Minimum Recommended Size for a 4k monitor

[TyrianFC]

Currently using a 27" 1080 monitor and considering jumping to 4k for Pascal. Which begs the question, what sizes should I be considering? I'm conscious of the main points people will no doubt bring up:

1 - 4k will make everything tiny on a small/average sized monitor, my eyes will strain and push me to consider...
2 - Using DPI scaling, which Windows has but apparently doesnt work too well?

So could I get some feedback into what size 4k monitor people have - whether you feel its too small / just right - and what you would consider the 'minimum size' to make any 4k purchase worthwhile? Would getting a 27" or 28" 4k monitor, when coming off of a 27" 1080p, be a stupid decision?

I'm not going to be using it for hardcore Photoshop / CAD work or anything like that, just general browsing / gaming / vids etc. And I sit at a generic bedroom/office setup distance from it on my desk.

(My currently guess is that 32" will be the sweet spot minimum people will recommend?)

[analmoose]

I'd say at least 32", maybe even bigger depending on how close you sit. I have a 27 at 2160 or w/e and even that is almost too much

[Zogarth]

I would personally rather go for 1440P and 144hz if I was you. Higher fps and also an upgrade in resolution. But if you do want 4k, I would also say 32"+ most likely.

[DeltrusDisc]

Was thinking 32" in my head before I clicked on here.

Welp!

[caervek]

Currently using a 27" 1080 monitor and considering jumping to 4k for Pascal.

If you don't find 27" too big for 1080p then have you considered a 1440p with high refresh rate? That way you would get increased resolution and speed. As opposed to just getting higher res (which is seems you're not that bothered by anyway).

[Artorius]

40" is where 3840x2160 has the same pixel density as 2560x1440 at 27".

You can go for any size, really. Just turn on high-DPI scaling at Windows, it'll be okay for most things nowadays.

[Barnabas]

Currently using a 27" 1080 monitor and considering jumping to 4k for Pascal. Which begs the question, what sizes should I be considering? I'm conscious of the main points people will no doubt bring up:

1 - 4k will make everything tiny on a small/average sized monitor, my eyes will strain and push me to consider...
2 - Using DPI scaling, which Windows has but apparently doesnt work too well?

So could I get some feedback into what size 4k monitor people have - whether you feel its too small / just right - and what you would consider the 'minimum size' to make any 4k purchase worthwhile? Would getting a 27" or 28" 4k monitor, when coming off of a 27" 1080p, be a stupid decision?

I'm not going to be using it for hardcore Photoshop / CAD work or anything like that, just general browsing / gaming / vids etc. And I sit at a generic bedroom/office setup distance from it on my desk.

(My currently guess is that 32" will be the sweet spot minimum people will recommend?)

It all depends on distance.

[TyrianFC]

If you don't find 27" too big for 1080p then have you considered a 1440p with high refresh rate? That way you would get increased resolution and speed. As opposed to just getting higher res (which is seems you're not that bothered by anyway).

I don't understand why people have such an erection for 144Hz. Unless playing a niche shooter, isnt it just way overkill and unnecessary aside from +epeen value?

(No I haven't tried it myself, but seeing stuff at 60fps seems pretty darn smooth to me, makes me wonder why i'd need to increase it x2.5?)

[Turtlewithnoshell]

I don't understand why people have such an erection for 144Hz. Unless playing a niche shooter, isnt it just way overkill and unnecessary aside from +epeen value?

(No I haven't tried it myself, but seeing stuff at 60fps seems pretty darn smooth to me, makes me wonder why i'd need to increase it x2.5?)

It's honestly a whole new world lol. It's amazingly different and more smooth.

[TyrianFC]

It's honestly a whole new world lol. It's amazingly different and more smooth.

What do you value more then: Having 144hz at 1440, or 4k at 60?

[Turtlewithnoshell]

What do you value more then: Having 144hz at 1440, or 4k at 60?

144hz hands down. It's so smooth, everything looks better just because I'm seeing so much more.
From csgo to wow, hots, gta, diablo and pretty much every game 144hz makes it better.

[Lathais]

What do you value more then: Having 144hz at 1440, or 4k at 60?

I'd definitely go for 1440@144hz. Some games are capable of 60FPS at 4k with some setting turned down, but a lot of games aren't. 4k just is not really here yet, unless you are planning on running dual Vega 10/1080ti's when they come out. Even then though, performance will not be what it should in all games.

[Artorius]

It's honestly a whole new world lol. It's amazingly different and more smooth.

144hz hands down. It's so smooth, everything looks better just because I'm seeing so much more.
From csgo to wow, hots, gta, diablo and pretty much every game 144hz makes it better.

I'd love to know how exactly you're seeing "so much more" with a higher refresh rate when the picture is essentially the same.

