After 1080p60 I kind of still notice a difference, but I’m not willing to pay much more for increasing that further.

I hate HDMI with a passion that can not be explained.

I mostly want displays to not be something I worry about. Even if I just have a single port, being able to connect 3 4K monitors without worrying about their refresh rate is convenient.

DisplayPort over HDMI!!

1080p60 is/was the norm for a long time. 1440p144 is the current sweetspot for desktop/gaming I suppose.

I need 4k to be happy, with 1080, you have giant windows in you OS (like most apps are only usable in fullscreen) even on 100% and still see single pixels so well…

Straight unusable for me, maybe on a phone with max 5” there 1080 is like a good middle ground (battery vs resolution vs not seeing single pixels)

I personally prefer 4k 60 (of course, high hz is better)

I ajust zoom level according screen size, on 32” 4k, I have it mostly around 125% zoom

On my 14” i have, i think, 2550 which as well looks amazing and allows to be usable at 125% as well

I adapt zoom level according on what I am doing, I like having options to go tiny icons and a lot of space or have it big if I am e.g. in a meeting and have to adjust screen distance to be normally visible by the webcam

I meant to say 1440p144 is as a sweet spot concerning price performance ratio imho. The rest of the hardware, especially the GPU have to be considered as well.

Even on a 1440p 27" LCD I zoom in to about 133%, mostly for the viewing experience of the people I share my screen with.

I’d love an OLED with the same specs, but they are still to expensive to potentially suffer from burn in some time.

Yea, I always only share a window, so that I not have to change resolution or zoom while in meetings, very valid point

And as well for pricing, I agree (especially if you consider that you need more GPU power for more pixel), but if you are not too picky, you can get a 4k60 screen at sub 300$

1440 27” and 133% seems to me, like you have not much space to have multiple app beside each other?

I most likely sit more near the screen than most people, that may be the reason for my preferences

Is the 480Hz support “just because”, or is there any kind of use case for it?

My work environment is chaotic enough for me to have to cycle through 4 different instances of VSCode, terminals and Firefox, while simultaneously doing tech support for windows issues. I’d have switched to Linux if it wasn’t for the last bit.

I work on a 14" Laptop with 1080p60 that is the second display, while i use the 27" 1440p as the main one. I use a USB C dongle to connect and can therefore can only get 60hz because the screen will flicker otherwise (though on Linux the dongle works even for 144hz, which is above the dongle rating of 120hz, but I digress).

I’m a bit constrained with the available space, so I use only my Laptop + screen for work and only the single screen for my personal rig, which is kind of a bummer. Will opt for a 4k ~120hz ~40-50" OLED TV for my next second “monitor” though

I think It’s more like the bandwidth needed to support 12k at 120hz also allows for 4k at 480hz, soo… por que no los dos?

yeah that’s what I was wondering. There doesn’t seem to be a widely agreed upon maximum human perception fps, but all the articles I’ve been able to find on it suggest it tops out way below 144Hz, and that these supposed pro gamers insisting on higher are like those wine connoisseurs who can’t tell a red from a white blindfold.

It doesn’t top out below 144Hz. There are benefits with diminishing returns up to at least 1000Hz especially for sample-and-hold displays (like all modern LCD/OLED monitors). 240Hz looks noticeably smoother than 144Hz, and 360Hz looks noticeably smoother than 240Hz. Past that it’s probably pretty hard to tell unless you know what to look for, but there are a few specific effects that continue to be reduced. https://blurbusters.com/blur-busters-law-amazing-journey-to-future-1000hz-displays-with-blurfree-sample-and-hold/

Great. What’s the max length? 6”?

Of course you need a new cable. You’re not getting massive upgrades in fidelity on your old crappy cable.

Yea, I think the limits are going to top out around that 300Hz mark, it’s going to be really hard to convince people they can see or feel a difference between 300Hz and 480Hz. I have no preference between 240Hz and 300Hz already.

For computer monitors, I also wouldn’t be surprised if we top out at 4k for regular consumers, with a few niche 8k products available.

Yeah, 1080p is fine on a small laptop screen, or a small TV on the other side of the room, but it’s unusable for desktop applications. Even 1440 is noticeably low res. I disagree about phones, though. I think 1080p is overkill and 720p is fine.

But… but… it has gold-plated connectors