Is it worth getting a 4k monitor if a lot of the stuff on your drives has a max resolution of 1080p/720p or less (not only games but video files like movies and tv shows etc)? Does playing 1080p (or less) games somehow look worse on a 4k monitor? I am seriously considering just sticking with regular 1080p monitor. Would like to hear from people with 4k monitors.

I am rocking a Dell P2715Q

I will give my 2cents on my upgrade from 1080p

DVDs look the same as my old dell 1080p yeah I know... but happy they don't look like shit

Some Blu-rays have less sharpness to them but this is almost unnoticeable, blame this on the 4k res being so big.

Images and text are frigging amazing way better then 1080p you cant see pixels and it's all smooth

Color is outstanding due to IPS and higher brightness

Gaming now... When playing games that only go to a specific resolution you will notice a soft image and it does get annoying if you are used to a tack sharp image. some games have it bad and a lot of old games like unreal tournament, deus ex, thief and so on can run 4k no problem.

at the end of the day it's only games with limited resolution you will noticed a soft image. if you don't care, the benefits are amazing for everything else. like text, image, video, color.

And you need a very powerful card to handle 4k gaming. I use a gtx 1080ti and even that is not enough to run some games at max 60fps. metro 2033 here runs at 44 fps dips at 4k with my setup and maybe 2 more generations of card we will see 4k be a norm for middle to high end cards.

I know for sure I will never go back after experiencing 4k.

Yeah that's what I was thinking too, I'm guessing though that if a game doesn't run well at 4k for you, you just switch to 1080p? I have personally been meaning to get a 1080ti for a while but the fuggin miners have ruined that for me.

I keep an old 17" 1024x768 monitor around in case I ever want to play truly ancient games that work best on old hardware. I have it set up as my secondary monitor, but I usually just leave it turned off.

I never drop the resolution cause you loose that tack sharpness and it feels like when you drop bellow 1080p like 900p you notice that soft image and it gets to me. So I just drop a setting or 2 and it runs fine.

But so far overwatch was running at 125 fps at 4k with the amd 1800x and 1080ti. and pretty much everything on GOG besides games like crysis and metro series run 100% perfect with no lag on 4k. so that I am happy about.

It's hard to tell you to get a 4k monitor. it's really something you have to just dip your feet into and test the waters you know?

I did it out of curiosity and it grew to me.

I am running an ultra wide curved beast which is incredibly good. Not sure I could go back to 1/4 resolution.
https://www.scan.co.uk/products/34-acer-predator-x34a-curved-nvidia-g-sync-ips-gaming-monitor-ips-60hz-100hz-oc-3440x1440-4ms-tilt-d?gclid=EAIaIQobChMIguWJpLai2QIVBLvtCh2IRg9bEAQYBCABEgIna_D_BwE
Running it with a 1080 nvidia and not had any issues yet, even on call of duty ww1 or ac: origins.

gaming wise - 4k doesn't matter, 1080p is fine but if you get a 50inch, then you're most likely going to get a 4k anyway.

movie wise - all this hdr 4k stuff sounds fancy and all and there is a difference. however they're slight changes. dvd to 1080p is significant but these newer toys need more features. you also have to consider the lack of 4k content especially in the uk.

Bullshit!*
There's no such thing as a general "4k gaming". Your "gaming" isn't my gaming, or someone else's gaming.
- Not everybody cares about 60 fps or more.
- Not everybody plays first person shooters, or even any online games in general.
- (most) (relatively) recent AAA games require a recent/expensive graphics card to play in 4K on maximum graphic settings.
But... not everybody plays those things. There are MANY 3D (and also 2D) games out there that can be played in 4K and don't require a high end PC and/or graphics card. There are so many of them that I won't even bother with examples.

Anyway, 2 years ago, I bought a new monitor. I decided to go for a 27" 2560x1440 instead of a 27" 4K. Why? Because with this I can play still play a lot of older games in native resolution (or the 4:3 variant). On a 27" 4K playing in native resolution, the interface elements and fonts would be too small in older games (because there wasn't any scaling back then).


