Current Events > Why aren't 4k monitors a good investment

(+) Yeah! (+)

You need dual gpus to get 4k at 60fps at max settings.

I don't want to spend 3000 on two gpus

you just answered your question?
---

Most people don't even need them, but get them anyway because "newest tech". For it to be worth it, it would have to be a monitor somewhere in the 28" or larger category. Any smaller and you will not notice the difference between it, or a 1080 monitor.
---

It's either 4k or else stick with my 2k monitor
I could just get a 2080 gpu for 60fps for 2k. And then a better cpu and 32gb ram and a capture card and be the best YouTube ever

Or spend the 3k on 2 2080 tis

Lolno you don't, and the difference between 1080p and 4k is mind blowing. Granted I'm running a 1080 gpu in my rig, but a 960 could handle 80% of things at 3k when I had it. Jumped on that 1080 at release though.

However you're not incorrect. Pmuch 28" min. I bought a Samsung UE490 on a black friday special a couple years back. Really good monitor.
---

An average 4k screen is apparently 500

yeah we'll be sticking with 2k and a single 2080

008Zulu posted...

Most people don't even need them, but get them anyway because "newest tech". For it to be worth it, it would have to be a monitor somewhere in the 28" or larger category. Any smaller and you will not notice the difference between it, or a 1080 monitor.

That's not true at all. The difference between 1080 and 1440 is obvious and 4K is even more obvious. I say this owning 27" 1440, 4K, and 5K monitors.
---

Master_Bass posted...

That's not true at all.

What's the pixel pitch and viewing distance on those?
---