|
FateFree posted:Is there a reason why no one makes 30 inch monitors? I bought a dell 30 about 8 years ago, and its been amazing but I want to upgrade to fancy things like gsync and high refresh rates. However its either 27 inches, which seems like such a downgrade, or 34 ultrawide. Dell has a new 4k 16:9 31.5" display, the UP3216Q. Its not 4:3, but at least its not ultrawide either. I haven't seen a review yet but its on my wishlist.
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2015 23:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 15:32 |
|
|
What's the general advice on vertical monitors? I think I need an IPS panel, but is there a general size and resolution to shoot for? I have two 22" monitors but it takes up a shitload of desk space and I'd really like a larger main monitor and a smaller vertical for web/general use.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 03:44
|
|
|
Choices for monitors to be used in portrait mode really depends on what you're putting it next to, assuming it's going to be a secondary display. You want something with similar DPI to your main display, and a stand that allows you to have either the upper or lower edge line up with that of your other monitor (depending on if you're using OS X or Windows and where you place your task bar). For example, A 30" 2560 x 1600 in landscape flanked by 20" 1600 x 1200 in portrait used to be a near-perfect setup in terms of uniformity, albeit not cheap (since both size/resolutions were generally only found on high-end monitors when introduced). It's pretty hard to get something similar with currently available options - I use a 40" 3840 x 2160 flanked by 24" 1920 x 1200, but while the physical heights more or less match up, the resolution and PPI is still a bit off (22"/23" 1920 x 1080 screens might work a little better).
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 06:14
|
|
|
Ika posted:Dell has a new 4k 16:9 31.5" display, the UP3216Q. Its not 4:3, but at least its not ultrawide either. I haven't seen a review yet but its on my wishlist. Why would you want a 4:3 screen for a device that isn't going to spend most of its time with one thing on it?
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 08:09
|
|
|
FateFree posted:Is there a reason why no one makes 30 inch monitors? I bought a dell 30 about 8 years ago, and its been amazing but I want to upgrade to fancy things like gsync and high refresh rates. However its either 27 inches, which seems like such a downgrade, or 34 ultrawide. HP have 32 inch QHD monitor with freesync. Samsung and BenQ have 32 inch 4k monitors with freesync. Asus has a 32 inch 4k monitor with gsync. None have high refresh rates.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 09:31
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:Why would you want a 4:3 screen for a device that isn't going to spend most of its time with one thing on it? that resolution and size is easily enough to split the screen into a left and right half, and 4:3 means more lines of code.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 10:09
|
|
|
Ika posted:that resolution and size is easily enough to split the screen into a left and right half, and 4:3 means more lines of code. I honestly don't find going from 50 to 70 lines of code (or whatever it would be) significantly increases the chances of finding what I'm looking for on the same screen, while going wider lets me have two columns of code and a reference doc, and most of the time PDFs and the like are noticeably easier to read at 1440 px or higher, so trying to split a 4:3 screen into quarters would make it really awkward for readability. xthetenth fucked around with this message at 17:06 on Nov 22, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 17:02
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:I honestly don't find going from 50 to 70 lines of code (or whatever it would be) significantly increases the chances of finding what I'm looking for on the same screen, while going wider lets me have two columns of code and a reference doc, and most of the time PDFs and the like are noticeably easier to read at 1440 px or higher, so trying to split a 4:3 screen into quarters would make it really awkward for readability. I've got 2 columns of code on a 16:9 27" monitor. Why shouldn't I be able to use 2 columns of code on a 32" 4:3 monitor then? E: I mean I get that two columns is useful, but 16:9 32" isn't going to be enough for three. Ika fucked around with this message at 20:20 on Nov 22, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 20:16
|
|
|
