Instructions unclear, I'm now running a 4k 240Hz OLED with a 1050.

HU : "Don't upgrade your GPU, upgrade your monitor instead" Me suffering with 1050ti : "Thanks for the tips tim ❤"

Moving from 60hz to 144hz is a revelation even on the desktop. Daily computing tasks feel so much more responsive and natural.

This is the angriest I've ever seen Tim.

One important thing to note is how many of those 1080p gamers are on a laptop? That would explain a lot about the statistics.

The ultimate monitor sales pitch.

I feel like the HDR section needs a bit more emphasis on "real" HDR hardware, as opposed to the shit-tier edge-lit "HDR" that nearly every monitor seems to advertise these days, but literally looks worse than just turning it off.

Bold of you assume I don’t play on a 4K TV. I refuse to pay monitor prices.

Buy a monitor that'll last you the next decade, then upgrade GPU a couple times throughout at most.

I can't understand why people don't realise this simple concept; it's the same as buying expensive DAC's transports and power amps, but keeping the same tiny bookshelf speakers that you got second-hand in exchange for a pair of platforms in the 1970's.

Ha! Joke's on you. I upgraded my GPU, CPU *and* my monitor last year... though that did require me to downgrade my bank account...

Don't upgrade your GPU because your GTX 1050Ti can surely work well with a 1440p 144hz monitor 🤦

I figured this little fact out after I built my first gaming computer. Like many folks, I put all my money into the computer and used a 1080p 60hz TV as my monitor(I know, I know). I thought it would suffice until I could pick up a cheap monitor, which unfortunately was a cheapo 1080p 60hz as well. I honestly had no idea I was killing my experience because no one ever told me what Tim's saying here, the monitor is so important. When I got a "real" gaming monitor, one with 1440p at 165hz, my gaming experience really went full tilt. I thought it was my computer that needed upgrading, it was just the monitor! I wish I knew this from the out and I tell anyone new to this to make at least a high refresh rate monitor a must have item when setting up their gaming rig, it's necessary for best performance. Thank you Tim for highlighting this fact, it's so important!

perfect timing but I have started to avoid consumerism

I upgraded my monitor to 1440p high refresh, but then immediately realized I needed to upgrade my RX 580 to a 7900 xt to receive the full benefit of the monitor upgrade

I was given some advice years ago. Build a PC around your monitor resolution and refresh rate target. 1080P 60hz Monitor requires a lot cheaper GPU/system build than a 1440P 165hz Monitor.

Today's sponsor spot Monitors Unboxed and their new line of Tim monitor videos.

Upgraded to a 1440/144hz VA monitor back in 2018 from a 1080p/24inch/60fps panel, and finally in 2022 to a 34inch 21:9 HDR OLED monitor. Best upgrade of my life.

For me the monitor prices are screwed up too. The AOC Q27G33XMN cost here in Sweden 405 dollars.....😪 It makes it so much harder to justify it..

Tim argues that people should be upgrading to away from 1080p monitors because upscaling techniques work better at higher resolutions. He seems to be forgetting that people who use upscaling at 1080p might have certain budgetary constraints and GPUs that, upscaling or not, struggle to perform at FullHD, let alone a resolution with nearly double the pixel count.

I already did I, didn't push my gpu beyond 4070 and went with new OLED 1440p 240hz screen. Amazing for fps games and movies

Where I live, I'd have to sell my liver in order to afford a new monitor so this doesn't apply...

You lost me at "only $800". Am I the only one hit by the recession?

Thank GOD someone else is saying it. Can’t count how many times I’ve seen someone budget 2k+ for a PC and then wants a 200 monitor.

I'm not upgrading my 1080p 60Hz monitor any time soon, only if it breaks. Why? Because I don't know what is to game at 1440p at high refresh rate, and I'm happy with it. I suspect once I've seen what, then I'll have to spend on a new monitor and a new GPU to get the most of it. So I prefer to live in ignorance and be happy gaming at 1080p at 60Hz 😂😂 (I don't do multiplayer)

I have to say moving to a variable refresh rate monitor blew my mind

What a nonsense. The whole market is a nightmare, especially since Corona. Just because monitors improved and got cheaper in comparison to products that are overpriced by up to 500 %, it doesn't mean they're worth the money either. But sure, get your QD OLED DP 1.2 "true purple experience" today, when playing in 240 HZ later. Apples and eggs, my dear.