[Turtlewithnoshell]

I'd love to know how exactly you're seeing "so much more" with a higher refresh rate when the picture is essentially the same.

You are seeing more frames. Since it refreshes more the picture appears more smooth. Yes the resolution is the same but you are seeing more frames.

[Artorius]

You are seeing more frames. Since it refreshes more the picture appears more smooth. Yes the resolution is the same but you are seeing more frames.

Ah okay, so seeing it smoother = seeing so much more. I got it.

[Turtlewithnoshell]

Ah okay, so seeing it smoother = seeing so much more. I got it.

Of course, you need a pc that runs at 144+ fps consistently. Which is a pretty demanding thing if you run at high settings.

[Eroginous]

Currently using a 27" 1080 monitor and considering jumping to 4k for Pascal. Which begs the question, what sizes should I be considering? I'm conscious of the main points people will no doubt bring up:

1 - 4k will make everything tiny on a small/average sized monitor, my eyes will strain and push me to consider...
2 - Using DPI scaling, which Windows has but apparently doesnt work too well?

So could I get some feedback into what size 4k monitor people have - whether you feel its too small / just right - and what you would consider the 'minimum size' to make any 4k purchase worthwhile? Would getting a 27" or 28" 4k monitor, when coming off of a 27" 1080p, be a stupid decision?

I'm not going to be using it for hardcore Photoshop / CAD work or anything like that, just general browsing / gaming / vids etc. And I sit at a generic bedroom/office setup distance from it on my desk.

(My currently guess is that 32" will be the sweet spot minimum people will recommend?)

The issue with 4k and Windows is that it doesn't scale well enough yet with 4k, so you have to buy a monitor that compensates for how small text and icons will be on a 4k monitor (25% of the size they are on a 1080p monitor). I'd probably avoid 4k for now, I don't think the benefits outweigh the costs and lack of widespread support. Additionally, newer Nvidia tech is great at scaling up your game resolution and using lower gfx settings while decreasing hardware impact from the game. Wow @ 1080p on Ultra looks the same as Wow @ 2715x1527 (max DSR for my monitor) with the slider on High. That's one of the benefits of higher resolution, you don't need so much post processing for the image to look good. So while a 4k monitor might make games unplayable ultra settings except on the highest end of hardware, it also allows you to turn those settings down for a quality gaming experience.

[MrHappy]

Currently using a 27" 1080 monitor and considering jumping to 4k for Pascal. Which begs the question, what sizes should I be considering? I'm conscious of the main points people will no doubt bring up:

1 - 4k will make everything tiny on a small/average sized monitor, my eyes will strain and push me to consider...
2 - Using DPI scaling, which Windows has but apparently doesnt work too well?

So could I get some feedback into what size 4k monitor people have - whether you feel its too small / just right - and what you would consider the 'minimum size' to make any 4k purchase worthwhile? Would getting a 27" or 28" 4k monitor, when coming off of a 27" 1080p, be a stupid decision?

I'm not going to be using it for hardcore Photoshop / CAD work or anything like that, just general browsing / gaming / vids etc. And I sit at a generic bedroom/office setup distance from it on my desk.

(My currently guess is that 32" will be the sweet spot minimum people will recommend?)

get 21:9 34inch 1440p and you'll forget that 4k existed

[caervek]

get 21:9 34inch 1440p and you'll forget that 4k existed

I agree with this guy, but a quick note as sizes between aspect ratios are confusing, a 34" 21:9 screen is the same height as a 27" 16:9 screen and 33% wider. If you get a 21:9 34" 1440p with high refresh it will urinate all over 4K.

[Wries]

I've only used 144hz for maybe an hour total, but wasn't wowed in the least. Maybe I'm just reaching some limit but for sure I could tell the difference, I just wasn't convinced that I needed it in my life. I get that we're all different, though. Also I simply don't play many shooters and don't see myself doing so, other than perhaps OW at a very casual level.

Used to have a 34" ultrawide at 3440x1440. That screen was awesome, really. Until I ended up breaking it. Now I'm on a 40 inch 4K screen. 2ish weeks so far. Here is a short impressions list:

Pros:
4k screens regular 16:9 aspect ratio is accepted in all games. Some silly game makers still refuse accepting 21:9 as they see it unfair from a competitive standpoint.
Should I want/need to, I can set a custom resolution in NVcpanel and play at a 21:9 resolution anyway. My screen-space would still be slightly bigger than a 21:9 34"

Cons:
Requires a hell of a lot of GPU power. My card isn't cutting it, of course. I'm ok with lowering settings but at the point where I have to lower texture resolution it's sort of countering the use of going 4k in the first place.
It's a bit too large, really. My head is bobbing up and down more than usual. I think in a way that 21:9 34" is the sweet spot on enveloping you in the experience. Not sure you need more.