Vega 64 vs 1080 Ti

I like shooters too and for shooters you want smooth game play.

The ASUS monitor I posted is 60Hz which means a maximum of 60FPS, anything over 60FPS you'll get screen tear and a funky mouse feel, so no it will not be smoother at 80 FPS with a 60Hz monitor. At 1440p you'll want to turn on Enhanced Sync to cap the Frames Per Second to 60. At 4k you'd want Enhanced Sync off as you likely won't be hitting 60 FPS with most newer games, as long as you're at or below your monitors refresh rate turn Enhanced Sync off.

My monitor is 2560 x 1600 60Hz and with V-Sync ON (AMD's Enhanced Sync) games are smooth, 60 is the absolute minimum you want to game at. My monitor has an 8ms response time, the one above has a 1ms response time. The biggest difference between 144Hz and 60Hz is probably motion blur and you'll have it at 4k too, the 1ms response time may help eliminate a little motion blur. As you can see in the video the motion blur isn't that bad.

So you're question is do you want to game at higher FPS with no motion blur (1440p-144Hz), or keep 4k and game at 60 FPS. With your hardware you should pretty much be able to run all new games at 1440p with the highest game settings (except for maybe antialiasing) and keep pegged at 60FPS.

Decisions Decisions 🙂

On the plus side, a monitor with FreeSync costs substantially less than one with G-Sync.

A second Vega card would greatly expand your high-fps monitor options, lol.

Yes, IPS has better color accuracy and bolder color, IPS has better viewing angles too.

80fps is always "smoother" than 60fps, assuming it can be sustained by the GPU.

IPS panels have more colour depth than TN panels. But these days there's many types and subtypes of panel technologies which blend the advantages (and costs) of both. I basically ignore viewing angle parameters - I'm not in the habit of sitting five feet to one side and viewing my monitor sideways - although it's a consideration when other people in other parts of the room need to view the monitor at the same time. (But they can all just jostle around for a better viewing position instead of forcing me to spend more buying a "wider" display, lol.)

I've never found quality IPS panels more visually striking than quality non-IPS panels. Not for gaming and most movies, anyhow, since they tend to produce or emphasize less of the deeper colour range. The differences in panels are noticeable when comparing them side-by-side. IPS is definitely preferable for professional photo work and such stuff. Many people automatically swear that it's vastly superior. I personally think it is indeed (a little) better but it's also somewhat overpriced and vastly overhyped. I've never been disappointed by quality TN panels, they aren't at all as "washed out" as monitor marketing and monitor enthusiasts might have you believe.

The advantage of larger and higher-resolution monitors is the sheer number of moving pixels they put in your face. It fills your field of vision. Your brain/eyes automatically focus on "seeing" the movement while "ignoring" minor flaws or inconsistencies in visual detail, the overall experience is more immersive than when it's seen on a smaller or lower-resolution monitor. Sudden fps jerks and stutters, bursts and drops are immediately jarring because they break the illusion.

Nate is the only person who (to my knowledge) has experienced and commented on the "funky mouse feel". It's similar to playing a game client which "de-syncs" from a network game-server, sometimes things keep happening (for just a few fractions of a second) while the hardware struggles to keep up, it's annoying and even frustrating when you have to fight your own interface because the maximum refresh rates on your display panel imposes a "real-time" performance limit. Although it's not particularly noticeable at 60fps rates unless it recurs with great frequency.

I think you wouldn't regret a 28" (or bigger) display with 1440p (or greater) resolution. There's always tradeoffs and limits no matter which monitor choice you make. But I think you would (at least eventually) regret having chosen a smaller or lower-resolution monitor. And 60fps is quite playable, especially on a better-looking monitor, there's little need to obsess over the (not as good-looking) 85fps or 144fps that other monitors might support.

I would wait until the 4k monitors that can do at least 100hz at 4K are out. After playing at 165mz, 144mhz and 100hz (all about the same to my old eyes) I cannot go back to 60hz. Even with my old eyes it is noticeable. Even on the desktop.