Tim’s example at 4:35 of having a 1080p 60 Hz monitor that is upgraded to 1440p 144 Hz is spot on. I jumped from 1080p 60 Hz to 4K 144 Hz and find it a wonderful improvement. I also had the pleasure of gifting that 27” 1080p to someone who was using a 17” 720p.

Went from 1440p 165hz VA to 4k OLED 120hz (LG TV) last year. Complete game changer. And my previous screen wasn't even bad. So yeah, until you're in a horrible financial situation, you really shouldn't be using a cheap, old 1080p 60hz LCD screen

Bought a 4k 43" 144hz qled super thin TV, mounted in the wall and now is the perfect monitor.

It's a common mistake to undervalue the hardware you see, hear, and touch (monitor, keyboard, mouse, and speakers) in favour of making the hardware in your PC case the best it can be. The hardware you directly interact with does a lot to determine the quality of your experience when using a PC.

There's one key benefit of a new monitor that you missed: you don't have to get rid of the old monitor and having two monitors on your PC can be incredibly useful - gaming on one monitor and chat on the other, for example. BTW your high-end gaming setup took me back: I did have a RTX 2080 Ti, but I paired it with an Acer Nitro 4k XV273K monitor BTW2 With regard to OLEDs I think a lot of people are waiting on the results of your burn-in test.

just upgraded from 144hz TN to 240hz IPS and its a big upgrade

Then people buy that higher resolution screen and find out they need a much better gpu to run it properly.. it all depends on your personal setup. Only grab a monitor with a higher resolution if your gpu can handle pushing more pixels.

Instructions unclear, spent $3k on video hardware, playing Elden Ring locked at 60.

Smart thinking, never thought about it, mostly we are all too busy to think about cpu & gpu upgrades when our monitor still stuck at 60hz

I used to be on a 6650 XT with a decent-ish $150 1080p 144hz display. I upgraded almost simultaneously to a 4070 and a much nicer 1440p 165hz HDR monitor. Guess what? The monitor was definitely a much more noticeable upgrade.

Monitor unboxed propaganda

Another bottleneck is YOU! I mean your eyes, get your eyes checked if the game doesn't look good with a high end monitor & rig.

This doesn't make that much sense. Going to a higher resolution and/or higher refresh rate means you usually end up needing a better GPU. You then throw the bottleneck back to the GPU and end up upgrading it anyway. Apart from HDR, the only other target audience here would be people with powerful/overkill GPUs running at 1080p 60hz, which is rarely the case.

"You can buy a highend oled that will last you many generations of hardware" - yeah, how about no. There is a reason why no one offers a burnin warranty longer than 3 years, with no options of paying to extend it either... oled is a shortterm purchase, and that's just a fact. For that reason i and many others are still waiting for new tech to emerge without that CONSIDERABLE downside. And if you have a highend gaming monitor from 5 years ago, stuff doesn't really look that much better today. Don't even get me started on hdr barely working in most pc games. In 9 times out of 10 people will gain more from a more powerful pc than a new monitor...

Getting a good headset/speakers is another thing to look to upgrade for a better all round experience. Wait for 5000 series for gpu price drops and performance upgrades.

I got a 1440p 75hz monitor deliberately to avoid the trap of having to buy a high end GPU to run games at 120+ fps if I had a 1440p 120-144Hz monitor.

If you play competitive fps, you will get the fast graphics card, the fast refresh rate monitor but will play at 1080p (I’m sure Esports gamers aren’t absolutely wrong), set everything to the lowest possible there is no compromise at being able to see what is meant to be seeing, so they can play it at the highest and stable framerate possible with a monitor that makes use of as much as the system, through the gpu delivers so they have, not exclusively, the lowest possible input lag times

My problem with OLED at the moment is burn in I can't afford to pay that much for a monitor and then not be able to use it for a long time the way I want it and maybe have to pay again for a new monitor a few years later, because there are icons that just stay. I know it is less at this point, but still too much and too expensive for me

bought an alienware aw3423dwf for 650 euros, refurbished, around 1 month ago, it's mindblowing even upgrading from a really good 1440p 180hz IPS monitor (lg 27gp850)

Kind of naive of Tim to think 1080p 60hz is the bottleneck of a budget gamers setup, when lots of "budget gamers" aren't even getting that.

I had the monitor epiphany back in 2008, when my employment resulted in me using a gorgeous-looking 32 inch Dell IPS screen at work. I loved it so much, I bought one for my gaming PC. And instantly my gaming experience was enhanced like I never believed possible. I've been on 4K since 2018. But because I'm only playing "slow" games (like Civ and Anno) I opt for enhanced appearance at high resolution, and don't worry about going faster than 30fps, preferring to save on the electricity bill instead of running higher fps, even though my system is capable of up to 144hz.