*edit: I know, a bit of a strong word - but these days I read such generalised crap everywhere. Sometimes they're just speaking for themselves but are unable to write with any nuance, sometimes people just like parroting the things they read/hear.

Generally speaking, no, because: a) they cost top dollar and b) their refresh rates tend to suck (most of them are 60 Hz max) and c) most modern GPUs can't push most modern games beyond 60 FPS in 4K (but even if they could, the crappy 60 Hz refresh rate on most 4K monitors would prevent them from doing so anyway).

Mine is currently capped at 90, not saying it gets that high, but with the gsync I have not seen a single tear or slowdown as yet on any game. True it does cost more than most spend on a computer, but if you want the top then it costs. The 1080 ftw I have would really be a bit low end for the monitor however, so recommend that or above.
Just real estate on the screen however is amazing!

If you do any kind of productivity work, yes - gaming with a 1080Ti or better is just a bonus ;)
As for gaming specifically, an added bonus of a decent 4K display is that you can turn down/off AA settings - they compensate for jaggies due to lack of rendering resolution, of which you have plenty at 4K :)

The increase in real estate makes a huge difference (e.g. programming using an IDE, like Visual Studio), and the fonts look way better in 4K, so much easier on your eyes.
However, I am using a 32'' prosumer monitor (Asus PA329Q) and consider that a good compromise for size and resolution vs scaling (150% recommended at this size); smaller screens may have issues for you.
At this resolution it's also worth investing into a higher-end model, that supports features you find important, e.g. colour spaces supported, inputs, scaler quality, refresh range, freesync, gsync, variable refresh rate, HDMI standards (4K @ 60Hz requires HDMI 2.0 at 18Gbps) supported, HDCP version supported (HDCP 2.2 required for 4K video!), DP version, PIP etc.
For example I find displaying 50Hz pictures (for emulators supporting PAL systems) as well as colour space very important, and that limited my choices instantly to monitors recommended for photo/video production.
Then I wanted to watch 4K video from time to time, for that you need HDCP2.2 support - otherwise the video playback reverts to a lower resolution. That again limits your choices further, as many monitors do not support HDCP2.2 at all, therefore for example can't be used with FireTV or consoles for 4K video output.

You should make a list of exactly what you want from your monitor, and using that you can create a shortlist. Then if you have a chance try the selected monitors first in real life if not possible make sure the shop you buy from has a good return policy.
A monitor will likely stay with you for longer than any other part of your computing setup, so don't save money on it, unless you really have to.
Also check the monitor for screen defects once you installed it, use it for a few days for extended periods and re-check.

If you are using Windows, there is no hope of any kind of productivty unless you use Windows 10 - the last 2 updates finally support decent scaling etc., so you won't be looking at a blurry mess.

Your monitor will not display 4K @ 60Hz via HDMI (ie streaming devices, consoles, or even your PC, although for that use DP) unless you use high-speed HMDI cables, so make sure you have and use the necessary high-speed cable(s).
HDCP2.2 is also a requirement for this use.

Finally, if you care about that at all, at 4K you might as well get a HDR capable monitor, but it will take a year or two until decent models with the required brightness appear, rather than the simple 10bit 350 nit panels branded as HDR right now...

Never really gave a shit about HDR, my parents called me over to set up the LG wallpaper tv and the HDR on that was horrid. over saturated colors but it seems to be really big with console gaming and movies from what I see. Maybe in years to come it will be more color accurate? I hope it evolves into something amazing.

We'll need full colour volume support for that, ie colours not changing at different brightness levels.
However that will only come to professional monitors first, and high-end TVs. It's not that far off, but affordability will be an issue for a while...
We have decent HDR TVs at work, and they are already reasonable, but still far off of what they can be.

On a related note, does anyone here have a monitor with a refresh rate of 120-240? Is it really a huge difference from 60 frames?

I got a 4K monitor on my Alienware laptop and really regret it. It looks great, but most software isn't optimized for it and changing the resolution just messes everything up. What I mean by this is that most text is too small to read, buttons are too small to push on the UI, and sometimes the entire UI gets all mashed up and you can't see anything. King Arthur is a perfect example of this, there is just no fix and I can't play it because the UI is all messed up since the game can't handle the monitor resolution.