How long until 4k @ 144hz is an affordable standard?

[Deletedaccount1]

I was recently looking to upgrade my computer. My current build is a 780 with an i5-4670k that I built back in 2013, I currently use 2 60hz 1080p monitors.

I'm not looking for build advice since I've already figured out two potential builds but I now have to decide between playing at 1440p @ 144hz or 4k @ 60hz. Both have their downsides and benefits but most seem to agree that a higher frame rate comes out on top especially since I play more Dota 2 than anything. That said, I also don't want a 1440p monitor if 4k becomes widely available at higher frame rates in the coming years so I'd rather just wait.

Basically my question is how long would you expect until a 144hz 4k monitor is available that can be run on a $2000 build?

[Moozart]

I was recently looking to upgrade my computer. My current build is a 780 with an i5-4670k that I built back in 2013, I currently use 2 1080p monitors.

I'm not looking for build advice since I've already figured out two potential builds but I now have to decide between playing at 1440p @ 144hz or 4k @ 60hz. Both have their downsides and benefits but most seem to agree that a higher frame rate comes out on top especially since I play more Dota 2 than anything. That said, I also don't want a 1440p monitor if 4k becomes widely available at higher frame rates in the coming years so I'd rather just wait.

Basically my question is how long would you expect until a 144hz 4k monitor is available that can be run on a $2000 build?

1440 @ 144 if you are going to do a Gysnc, My systems will do either and the 1440 with the gsync wins every time. 4k gaming is best done on a large screen where you can actually tell there is a difference, ie your TV

[mrgreenthump]

With the current rate of GPU development, probably 3-4 years.

[potis]

Its 2017 and 1080p is still the standard, obviously because of prices.

Who in the right mind from the average user would spend so much for 1440p and 144Hz, most of the good monitors cost as much or near as much as a decent gaming PC, even with the prices that changed.

Even todays GPUs can handle older games like Dota 2 at 1440p but no way in constant 144Hz.

For me 4K is a massive gimmick, its too early on the GPU power/prices to enjoy anything on it, while 144Hz even on 1080p is awesome, if you can afford 1440p, G-sync and all that, go for it.

[Afrospinach]

For me 4K is a massive gimmick, its too early on the GPU power/prices to enjoy anything on it, while 144Hz even on 1080p is awesome, if you can afford 1440p, G-sync and all that, go for it.

4K really is a downstream thing from TVs and such. The PC monitor business isn't really big enough to make it's own market, same reason why we do not have OLED PC monitors despite them being probably the perfect monitor with their 0.1ms response times and spectacular colour.

I think you pay more for a 1440p than a 4k PC monitor right now. No one else really uses 1440p, I am guessing there is some manufacturing overlap for the panels because you can pick up a 4k on ebay for 300$ or so, a touch more for 1440p.

[HitRefresh]

1440 @ 144 if you are going to do a Gysnc, My systems will do either and the 1440 with the gsync wins every time. 4k gaming is best done on a large screen where you can actually tell there is a difference, ie your TV

Hey now, my 4K screen is near my face when I play PUBG and I can see people who are like a pixel high in the distance, very useful.

[Zenny]

High end Volta would likely be starting to get there, although the high end after that would be a better bet.

[Cyrops]

I was recently looking to upgrade my computer. My current build is a 780 with an i5-4670k that I built back in 2013, I currently use 2 60hz 1080p monitors.

I'm not looking for build advice since I've already figured out two potential builds but I now have to decide between playing at 1440p @ 144hz or 4k @ 60hz. Both have their downsides and benefits but most seem to agree that a higher frame rate comes out on top especially since I play more Dota 2 than anything. That said, I also don't want a 1440p monitor if 4k becomes widely available at higher frame rates in the coming years so I'd rather just wait.

Basically my question is how long would you expect until a 144hz 4k monitor is available that can be run on a $2000 build?

I mainly play LoL myself, playing 1440@144hz I can't really tell a difference between 60FPS and 144FPS, but I can tell when OBS bugs out and frame caps at 34FPS. It's hard to notice the difference when just moving the camera, but the image is much sharper than 1080p and the Hz should come into play during team fights when a lot is happening on screen, but you are not moving camera that much. If I move the camera things get blurry, but if I keep camera still, every moving champion/minion/particle is clear (er than 60Hz). Though I have not found a way to test if the monitor is actually working at 144Hz or not, I turn Vsync on and it stays at 144fps, but alas, I have no idea if it's true or not. The UFO Test doesn't show me options for over 60Hz.
That being said, Acer is releasing such monitor next year, while Asus should release it this year, your title and post seem conflicting, from current monitor offerings, you can see it's easier to go up in Hz's and size rather than resolution and Hz's (240Hz being offered before 4k@144Hz)

[Low Hanging Fruit]

Industry wants to milk 1440p for a while before moving on to milk 4k. It is best for their pocket for it to remain at a point like that for about 5-6 years at a minimal. Imagine how much money they made keeping it at 1080p for so long. If things were moving at the pace of actual technology we likely would already be well inside of the 4k era and thinking about the 8k era starting. But then monitor brands, video card brands, and all the way down the line wouldnt be able to milk each step of the way for a few years before releasing the next "revolution" that has been mostly collecting dust on a shelf in the R&D department for several years.

[TechnoChance]

I bet 2 years later or so. Most standard forms are now HD or 1440p and the price/performance allows people to do so.
There's not much playable source for 4K, unless you got a new Apple TV with all 4K movies.

And, to be honest I'm quite thrilled with 1440p, such question asked when sony got a 4K screen on their Sony Z5premium (which i owned..)

[DrMcNinja]

I've seen some 4k monitors for a fairly reasonable price. So I would give it 5-6 years before it's truly standardized.

[Deleted]

Er...is there even a connection with the bandwidth to do 4k 144hz yet uncompressed on *any* consumer tech? Gfx card or monitor?

[zorkuus]

Even 1440p isn't an "affordable" standard yet. They're going to milk 1080p aslong as they can and then they'll move to 1440p. Don't hold your breath for 4K.

[mrgreenthump]

Even 1440p isn't an "affordable" standard yet. They're going to milk 1080p aslong as they can and then they'll move to 1440p. Don't hold your breath for 4K.

16:9 1440p will likely never be standard of any sort. No content really makes a great use of it outside of gaming and professionals are already using higher resolution, so it's a specialty resolution only for gamers nowdays.

[Stormspark]

For the average computer (not only super high end enthusiast computers) to do 4k/144Hz as a normal thing...you're looking at about 5 more GPU generations. Assuming advancements keep on as they have been.