Please do series of productivity setups. Would help as not everyone plays games for majority of their time. Thanks

2:50 well yes Upscaling does work better if the monitor resolution is high. But guess what you don't need at 1080p? Upscaling.

3:13 I felt attacked personally, then I remember that I was one of these people before I upgraded to a 165 Hz monitor.

A good monitor really goes a long way and is worth spending up for, but I can empathize with people who are always on the fence about it. Display technology is rapidly evolving and I think it's a bit intimidating watching reviews and hearing things like, "oh this monitor excels at this but leaves a lot to be desired in that" or "new panels coming out next year won't have this problem" and just sort of puts prospective buyers in this never ending/never perfect mindset.

I did just this almost 3 years ago during Covid. Worst mistake ever. Bought a LG 4K monitor to replace my dell ultrasharp 1440p monitor and it immediately rendered my evga gtx1080 useless. Ended up having to overspend again to buy a GPU, during covid again, just to play some current games at 4K. Of course, it was my own fault for not doing proper research at what was needed to run 4K. The $1K 3080 is a daily reminder to not make that mistake again.

i upgrade my monitor from 1080p to 1440p , now i cant get 60 fps on 1440p

Thanks for this rundown on the state of monitors. I check up on it every few years to decide if it's time to make a move from what I have, and it probably is now. I often find myself wanting a higher refresh so I can read moving text easier in games without the smear-stutter effect it gets, and wishing for better black levels in dark scenes. What I have can't do that. They can't handle forced refresh hacks or improve the picture with any further calibration. The only thing holding me back is my strong preference for 16:10 (3:2 is acceptable), but that ratio died on desktop monitor in the late 2000's in favor of 16:9. My L220x (2007) is all but retired, and my U2412M (2012) is long in the tooth. Although I've seen a few 16:10/3:2 monitors come out, it's still a unicorn with modern features and it's time to move on and find my next 5~10 year monitor in 16:9. For anyone wondering why some people like 16:10 when you can just get more vertical pixels with 1440p and up, for me it's a matter of padding for UI/toolbars/etc.. I generally want to have a full 16:9 frame visible with space for toolbars above/below when I'm doing any kind of work or light media consumption. 16:10 provides pretty much exactly the extra space needed for that. It's also nice on games that don't punish your horizontal FOV when you have extra vertical space. I watch a lot of movies in 2.35:1 so I'm already used to letterboxing above and below when watching 16:10 in fullscreen.

I hope prices will be good at the end of year, I'm moving to a different country and will finally update my setup!

"Many people are using outdated gaming Monitors". Me, with a 200€ IPS lenovo without any adaptive sync that I got some 6 years ago:"Yeah haha, "gaming" monitors haha"

Hell yeah, an HD4850 is gonna last forever!!

we constantly see those benchmarks showing low performance in 4k and 1440p. this definitely discourages us from upgrading to high resolution monitors, and by extension, it discourages monitor upgrades overall

BRILLIANT!!! ❤🧡💚 Thank's a lot for these deep insights about how to upgrade efficiently. You guys will always be on of my top tier list of tech-tubers. Wish you all the best, Alex from Germany.

4 years ago I went from a 24 inch 1080p 60hz monitor to a 38 inch 3840x1600 120hz one... MASSIVE upgrade

The video is well intentioned and I get was he's trying to say - don't neglect including your monitor in your upgrade cycle. But I think Tim got tunnel vision with what he's trying to say. Suggesting a RTX2060S, an old 8GB card, paired with a 4K monitor (the M27U)? See at 12:28 Take a step back and think about that. He'd have us look at a heavily upscaled (prob. with frame gen), clear-as-mud image (albeit on a nice monitor)? Hard no for me.

I have low dpi, high dpi, large screens, and small screens. Everything from 4K to CRTs, tablets, etc. Almost always still gaming at 1080p. Sadly, I've found older 1080p 60 Hz, which were expensive, are still better long term than current displays. Long term testing sites show all manner of defects, and degradation of newer panel tech, even expensive monitors / TVs. Someone recommend a 50" or larger panel that has long term durability, then I'll be interested.

