Monitor to Run on 2080 Super. 4K IPS Vs WQHD IPS Vs 1440p OLED?

LnokcoL on 05/06/2024 - 17:58

My Kogan 27" 1440p just died so I'm in search for a new monitor and hoping to get some recommendations.

I'm running a rig with a 9900KF and 2080 Super. It's mostly used for work (50%, coding and documents), gaming (30%) and other stuff like browsing, reading, Youtube etc.

The goal is to find something that is an upgrade from my old monitor. I'm willing to spend up to around $1k (obviously lower the better though) and debating between

Upgrading to an OLED Is very tempting, only drawbacks are the price and possible burn-in due to my work. But I've read that the later gens of OLED are much better at preventing this?

I'm quite skeptical about going 4K with the 2080S even with DLSS. I'd still like to be able to play the latest games on at least Medium settings at >60fps.

Would love to hear all your thoughts.

Poll Options

  • 7
    4K IPS
  • 3
    WQHD IPS
  • 9
    1440p OLED
Computing Computer Peripheral LCD Monitor OLED Monitor

Comments

  • FireRunner on 05/06/2024 - 18:07
    +1

    4K would be too difficult for a 2080 Super.
    WQHD is the same thing as 1440p.
    If you got the funds and are happy to do a few changes to prevent burn in then OLED might be the way to go.

    • bargaino on 05/06/2024 - 20:08
      +3

      You don't need to play games at native resolution.

      4K is for work. Multiple documents at once.
      With a 32" 4K screen, you have no desire for a second screen.

      That Dell looks awfully cheap at $499! And 144Hz for gaming. It is bent, but you can't have everything. Go for it!

      • FireRunner on 05/06/2024 - 20:19
        +1

        It's $599 for the 4K 144Hz monitor which is quite good I must admit.
        The $499 is 3440 x 1440 100 Hz curved which is still pretty solid price too.

        Downside with not running games at native is that it will never look as good. I.e. 1440p on a 4K monitor looks much worse than 1440p on a 1440p display.

        • bargaino on 05/06/2024 - 23:38
          +1

          Thanks, $599 still good. And 1080p should look good on 4K. When you are moving, you can't tell the difference :)

          • FireRunner on 06/06/2024 - 07:49

            @bargaino: 1080p at 32” is going to feel like quite the downgrade from 1440p at 27”. I suspect you’re still better off running at 1440p even if the pixels don’t scale as nicely.

            I guess it’s up to preference, 4K will be better productivity at the expense of a worse gaming experience. Personally I think 1440p is the sweet spot and would go for that over 4K.

    • bazingaa on 06/06/2024 - 09:34

      4K would be too difficult for a 2080 Super.

      why ? I have connected my TV to 3060 and it works well at 4K 144 Hz

      • FireRunner on 06/06/2024 - 11:53
        +2

        I mean for gaming, any sort of recent AAA game will struggle at 4K even with dialled back settings on a 2080 super

  • barge-in hunter on 05/06/2024 - 19:26
    +1

    I run a 34” wqhd ips with my 2070 super

    I find it a great size for a few windows at once - but still have a vertical 27” off to the side as well.

    Performance wise, it’s struggle time at full details in games but tweaking the settings gets a reasonable frame rate

  • Sal in SA on 05/06/2024 - 19:37
    +2

    4k on 2080ti was pushing it ..medium settings in many games and 30-40fps not unusual.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join