Is 1600p enough screen real estate to warrant upgrade from 1440p?

trog69

Fantastic Member
Now that I have a new z170 system, and seeing how low-priced the higher-def monitors are now, plus the fact that I need another monitor ( my brother is the recipient of the old but still very potent gaming rig) I was wondering if going to a 2560x1600 monitor would be a major boost in screen real estate, or if it is mostly useless in games? I really love this 1440p monitor I have now. IPS has such a huge advantage over TN panels in how the colors really pop. And the larger screen-going from 24" 1080p-made a huge difference in how much I can see in-games. But is the added size, vertically, worth the added cost?

Anyone have experience with both sizes?
 

Neemobeer

Windows Forum Team
Staff member
The higher pixel density is just going to give you a crisper image. You still would need a physically bigger screen or a graphics card that supports a higher screen resolution to get more "screen real estate".
 

trog69

Fantastic Member
The higher pixel density is just going to give you a crisper image. You still would need a physically bigger screen or a graphics card that supports a higher screen resolution to get more "screen real estate".
Sorry for the late response. I have a 980ti SC+ card, so that's not an issue. I already have a 2560x1440 monitor, so all that is added is a bit more vertical screen.

I was just curious if any PC gamers here have used both sizes of monitor and if the added size would be enough to pay the higher price. I am leaning towards it not being worth the extra price, but I don't have a 1600p monitor to compare.
 
Top