So should you get a 1080p with high refresh or a 1440p at 75hz? Because I'm gonna be on an extremely limited budget (sub $200) when I upgrade my current 1080p 75hz monitor and looking at the prices you can have either high refresh 1080p or 1440p 75hz but NOT both. I mainly play a few competitive games like War Thunder and TF2 along with some older titles like the Middle Earth series and my setup is a 5700x with 64GB of RAM and a 6650XT.

Best advice ever, biggest upgrade i ever experienced.

I listened to you & now Helldivers 2 plays at 38fps when it rains 😢 but I have gsync & 1440p 165Hz so yay me?

I've been preaching this for years to my friends, esp when they wanted to build or upgrade their systems! Best I could do before was to explain, and ask them to come over to my house to see for themselves... So this is a godsend!

I absolutely love my $500 Q7 model of the TCL 55 inch 120 Hz 4K TV. It does have some issues with ghosting at lower frame rate but you can just run it at 60 FPS or use FSR 3.1 and frame generation to get 120 FPS and it works absolutely perfectly fine and is so immersive. Nothing compares to 55 inch TV for gaming except other sizes which cost thousands of dollars

I was running a 3070ti and a 60hz 1080p monitor from 2012 till recently. When I upgraded to a 1440p 165 hz monitor, first of all I didn't see any improvement in smoothenes, not the mouse or scrolling, not in games, no advantage in esports shooters. Only disadvantages. The first one is that every netflix or prime series looks now laggy as hell. While you see minor sharpness increase due to resolution I find it negligible, but it takes 2x the power and halves my fps. I've been playing max raytracing everywhere in 1080p and now even couldn't turn it on. So I had to upgrade GPU aswell to 4070 ti super to even play games. People with 60 series cards or older 70 series cards should not even think about going 1440p. Go 1080p 165 hz at best if you see the difference with higher refreshrate. For me there is only few 1440p cards on the market. Being 3090/ti, 4070 ti super (non ti and non super mainly being 1080p cards for newer games, because you need at least dlss balanced or peformance to reach playable fps in CP2077 or Alan Wake 2 with everything maxed out in 1440p), and the 4080/super, the only ture 4k card is the 4090. So 4k is off the table anyways for everyone who doesn't have 4k€ lying around for a rig + monitor. 1440p is just for very high midrange cards where you need to invest at least 1,5k with monitor and gpu to become a playable experience. Every one else is stuck to 1080p. The only exception to this is if you're only playing 6 year old games. Then you can go 1440p even on older cards, but theres only few pople solely sticking to old games. AMD cards are off the table due to bad RT performance (7900 xt has literally half of the FPS in Alan Wake or CP 2077 what even a 4070ti super can offer). FSR is still far worse than DLSS even with FSR 3.1. Intel has nothing powerfull enough yet. I barely get 60 fps with DLSS quality in CP2077 with drops to 50 on my 4070ti super in 1440p, with FG I get 90-100. there is no way ppl with weaker cards even the 3090/ti are having really good esperiences in 1440p besides old/indie games.

Thanks, I'm now playing my games at 720p on my 4K monitor

Cries in 4 screen 1080p 75Hz.

I hadn't considered monitors. I see better at 1080p with a 24" display but if I can go 1440p with crisp text with not too high fractional scaling I'll look into it. Really informative video. Thanks! 😊

it make sense if you already have a perfectly good pc to run at those resolution and fps, but if not, i'd just buy the pc parts first

100% right, but whenever I upgrade my GPU i sell my old one and buy used so i get a pretty good deal. Last time i traded my 3060 for a 6700 for an extra $35 I'm not comfortable buying a used monitor and they don't hold their value as much as GPUs these days. I want to get a 1440p monitor but as a college student I don't have a lot to spare. If like me you are stuck with a 1080p monitor, running games at higher resolutions with any type of temporal anti-aliasing improves sharpness a lot and reduces the blurry nature of TAA/DLSS/FSR/XESS Currently playing Elden ring at 1700p and it makes a huge difference particularly in foliage

this is one of the best tech videos in this year so far. thx for sharing this. its awesome!

