So I recently got a 4K monitor and am pleased with it, getting around 30-45fps depending on area.
I’m beginning to think I should have gone for a 1440p monitor with a higher refresh rate at 144hz. Most people seem to say this is the best choice. Also this would be a better monitor for high frame rate games than the 4K which is running at 60hz. I don’t play other games much so would not benefit from 144hz in flight sim. The only only benefit to going to 1440p would be higher frame rates I presume.
Have I made the right choice with 4K or shall I change it for a 1440p monitor?
I’ve had a 4K 60Hz monitor for a couple of years now, and it’s awesome. I quite love it.
However, shortly after MSFS came out, I swapped another 1080p monitor I had for a 34", 100Hz Acer UWQHD at 3440x1440. In all honesty, it’s pretty much the best gaming hardware decision I’ve ever made. It gives me better performance than 4K, a wider field of view, and for all my games (except MSFS) where I can hit close to 100 fps on ultra settings, it looks absolutely stunning. And HDR is really nice as well. And the high frame rate is very perceivable in Windows as well. Particularly when scrolling web pages or long documents. Text is easily readable when scrolling.
For MSFS, there’s zero benefit to a high refresh rate, but all other aspects are applicable. A nice, wide field of view, better performance (only about 3/4 of the pixels of a 4K monitor), and just overall a better experience.
As a owner of both a 4K/120Hz and a 1440P/144Hz monitor, I tend to use my 1440P monitor more so than I do the 4K one. I mostly play online multiplayer games where I benefit more from higher frames than higher resolution. Also when comparing them side by side, there’s definitely a difference in visual presentation(4K vs 2K). However, the difference in 4K visuals isn’t enough to sway me from using my 1440P monitor because of the higher frames I can obtain when playing at 2K resolution.
When I fire up MSFS 2020 I definitely use my 4K monitor since I’m not as concerned about high frames, but visual presentation @ a playable frame rate. I use my 4K monitor when I play single player/campaign games, and my 2K monitor is used mostly for online competitive gaming. Now if I had to choose between the 2 as my sole monitor, I would with a second thought choose 1440P/144+ Hz which I consider a nice balance of both worlds.
I got my 1440 monitor back in September. I was getting 40-ish fps out of the sim at 4K all ultra at the time. The 1440p gained me about 5 fps overall. Not a huge gain by any means. If it was a regular 2560 x 1440 16:9 monitor, it would likely have been greater, but the ultra-wide 3440x1440 is pushing almost as many pixels as 4K. It wasn’t huge, but it was there.
Now with the current state of the sim, I would take those numbers with a grain of salt. Due to the current performance issues, I’m barely breaking 20 fps right now with a mix of medium / high settings, so I’m not really in a good position to speak…
After the last update on 4K @ ultra settings 100% scale I experience 45 FPS @ takeoff with a increase to a max sustained level of 60 FPS above 3500 FT. (Live Weather on/ Multiplayer off)
When I fly on my 1440P monitor @ ultra settings 100% scale I’m getting from take off to high altitude 75 - 90 FPS. (Live Weather on/ Multiplayer off)
Keep in mind that this is with clear weather in the A320 flying in my local area in and around DFW Texas, therefore, this represents my best case scenarios. If you include clouds, storms, flying low in and around NYC, performance is wildly variable and will most likely decrease performance significantly. However, I’m satisfied with the performance outside of the unpredictable stutters when the FPS tanks and then recovers. This a well documented issue with the Sim at this point and time.
Without very high end components, I find 4K unplayable and 2K decent enough for low-poly areas. You probably won’t be able to utilize any refresh rates higher than about 80 or 90, unless you have that high end gear like I mentioned beforehand. Personally, I like to play on a lower resolution monitor with high refresh rates and high LOD. But that’s just me.
I’s suggest you go for anything that has HDR, >60 Hz (If you play other fps games as well on the side), 1440p, and use the rest of the money on a good VR headset if that’s something you can use without getting motion sickness.
I’m still on the fence with this one. While my 4K monitor look stunning with FS2020, I’m still wondering whether I would get a smoother experience with a 1440p 144hz monitor.
Obviously I would get more FPS with a 1440p monitor but I’m already getting around 30-35 on 4K so would I really notice a difference if say it went up to 40-45.
Say my FPS was locked at 30 regardless of what monitor I’m using. Would it still appear smoother on a 144hz monitor than a 60hz one? Or would this not make any difference?
