If you are going to get a monitor then you might as well get one that will last a few years, we are at that sweet spot now where the inputs do the refresh rates

If you are going to get a monitor then you might as well get one that will last a few years, we are at that sweet spot now where the inputs do the refresh rates and the price isn't so expensive. Having two 'Full HD' monitors side by side doesn't cut it any more. The big benefit of 4K is the vertical resolution, you really can work on a good chunk of code with the whole block you are working on fitting in the screen with your browser (full of Stack Overflow tabs) open adjacent to it. Nobody likes land-filling monitors or having a cupboard full of dead ones. So my advice is to go for a 4K monitor that does justice to colours. A TV won't do. I went 4K before the inputs did decent refresh so I have 'cinematic' 24 fps. This is fine for programming and I am not a gamer plus I have a laptop for watching video. There is also a difference between 'cinema' 4K and regular 4K. Regular 4K is 3840 x 2160, 'cinema' gives 4096 x 2160, giving a whole column of extra 256 pixel goodness. I went for 'cinema' and 'real 4K' but the market has settled into not selling these beasts. Size is also a thing, do you really want to crick your neck looking skywards to the top of your screen? Therefore 31" may be the sweet spot for you, your desk and your code. This has worked for me and I don't feel that a larger screen would help. There are these ultra-ultra-wide monitors on the market with 1440 vertical pixels but after enjoying 2160 vertical pixels I am not going to want less. Those that work on websites for a living should demand a 4K monitor instead of the side by side Full HD monitors everyone else in the office has. The website of today does have to look good on an iPhone as well as a 4K monitor so the budget reason for the upgrade is requirements.