Great stuff! I've always felt that monitor quality is overlooked in PC building discussions. Cheers

Thought this would be the FSR 3.1 video. But I agree, FSR 1.0 Ultra performance on my S90C OLED >>> DLSS 3.7 Quality on my 27' 72hz FHD VA at work :)

I have many problems regarding your statements about 1080p monitors and then recommending monitors with higher resolutions: 1) Money and electricity consumption are very important. You cant just blindly waste money on a product that increases your electricity bills.That is a very important concern for consumers. 2) Despite the many benefits 1440p and 4k monitors bring, those two are very expensive compared to 1080p monitors. Their prices, especially 4k monitors, are close or the same as mid- or high-tier GPUs depending on the models. 3) Higher resolutions and high refresh rates means wasting more electricity and taxing your own hardware. That means, the consumer is maybe then forced to upgrade the system or in the worst-case scenario, build a new one further wasting money. It depends on the situation. 4) Energy labels and power efficiency: This goes hand in hand with 1). Bigger sized monitors, higher resolutions and refresh rates means the manufacturer didn't seem to bother considering alternatives to reduce power consumption. This increases not only electricity bills but the overall product is more expensive the higher the specs go. Manufacturers, who aren't willing to improve the power consumption by researching technologies and developing new methods to reduce power consumption aren't worth my money. That's why energy labels are there for and people can find out through more researches if the manufacturer was lying about the claims and the efficiency category the manufacturer claimed how good the product is in terms of energy consumption. 5) "Graphics visuals look better on higher resolutions". Please give certain hardware examples as to why that's the case. Me being a developer, it doesn't make sense to make use of certain visual features, when it's only accessible for consumers with expensive monitors. a) It's unfair for other consumers b) you are putting a bit more pressure on the hardware, so what's the point here? Game optimization is important. c) Sure, it is beneficial for video and photo editing as well as production but for average gamers, where is the point? It's a question of taste. 6) Consumers don't always play modern Triple A games. They play also old Triple A games, indie games and retro games. Not all of those games are optimized going above their designed FPS. Many games have either a 30 or 60FPS lock for various reasons. It's because their game engines were designed that way for various different reasons. There are games with mods that disable the FPS locks and can run fine, were other games can't simple handle higher refresh rates because, again, the engines weren't designed that way. 7) Artifacts: Tim, do you know basics of game engines? Artifacts can appear on any resolution. Sure, higher resolutions can reduce more artifacts but the problem with artifacts on 1080p monitors aren't a significant problem to point where it massively bothers the player. If that's the case, then the game was poorly optimized. The problems with visual artifacts also stems from engines how they deal with visuals. If players see small amounts of artifacts and find this very annoying, then it's subjective. 8) "Games are easier to play on higher refresh rates": I agree that games running on higher refresh rates look more fluid and lively but your point, although true, can be misleading. People can play games at 60Hz (lower or higher) perfectly fine and can have a great experience. Your point trying to justify purchasing monitors with higher specs wont sit well with other people since it's just laughable and doesn't make much sense. Average gamers aren't hardcore speed-runners or competitive players who focus on frame exploitation and they will definitely find monitors with higher refresh rates more beneficial. 9) No, only because a certain high-end monitor is cheap in your region, doesn't mean it's cheap in the other nation. There are nations where high-end monitors are much more expensive than you have suggested otherwise. 10) I don't deny the many benefits monitors with higher specs (1440p or 4k monitors with higher refresh rates) bring. However, there are 1080p monitors with higher refresh rates, too. Players should lower their expectations, what is realistic for them to archive and demands because this is a typical topic for graphic w* loosing their minds willing to waste hundreds and why console players find it amusing those types of gamers waste their money. 1080p monitors aren't terrible and still to this day fulfill the demands of many people. The problems you have presented are largely subjective and motivate people, in certain scenarios, to waste their money, when they don't need to. The utility of higher resolution monitors is subjective and varies depending on individual needs and preferences. For many users, especially those not focused on high-end gaming or professional visual work, 1080p monitors remain adequate and cost-effective. So how come you have not considered this? Especially, when you looked at the survey from Steam. Tim, please evaluate your own script before presenting your own points. In case someone fully or you, Tim, disagrees to what I said, you are proving my point, especially 1), 9) and 10).

An interesting perspective, well articulated. Thank you. I watch my friend game on his PS5 on an enormous 4K TV, and it's impressive as hell.

still loving my 24G2 from 4-5 years ago thanks to your recommendations. the longevity is fantastic, still great performance for what it is.

Unfortunately I am stuck on a 60 hz display because there are no modern gaming displays with a 16:10 aspect ratio. 16:9 just isn't suitable for productivity. If any of the big players would make a 2400p high end gaming monitor they would likely make a killing.