I came up to 1440 from 1080 and given the specs of my PC at the time, was a bit circumspect and didnt want to spend too much. In the end, I got
a Pixio px275h (I think) which is a bit of a mid fielder with a 95 hz refresh rate and to be honest, I love it. Think it is around 2540x1440. Seems to suit MSFS very well.
Do you mind me asking the model you’re using? I currently have an Asus VG289Q running in 4K @ 3840x2160, but was considering a monitor change to 2K @ 3440x1440.
Sorry to resurrect an old topic but maybe there is some more up to date advice now?
I’m considering buying a new monitor but looking at various options, the choices and differences are bewildering. Maybe I’m being too specific in my requirements but I can’t seem to find any model that ticks all of my boxes. Has anyone got some solid advice before I take the plunge please?
My requirements (I think!):
Ultrawide 34" (3440x1440 or 3840x1600)
Probably curved (it will be my only screen so I want to make it more like a wraparound cockpit)
Native G-Sync (I see some say G-Sync compatible but as I understand there is a difference with native in that there is a dedicated CPU on the monitor to handle the synchronisation, but it’s very unclear, on Amazon at least, which ones are the real deal? Also a lot of monitors that are otherwise close to my requirements only have AMD FreeSync Premium. I’m never gonna get an AMD graphics card!)
60hz would be enough (none my my games will need more than 60fps, but maybe 144hz etc is more future proof option)
Speakers built-in, fed by HDMI (don’t have to be amazing quality but not tinny)
Height adjustable
OLED / QOLED / IPS / VA (don’t really know what is best but they seem to affect price a lot)
HDR (good quality. I’ve read that some dim the screen in a very steppy way in MSFS, like the Benq)
Don’t really care about 1ms response. 4ms should be fine for MSFS?
Oh and not too expensive hahah (<£500)
This Philips looks pretty ideal. Decent speakers, good brand, not too expensive. But only Adaptive Synch (whatever that is)! Amazon.co.uk
I like the look of the Samsung Odyssey G5 Ultrawide curved, but that is only AMD FreeSync and no speakers.
On the flip side 4K is tempting but I don’t have much width to fit the screen into in my setup and I’d rather have the wraparound effect I think.
Currently running an old 32" 1080p TV and it’s looking pretty pixelated so want better but question if 34" ultrawide means I will have less height? This one is 39.5cm (15.5 inches) top to bottom and pretty nice size wise I guess!
Is there any particular reason why you want the monitor to have native G Sync? You don’t really need this for flight simulator as the frame rate won’t be exceeding the refresh rate of the monitor. It’s only useful if you’re running games with a very high fps.
I did quite a lot of extensive research into monitors a while ago and tested quite a lot. In the end I settled with the HUAWEI MateView GT 34-inch Sound Edition.
It’s a 34” Ultrawide curved VA monitor with 165 refresh rate. Even though you will never get near to 165fps in MSFS, a higher refresh rate monitor is smoother when moving your camera around in the sim.
The speakers are built into the monitor stand and sound quite good.
I found that a lot of choosing a monitor is down to personal preference and yes there are so many options out there.
You can’t go wrong with IPS or VA although the colours do pop more with IPS. IPS tends to be more expensive especially on Ultrawide monitors. For me I found that IPS gave me slight eye strain which is why I went with VA. It’s still very good and and is just more easy on the eyes I found.
The monitor I chose ticks all of your boxes apart from G Sync and HDR it’s around £450. HDR is good but you need to be spending well over £500 for a monitor with decent HDR. I wasn’t really too bothered about it but again this is down to personal preference.
It’s not really about exceeding the refresh rate of the monitor. It’s about matching the monitors refresh rate to what a game is currently outputting, thereby removing tearing.
Yea I thought this was the benefit with true native to work in harmony with an RTX card? Stops tearing effect.
About the Huawei I did look at that but some reviews said the sound was very tinny? Maybe different model. I think the one I looked at had a USB Soundbar. Will do some more research!
I’m happy with it although I do have additional speakers connected to my PC. I doubt you will find any monitor that has decent built in speakers, the same as TVs. This is why people usually have a sound bar to go with a TV.
As long as you connect it via Display Port you will get the maximum refresh rate.
I haven’t noticed any tearing effect with MSFS or any other game, the monitor handles it very well. It has AMD Freesync which is supposed to eliminate this. The monitors with built in G Sync are very expensive and I doubt you will find one sun £500.
