Would not recommend 1440p displays since with recent versions of macOS, they look noticeably worse due to font smoothing being gone in recent versions.
For the benefit of others reading this thread: an actual "1440p" display is
not the same - and shows far less detail than - the "2560x1440" mode offered by MacOS on 4k monitors. The latter is basically 5k downsampled to 4k and takes great advantage of the extra resolution of a 4k screen. (It's about time that Apple stopped using these "looks like" resolutions as they're really confusing and misleading for newbies and their significance is lost in the mists of history).
I would not recommend spending money on a physical 1440p or 1080p display these days - if you have one knocking around it will work on a Mac, but Apple are no longer making an effort to make MacOS look good on them.
The problems with usingt a 4K display are, however, overstated, I think.
This article explains the issues with 4K displays.
...and it describes the issues correctly, but IMHO is overly prescriptive and simplistic and exaggerates their real-world impact. The illustrations of the artefacts do have a factual basis - but take worst-case scenarios and then exaggerate them by showing enlargements. The article misses the point that a 4k, 27" display at a reasonable arms-length viewing distance just about meets the definition of "retina" so people with typical vision will have difficulty seeing individual pixels - or pixel-sized artefacts.
(...and if you're using 1-pixel checkerboards in anything you're creating then Claris the DogCow phoned and wants it's 1984 UI design back, since
anybody looking at those at anything other than the One True Resolution is going to get horrible Moire patterns.)
Also, on a 4k screen, simply switching to "looks like 1920x1080" takes seconds and will give you pixel-perfect 4k images at the expense of slightly large
but perfectly usable (and sharp) system fonts/menus/dialogues. Most Apps will let you zoom or change the font size for the
content and that is displayed at full 4k. How much "screen estate" you lose depends on your apps, workflow and personal preferences... it takes seconds to flip between one mode for pixel-accurate work and another for maximum "screen estate".
Bear in mind (a) the price difference between 4k UHD and 5k (5120x2880) will get you a
pair of decent 4k displays for the price of a single 5k.
Once a 4k screen gets >> 27" then "1:1" "looks like 3840x2160" starts to become usable and the whole scaling issue goes away (Ignored by the red/green charts in that article).
For years I had a 5k iMac with a cheapo Dell 4k@28" alongside it as a second display. The "cheapo" bit showed up because the Dell had washed-out colours (better 4k screens are available). With the 4k in "looks like 1440p" mode - giving much the same UI size as the 5k - then, yes, the 5k was crisper and the 4k looked a bit soft-focus, but the difference was barely noticeable in daily use.
Does that mean that a 5K monitor is the best buy?
Depends on your definition of "best buy".
Arguably, a ~220ppi display is the optimum for MacOS - which means 4k@24", 5k@27" or 6k@32". (...and that 5k is 5120x2880, 16:9 - don't be confused by "5k2k" displays that are ultra-wide screens with the same ppi as a 27" 4k).
However, those 5k and 6k screens come at a huge price premium and there are only a couple of alternatives to choose from (and even 4k 24" screens aren't very common now).
so 4k is a very reasonable compromise on price & choice vs. performance. Also - Your Mileage May Vary (along with your eyesight) as to whether the historical UI size of a 27" iMac is really the ultimate: its actually quite small and fiddly.
If you want to really capture the old 5k iMac experience you'll probably be looking at a Studio Display, although with basically the same sort of panel that Apple were selling 8 years ago, no secondary video input, a penny-pinching/form-over-function captive mains lead and a very basic stand (unless you fork out $$$ for the sort of height-adjustable strand that comes as standard with cheaper displays) I'm loathe to call it any sort of "best buy". Also, I like a dual display setup, and it just doesn't make sense to double-up all those audio, webcam, power delivery and TB hub features at the price.
Personally, my "best buy" would have been what I currently have - a
pair of 28" 3:2 ratio, 3840x2560 4k+ Huawei Mateviews if not for the deal-breaker that you could never find them in the US and that they now seem to be discontinued. Total cost: I paid £400 for the first and £600 for the second. I can't really recommend the Benq RD280U 28" 3:2 "programmers monitor" sight unseen, but it's what I'd be checking out if I had to replace my Mateviews - and you could still get a pair for less than the cost of a Studio Display.
bjango.com
