Why are you still playing on 1080p

I just play everything at 4k downsampled to 1080p and it looks the same

I do though.
>imagine being poor

>crazy expensive
>$350 gpu is crazy expensive

Are you just poor? or a frugal fag? What do you need to save $350 on then?

how come im able to tell the difference on my 1080p

4k is a meme
Anything above 30 fps is a meme
Dolby Atmos is a meme
Dolby vision is a meme
HDR is a meme

>2000€ + tip + tax
>dirt cheap

4k is just a meme. While it's very achievable, people always neglect to mention you're not going to get a solid 60 frames with it unless you're playing ancient shit, completely defeating the purpose.

because i don't give two shits about the difference between these two pictures? it is not worth paying any money for, the left is enough for me. i want good games, i don't need marginally sharper fucking lily pads or trees, it doesn't help immersion - people were immersed in games that were fucking pixel blobs 35 years ago, immersion is not tied to graphics being a little better.

>$350 gpu
Barely chugs 60 fps in current games and will drop to 30 in future ones. People sit on 1080p and 1440p because they don't want to play at console-tier framerate.

4k is amazing and it's crazy how good games look.

Attached: R4 - Ridge Racer Type 4 (Japan, Asia)-220827-151333.jpg (2637x2160, 1.27M)

>uses a 27 inch or smaller monitor so 1440 is acceptable
Found the poor

Stop being poor.
a $350 AMD GPU can do newer games at 4k 60fps.

Wrong. Go be wrong elsewhere. Your ignorance is annoying those less retarded than you. Be a good kid and go back to low res gaming.

Define "newer", because you're not doing that in anything even remotely demanding.

because 4k gives my system 40fps

>windows scaling is shit

Based DSR CHAD. Though in most cases, DLDSR 1620p is better than DSR 4k. Try it out.

Wrong

>AYYmd
>calling other people poor
lul, lmao even

If you want higher ppi you can just buy this bad boy and use the same resolution and gpu
rog.asus.com/monitors/below-23-inches/rog-strix-xg16ahp-w-model/

I upgraded 1440p this year, will be a long while until I go to 4k

>higher ppi
Just buy a phone, zoomer. Those have great ppi.

I am looking at this on a 55" 4K monitor and they look identical.

3080ti and 5800x, prefer 1440p as I can get 90fps easy with everything on ultra in newer games

>6950 XT competes the 3080

But muh hecking Gay tracing and GayLLS

>chad
3840x2160
3440x1440
>poorfag cope
2560x1440
>luddite
1920x1080

because 165hz framerate

arr rook same
120fps with a 120hz monitor is amazing and it's hard to go back, but you likely can't afford it by the sound of your post

If you don't care about ppi then the only reason to buy a new display is if you fall for le huge display meme (which is a sign of being a zoom zoom btw, monitors of the past were much smaller)

a 6700xt can do most new games besides demanding unoptimized shit like Cyberpunk, RDR2 or the new assasins creed games at native 4k 60 fps.

Yeah sure, my 3080 manages 60-70 in most modern games @4k. I use a 3k monitor as my primary and a 4k one for movies and general desktop use, I get almost double the framerates on that over 4k with an almost unnoticable difference to clarity unless I put my eyeball into contact with the panel . 4k is good for everything other than gaming.

Only zoomers walk away from the PPI handed to us by god, which is 96. 96 shall be the number of your PPI, no more, no less.

Monitors were smaller because the max resolution was smaller. Bigger resolution means a bigger fucking monitor.

jpg destroys all the detail bro

Attached: duckstation-qt-x64-ReleaseLTCG 2022-09-14 13-33-26.png (2560x1440, 3.53M)

>plays on a 20 inch monitor
>yeah dude 4k is a meme

Nigga tell me 4k is a meme after you play on a 80 nch TV with HDR

You do realize even a 32 in 4K display has a ppi of close to 140, right?

1440p, ultra settings, high refresh rate gsync compatible/freesync monitor is where it's at.
DLSS and FidelityFX are making 4K much more viable though

Yes? 43" is the minimum 4k size, gives you a PPI of 102.

At such a size you need to increase viewing distance though

Can you define dirt cheap, OP? I paid roughly £800 recently for a new PC, sans monitor and peripherals. I don't think it's 4k-capable, though.

>secondhand 1080ti finally broke down on me after 4 years

Guess it’s time for an upgrade. How good is the cooling in a 3080? Should I invest in a cooler if I live in Florida?

Would a 1080 27" 144hz oled screen be a good monitor or should i go for 1440?

I mostly play pirated hgames.

Get 1440p
1080p looks awful at 27”.

1080p starts looking like shite above 24 in
imo absolute minimum ppi for a passable (not great, passable) picture on a monitor is ~85

No, you don't. The reason for god's commandment is to give you an acceptable PPD of around 60 at a standard desktop distance of 2-3 feet. Sure enough, 43" 4k meets that requirement at 2.5 feet away.

The size of a screen has no relation to its viewing distance, at least when it concerns monitors built to CORRECT SPECIFICATION, and sub 8K resolution. Once you go over 8k, you're forced to either increase viewing distance or PPI, but we're nowhere near the stage of 80" monitors yet unless you're super rich, so it's a moot point.

I'd rather have games run well than look slightly clearer