FateFree posted:Is there a reason why no one makes 30 inch monitors? I bought a dell 30 about 8 years ago, and its been amazing but I want to upgrade to fancy things like gsync and high refresh rates. However its either 27 inches, which seems like such a downgrade, or 34 ultrawide. 27" 2560x1440 and 30" 2560x1600 monitors are nominally the same width, within normal variances between manufacturers. The 30" monitor will have about 1" more vertical screen size. It comes down to 16:9 being the format that won and 16:10 being the format that nerds insist on because. e: more serious, is the Asus PG279Q worth the cost and risk over the PG278Q? I am looking for a high refresh gsync monitor to roughly match my 27" 1440p Korean panel. Aquila fucked around with this message at 20:27 on Nov 22, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 20:22
|
|
|
Anyone heard anything about the acer xf270hu? Looks like a updated version with full free sync range 30-144hz 1440p IPS.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2015 23:38
|
|
|
Ika posted:I've got 2 columns of code on a 16:9 27" monitor. Why shouldn't I be able to use 2 columns of code on a 32" 4:3 monitor then? That's true, I'm more thinking of what I can do with my ultrawides. B-Mac posted:Anyone heard anything about the acer xf270hu? Looks like a updated version with full free sync range 30-144hz 1440p IPS. Ooh. Very nice. Can't wait to see if that turns out well, I could go for drooling over a setup I could eyefinity with 27"s flanking a 34", although over 1.5 times the pixels of 4k and high fps dont seem to be a likely combo.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2015 07:53
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:That's true, I'm more thinking of what I can do with my ultrawides.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2015 10:40
|
|
|
UK goons, the XB270HUbprz is on flash sale at Amazon for £500 for the next hour or so. I want it but it's £500 and I'll need to buy a 980ti too. Decisions decisions
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2015 13:25
|
|
tarbrush posted:UK goons, the XB270HUbprz is on flash sale at Amazon for £500 for the next hour or so. Monitors last a lot longer than video cards do. Also you can get by with a 970 if you turn some things down.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2015 13:30
|
|
|
AVeryLargeRadish posted:Monitors last a lot longer than video cards do. Also you can get by with a 970 if you turn some things down. That's what I told myself when I bought my last monitor two years ago 
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2015 13:58
|
|
|
Should I get a refurbished XB270HU for $600 from newegg? or wait for the XB271HU? I'm hoping this is refurbished as in "we gave it a better look the 2nd time and fixed the poo poo that was wrong" kind of refurbished.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2015 15:11
|
|
Pews posted:Should I get a refurbished XB270HU for $600 from newegg? or wait for the XB271HU? I'm hoping this is refurbished as in "we gave it a better look the 2nd time and fixed the poo poo that was wrong" kind of refurbished. Nah, many of the issues that afflict the XB270hu are not really fixable. Also Newegg has some pretty strict policies on returning new monitors let alone refurbs. This is basically buyer beware territory.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2015 15:21
|
|
|
Ordered my crossover on Friday and it's estimated to be here tomorrow  I will update when I get everything set up.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2015 15:57
|
|
|
Ika posted:Good point, but is there a tool that modifies windows+left or windows+right to split the screen into vertical thirds? That would make ultrawides more attractive, since I couldn't be bothered with doing that by hand all the time. My IDE and notepad++ can do two columns internally so as of the W10 November update, I can just snap them to both sides and move the edge between them so snap puts them at the right width.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2015 16:01
|
|
|
Thom P. Tiers posted:Ordered my crossover on Friday and it's estimated to be here tomorrow They use advanced korean rocket ships for shipping.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2015 16:10
|
|
|
Man, trying to decide on a new monitor has never been so complicated. I posted here before looking at the Acer XB270HU only to learn about the QC issues and that I may want to wait for the Asus PG279Q. I'm reading that these screens have the same issues though. Is this correct? Also the Acer is considerably cheaper, are there any other major differences, such as the stand adjustments? Next, I'm considering getting a Freesync version, the MG279Q, since it is so much less expensive. Is GSync VS FreeSync the only real difference between the PG279Q and MG279Q? I currently have two 670s and haven't really felt the need to upgrade, but am thinking get the cheaper monitor and then go AMD when I do get rid of the 670s. Is this a bad idea? I haven't had an AMD card...well, since they were ATI. LAST. I have absolutely no local retailer I can pick these up, or anywhere even within a 4-hour drive probably. I know there are QC issues with all of these, but I really don't want to pay $550-$830 without accepting anything less than flawless. What's the best online retailer to go with in case I do have issues? I've RMA'd with Newegg before without any trouble, but its been a while, and never a monitor.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2015 17:20
