144hz vs 4k vs monitors vs TVs

I've been testing geforce now(great) and elite(already in bored cope mode after 5 days); and it's become apparent I need to upgrade my old shit monitor.

I went to walmart being a burger and was immediately confused.
>I want 1080p@120 (but you go to 144hz instead?)
>I also want 4K@60
it seems like it's either or. you either get a 4K@60 monitor or a 1080p@144 monitor, but is there anything capable of doing both? Is that prohibitabilty expensive?

I want to be able to flip between 1080@120 and 4K@60.

Also what's the difference between TVs and Monitors now? Consolefags are obviously playing on TVs with PS5's they can't be that shit at 4k; I assume none of them are doing 144hz though.

I'm looking for something in the ~$200 range; i'm not a graphics artist i don't need meme color accuracy i'm used to shit 10 year old monitors.

pls halp

Attached: shill_image.jpg (1024x573, 126.96K)

You need more than $200

tvs have more input lag

to mode flip between 4K@60 and 1080p@120?
i'm seeing both types of monitors/tv's in that price range now especially with memorial day weekend sales.
Walmart's own store brand ONN "Gaming" monitor does 144hz and it's like $150

test

Are you sure those are 4k? I haven't seen a monitor be 4k @144hz and also below $450.
Also I know you said you don't care about color accuracy, but that is only one of many things to look for in a good monitor. I would recommend you save to at least ~$450 and go for something better.

144hz makes way much more of a difference
4k is just simply a sharper image
going back to 60hz alone is aids as shit because it feels like my brain is lagging and the screen tears even from just scrolling in the browser

A lot of TVs claim to be 120hz or higher but its some "simulated" garbage where its basically interpolation or something stupid like that. Whenever a TV is touting some kind of special *companymarketinglingo*120 its absolute lies.

If you want 4k and 120 or higher you need to bring out the wallet if you want anything even halfway decent. Ill also mention that if you arent going for 20 inches or more anything above 1440p is a waste as well. I would say 4k is only really mandatory if you go above 30 inches or so as thats when the pixel density of 1440 starts to show.

there wasn't anything there at the physical store that did that; it was either/or, they sold 144hz monitors and then they sold a shitton of 4k TVs in the

You can't choose a monitor than can 4k60 and 'swap to' 1080@144, you'd need a 4k@144hz monitor and you're not getting that for 200$

Attached: jfs11cqxpyc81.jpg (300x168, 9.01K)

either i'm going blind in one eye or i'm getting severe eye strain from looking a monitor all my life which is also prompting this decision. i was wondering how big a difference 144hz really makes and this helps

Eye strain can be a lot of things. Sitting to close to it or it being too bright are the two biggest causes. Lower refresh can cause it but its far less likely than those. Set the monitor further back and reduce the brightness.

realizing that now thanks. I've just been not paying attention to display technology for a long time, don't watch TV and 1080p60 was always enough until now.

4K might help for productivity but I"m getting eye strain as it is; 4K on a 27" monitor only boosts productivity if I keep scaling and make everything tiny, no point if I'm just making everything giant at 4k now.

which is better for the eyes? 1080@144hz or 4K@60?

This is a video game board.
This thread isn't video games.

>A lot of TVs claim to be 120hz or higher but its some "simulated" garbage
i saw that too and i assumed it was an outright lie; because the TVs were also 50".
may not have been paying attention but i'm sure a 50" 4K@120hz tv costs more than $300. These cheap giant TVs are getting ridiculous; i assume they're bad but I have no idea.

let me just plop a 50" 4K TV on my desk and use that as a monitor. i assume if it was $300 something has to give and like another user said; input lag.

>This thread isn't video games.
the big prompter here is I want to test geforce now; and all i have is 1080p60.

geforce now will do 1080@120 or 4K@60

There's a shit ton of different things with monitors that contribute to eye strain, but a high refresh rate does help

LCD is just a garbage display tech and we're staring at literal fucking flatly lit panels of lights for hours a day and wondering why our eyes hurt for one

>LCD is just a garbage display tech

Its the best weve got right now so you take it or leave it. Its still miles ahead of CRT and projection no matter how much nostalgiafags cry and moan.

I'm also thinking now if nothing is capable of doing 4K@120.. but monitors can do 1080p@120.. and you can just get 4 monitors and 4 GPU's, clearly the answer is to just get 144hz monitors and if I need more screen real estate get more gpu's / monitors

Display port > HDMI

If you really need a replacement, then sure get something cheap. If you can wait, save money and go for a 27'' 1440p @ 144hz monitor of good quality. I wouldn't recommend getting a 4k monitor unless it's above 30'' and you have a good setup that actually can play shit at 4k.

The fuck would you need more than 1 GPU? Most decent GPU have multiple video outs. 4k/120 is literally everywhere as well as long as you arent looking at the absolute cheapest bargain bin bullshit.

>good setup that actually can play shit at 4k.
the bottleneck on geforce now is essentially they're 75mbps cap; you can have gigabit but they're only sending that much of a stream to you.

i'm sure 1080p@120 looks and handles better on a geforce now stream, especially with input lag there, than 4k@60 anyway.
a 4K 75mbps stream prob looks shittier than a 1080p@120 75mbps stream too, ignoring input lag; it's still h264

I'm talking about the fucking florescent lights used, almost any other display tech seems to be less straining

if monitors can't display 4K@120... how many 144hz or 240hz monitors can a single gpu support?
how many 4k monitors can a gpu support?

i'm assuming the reasoning behind no 4K@400fps support is gpu side / cable bandwidth side too

OLED is more straining for me. Worth it though.

Not a lot of lcd's actually use flourescent these days it's mostly led

But they definitely do crank the brightness to hide mid display quality