🔥Bro, you HAVE to talk about gaming TVs at some point. You can't continue avoiding this since many PC/console users prefer that experience. Other than that, excellent video!👍🏻

For certain subset of games we are back to 1080p/60Hz targets with minspec around RX6800, the vast majority of Steam users do not have anything close to this. Higher fidelity screen is definitelly a luxury rather than the need for most people, but for sure i would love to grab 32" 4K240Hz monitor that my 6900XT won't be able to drive in games I play and work on without upscalers anyway.

Couldn't agree more, as absolutely anything you do with the computer involves the screen, be it games, films, emails, work or whatever. Currently running a non-curved 240Hz IPS 32", which although is a very good experience, I think the next upgrade will certainly be a 32" or larger full HDR panel. I'm still not 100% sure I am sold on OLED as the risk of burn-in concerns me.

This video sounds so incredibly out of touch 😅

You only think this way 'cause for you, buying a new GPU is never gonna be a problem no matter how overpriced they are. Many people are still stuck with 3-4 generations old GPUs, what do those people benefit from getting a new monitor? It may make the games and stuff they're currently doing look better but at what cost? You could literally get a budget GPU at that cost, and as for the current state of GPUs pricing, I think those people will rather just wait out for the next generation of GPUs/CPUs or whatever their bottleneck is, and buy that. Someone who is on a 1060, unless they win a lottery or giveway or something and get something like a 4070 Ti Super, will not benefit much from getting a new monitor. They will benefit by getting a new GPU though because at least they'll be able to play the games they want right now even if the visuals are reduced/bottlenecked by the poor monitor panel.

I agree, but unfortunately, I'm already where I want to be monitor-wise. 4K 144Hz is good enough for me. But my 3080 10G is crying. Having to turn down the graphics settings mean I'm not getting the most out of my monitor. I'm hoping the 5080 will be powerful enough and more importantly, reasonably-priced enough. I won't pay the price for a 4090 and worry about it burning down my house.

Undoubtedly, the best upgrade to my PC this year was purchasing a new monitor, and then another because the first one was such a massive improvement that it convinced me to get 32:9 display. Worth it!

I spent my entire paycheck on one of those new 32" QDOLEDs to experience HDR gaming for the first time (upgrading from a 32" TN) and HDR is hardly a game changer. Everything looks different but it's hard to call it better. Absolutely not worth the price premium

While I can agree to some degree, I think it's absurd that modern games require essentially 4k>=120hz just to minimize the blur, smearing and sizziling introduced by TAA/DLSS/FSR and rendering pipelines that neccessitate temporal upscaling (low res particles, nanite etc). Also what's really the point of having a high refresh monitor if I only have the hardware to run it at 60hz anyway? I mean sure if I drop below that the monitor can render each frame twice and maintain freesync but that's about it. Motion clarity won't be affected in any way since most modern games essential simulate a 30+ year old LCD with their dogshit TAA and even if you replace that with DLSS that might do a slightly better there's still going to be worse motion clarity compared to a non-TAA game on a 20 year old LCD.

I change my monitor setup last year. I run an old and weird 25' 1080p TN LG TV-monitor hybrid from around 2011. Then I bought 20' 1600x1200 IPS Dell 2007FPb from 2008 for retro stuff, and it blew my mind, despite being two years older it have a superior color quality. A half year later I exchanged that LG for 32' 4k VA Gigabyte M32UC and the jump in visual quality is insane. I don't plan to upgrade in the nearest few years, certainly not for OLED due to still existing burn-in issues.

Awesome video Tim. Definitely convinced me to look for a monitor upgrade instead of trying to rationalize a gpu upgrade over my rx 6800

you'll have to take my 1080p monitor from my cold dead hands, I WANT MY FRAMES

The problem is you'll NEED a better GPU to run a higher resolution or refresh rate monitor so that the upgrade is worthwhile. Sticking with a 1080p 144Hz display is the best thing I have done. I even have a newer 1440p display I got at a huge discount with existing, about to expire, Lenovo credit and I'm not going to set it up until I upgrade my aging i7-8700 based CPU and 3060Ti.

Biggest shock from going from 1440p to 4k was how much better dlss works at this resolution.

You guys do a great job of coming at things from an interesting, other angle

I'll upgrade my monitor when OLED prices down to about $200.

With all due respect this is BS. What a disappointing video filled with misinformation

This video is super condensed, great information

This is exactly what I'm talking about. Currently using the RX590, amazing card for 1080p, it can run everything I've thrown at it at atleast 1080p. I've wanted to go to 1440p for a while now, and with FSR 3.0 just dropping I believe that shouldn't be a problem.