I know they can be situational, but if you had to pick one to rule them all which of these two would you pick?
I’d pick 4k 30hz over 2k any day.
2k 120, my vision even with corrective lenses is not good enough to tell the difference between 2 and 4k
1080p 60Hz
1080p/60hz
High res is amazing for productivity, but unimportant for gaming.
Higher refresh rate is nice at all times, but in gaming it’s especially great.
Since I don’t play nearly as much as I did, and don’t play any competitive games, I lean towards higher resolution. Maybe I’ll be able to get one of these fancy 4k and high refresh rate monitors used eventually.
Obviously the former. In fact, it’s 1440p/165Hz right now, and I have 0 intent to increase resolution further since modern unoptimized games already struggle with this.
Ultrawide 3440x1440 with 120+ refresh. I prefer refresh over pixel density, but love ultrawides.
Well I only play a single game, at 30fps and 50% resolution, because I really dislike the fan coming on.
Outside games, I guess higher resolution is better for reading text, but 2k should be enough for that.
I don’t do a lot of the kind of gaming where refresh rate really matters (I don’t think Civilization needs to be 120hz) and for other things I do I’d much rather have the pixels, so 4k/60hz for me.
120 hz for me
I cannot do 60hz anymore. Once you go above that, there’s no going back. Just moving the mouse feels better.
1080 360hz
As a non-gamer, I’ll take the pixels every time.
I currently on 1080p/240hz
4k for me since my primary use case is programming, and I want to be able to get a lot of sharply-rendered text on the screen at once. I managed to get a 2160 ultrawide that does 72 Hz at least. But I do miss 120 Hz.
