• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

1080p vs 2k vs 4k

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.
Correct me if I'm wrong but 4k is 4k no matter the size of the monitor. To what I think is the original question, I don't think that the size of the screen impacts speed. 4k is 4k. Right? I can do 4k on a 20" screen the same as a 32" screen or 120" screen (My dream size).

As such, I think this thread made the correct pivot. Screen size plays heavily into ease of use and comfort depending on such variables as distance from the screen.

It is this comfort level that can make or break your proficiency in game play.
For competitive gamers and esports players, especially those on Twitch-type FPS games (CS, Apex, COD, Doom, Quake, etc.), every ms counts. As in moving your eyes inches more to see the corner of the screen matters. It's also an FPS thing. It's easier to push 165-240Hz+ on 1080p than it is 4K.

So, size impacts speed, but in a different way than you were thinking. Otherwise, you're correct, 4K UHD is 4K UHD to the GPU no matter how many inches diagonal it is, the # of pixels remains the same.

So, you all are saying that all the are crap?
What are you asking here? All what is crap? Crap has not been mentioned yet, lol.

EDIT: Cleaned up the thread, deleted off topic/hijacking.

Flamethrower1972 - If you'd like to discuss your options again, bump YOUR thread with whatever question you have. If it's generic, about the resolution or helping the OP, etc., you're good here. ;)

I don't think anything mentioned here makes your pick 'crap' or brings up any further questions as you are looking at 27/28" monitors at 2560x1440 which has the higher PPI anyway.
Last edited: