the screen industry is trying (and I hate it) to push anything 4k into the 32"+ category and also to my dismay curve the screen (puke) of course my personal opinions aside, I dont think most CS:GO valorant imsuperl33tlookatmydancemoves gamer is going to justify the spend or the physical dimensions of higher rez monitors.

further compounded by the fact that most people dont "step down" when they have gone multi monitor to begin with. If you took my monitors away and put a physically larger 4k screen on my desk that took up the same amount of space I would be lost because I have lost the logical desktop space I am used too.

 

[evernessince]

Console Gamer: I'm playing 4K games on my $500 console. Woot! Woot!

PC Gamer: It's not native 4K. It's upscaled from 1080p and some quality settings are low and you're playing shooters at 30 FPS

Console Gamer: 30 FPS is fine. The human eye can't see more than 24 FPS anyway. You PC gamers are full of poop with your 144 Hz monitors.

PC Gamer: <sigh>

Nvidia to PC Gamers: What if I said you could get upscaling and fake frames for $1,600?
PC Gamers:

 

[sLowEnd]

It probably won't be in the same way 1080p is/was, IMO. I see a stronger drive in consumer electronics to push 4k (4k tvs, 4k movies, 4k consoles...etc.), rather than 2k.

2k is higher resolution than 1080p, of course.
...so was the case for 900p screens vs 720p screens, but 900p wasn't exactly hot, and was generally leapfrogged by 1080p.

 

[AusWolf]

After 2027 at the earliest.

Tech enthusiasts forums such as this one are not representative of the average gamer at all.

Last but not least the QHD resolution means 77.8% more pixels [to render] which means you need roughly twice as fast GPU to maintain FPS which is a very expensive upgrade for far too many.

View attachment 271976

This!

The more expensive GPUs get, the later high display resolutions will get adopted.

I'm still happy with 1080p, personally.

 

[cvaldes]

1440p will never be the most popular gaming resolution for a number of factors, the most obvious one being that it's not a native resolution for television sets. Remember that PC gaming is a small portion of video gaming, there is far more done on consoles and even more on mobile so looking at Steam Hardware Survey results provides little insight into the industry as a whole.

Competitive gaming favors resolutions like 1080p where the lower resolution provides a performance enhancement compared to higher resolutions like 4K, 8K, whatever.

Streaming also impacts gaming resolution choice as higher bandwidths equal higher costs to content creators (computer hardware, broadband connectivity, platform charges).

 

[GreiverBlade]

I was able to knock MSAA down to 2X in most games without a noticeable loss in quality because the raw resolution is just that much higher.

^that, definitelly ... 1440p i use 2X AA but 1620p i use noAA, ofc it would be the same at 2160p but the the impact with anything else than an overpriced 4080 would be ... uninteresting

1440p is a sweetspot for many, 1620p is a niche (which i am happy my monitor can handle despite being a 1440p native ) 2160p is too excessive for the most but still desirable for some (and not talking about 2700p/3160p/4320p )

@cvaldes most of the streamer i follow stream in 1440p since quite some time now iirc (at least CohhCarnage do)

under 27" fine with 1080p (i need to change my Phillips 273E3LSHB ) 32"+ 1440p/1620p is a must (i see that between my TV and current monitor )

 

[cvaldes]

I actually have no idea what resolution any streamer is broadcasting but I do know that a large number of them are playing games on consoles (including Switch or even older hardware) so I suspect they are mostly gaming at 1080p.

Only a handful of the most popular streamers can really justify paying the extra bandwidth fees for higher resolution. The typical streamer with 100-200 viewers doesn't have any reason to game at 4K even if they have the hardware to do it.

 

[GreiverBlade]

I actually have no idea what resolution any streamer is broadcasting but I do know that a large number of them are playing games on consoles (including Switch or even older hardware) so I suspect they are mostly gaming at 1080p.

Only a handful of the most popular streamers can really justify paying the extra bandwidth fees for higher resolution. The typical streamer with 100-200 viewers doesn't have any reason to game at 4K even if they have the hardware to do it.

that's true, indeed although they are switching to 1440p (for Youtube also)

streaming 1440p is more taxing than 1080p but less than 2160p which make it the ideal step up for some

 

[InhaleOblivion]

Never gets my vote. I think we'll eventually leap frog 2k gaming to 4k. Though personally I'll stay on 1080p 144hz until I don't have to spend 1k+ on a GPU just to do 60FPS+ in 4k.

 

[Shrek]

I'm way behind and use a 12-year-old PC but have been using it with a 2560 x 1440 monitor for several years now.

Don't feel the need for speed but do need resolution.

 

[freeagent]

I was at 1920x1080 60 for eons it seems, got a new tv that is 3840x2160 60, so I just play at that. I do the +175 zoom on the desktop so that I can actually read without getting off the couch. I could play at 1080p 120 with this tv, but nahh

 

[erocker]

I'm not so sure it will ever get "mainstream" as 4k, I believe will take 1080p's place sooner than later... Though I see 1440p being relevant with PC's for quite a while yet.

 

[freeagent]

Maybe 1080p will be the new 480p, 4K 720p, and then 8K the new 1080p? I don't know...

1440 used to be what I wanted to run when I was stuck at 1080p, but now 1440 is what I sometimes drop down to when VRAM is a concern

 

[eidairaman1]

1440 is short lived and overshadowed by 2K and 4K. It would seem that TV Resolutions of 2K and 4K are what determines what monitor resolutions/games/consoles/gpus will be standardized to.

Maybe 1080p will be the new 480p, 4K 720p, and then 8K the new 1080p? I don't know...

1440 used to be what I wanted to run when I was stuck at 1080p, but now 1440 is what I sometimes drop down to when VRAM is a concern

8K isn't commonplace like 2K, 4K, 5K. Just Upgraded from a 720P TV to a 4K

 

[freeagent]

1440 is short lived and overshadowed by 2K and 4K. It would seem that TV Resolutions of 2K and 4K are what determines what monitor resolutions/games/consoles/gpus will be standardized to.


8K isn't commonplace like 2K, 4K, 5K. Just Upgraded from a 720P TV to a 4K

That is a solid bump