[samsin]

It would be nice to see the comparison between 2160p/144hz and 1440p/240hz since they're priced similarly, so that's the choice consumers will be making. The article makes the point that the perks of 144hz for general computer usage are for scrolling text, but in my experience the difference between 144hz and 240hz in that area isn't a huge game changer.

Meanwhile the benefits of 4k seem more impactful with better text clarity and native resolution for 4k video/image content. Even with games, the argument for 240hz where "games display many small, fine details in character models, effects, and the interface" would be just as applicable for 4k.

I made this choice recently and decided on 2160p/144hz, already owning a 1080p/240hz monitor that I thought I would still use for competitive games like Counter-Strike and Rocket League. But I haven't noticed a significant difference between 240hz and 144hz so I'm happy using my 2160p for all types of content.

IMO you reach diminishing returns sooner with refresh rate than you do with resolution.