|
|
|
xorex posted:I posted here before looking at the Acer XB270HU only to learn about the QC issues and that I may want to wait for the Asus PG279Q. I'm reading that these screens have the same issues though. Is this correct? Yup, I bought a PG279Q and it has backlight bleed issues. For some reason every monitor in this class seems to have QC issues right now. (And by right now I mean the last year or so?) Where are Acer and Asus sourcing these panels from? It seems like there's just one supplier out there and they don't quite have the manufacturing sorted out yet.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2015 17:25
|
|
xorex posted:Man, trying to decide on a new monitor has never been so complicated. It's generally agreed that Amazon has the best return & exchange policies. Last I'd heard Newegg won't take the monitor back except for severe issues. McCracAttack posted:Yup, I bought a PG279Q and it has backlight bleed issues. For some reason every monitor in this class seems to have QC issues right now. (And by right now I mean the last year or so?) The panels are made by AU Optronics, aka Acer. Only they have the tech for 144Hz IPS(actually AHVA to be exact) panels.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2015 17:46
|
|
|
xorex posted:Man, trying to decide on a new monitor has never been so complicated. At that point you should probably get the Crossover 2795 and OC it to 96-110hz. It's $300, the downsides are the lovely stand and DVI only, but it's not worth twice the price for a few more hz and no g-sync.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2015 18:11
|
|
|
VulgarandStupid posted:At that point you should probably get the Crossover 2795 and OC it to 96-110hz. It's $300, the downsides are the lovely stand and DVI only, but it's not worth twice the price for a few more hz and no g-sync. I haven't considered anything I could OC. I don't know if I want to go with some weird rear end brand though. The last time I did that (SCEPTRE brand) it was a piece of garbage. It's just frustrating to know that I'd have a high chance of issues when paying such big bux for a monitor. It feels like a gamble. And since g sync and free sync both arrived since my last upgrades, I don't really understand how big a deal they are and if g sync is worth the cost. I currently have a 144Hz 1080p screen and don't want to step back. I mainly play Battlefield and the 144Hz, which I hit pretty consistently at 1080, is very nice. My secondary is going out and I just want something nicer so I can slide my current main screen to the side and then go through the same mess in a few years when we have 144+ Hz 4k screens.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2015 18:53
|
|
|
xorex posted:I haven't considered anything I could OC. I don't know if I want to go with some weird rear end brand though. The last time I did that (SCEPTRE brand) it was a piece of garbage. It's just frustrating to know that I'd have a high chance of issues when paying such big bux for a monitor. It feels like a gamble. And since g sync and free sync both arrived since my last upgrades, I don't really understand how big a deal they are and if g sync is worth the cost. I hear your worries, but rest assured they are ill-founded. The Korean 1440p's have been the go-to monitor in this thread for a long time, and we've yet to see someone come back and complain about any major issues--maybe a little niggling one here or there, but it's a lot easier to accept that there's a bit of backlight bleed on your $200 monitor than your $800 one. GSync/FreeSync are both pretty cool, but remember you have to buy into their ecosystem: GSync will only work with NVidia cards, and FreeSync will only work with AMD. Both do the same sort of thing, though generally GSync does it better (albeit, at a higher cost). They're both quite useful if you've got a monitor that supports higher Hz than your GPU can push out frames. That is, if you've got a 144Hz monitor, but you're playing TW3 on a 980 and can only get 50FPS, *Sync can step in and smooth things out, giving you the most of the advantages of constant-rate vsync (no tearing, 'smooth' display because the frames are evenly paced, etc) while not having to down-clock to some 1/2 multiple of your screen Hz if you can't hold the screen's Hz in FPS (eg, if you've got a 60Hz screen and can only push 59FPS, it reduces you to 60/2 = 30 FPS because 59 > 60). tl;dr if you're planning on playing CS:GO at 144FPS, *Sync won't do much for you. If you're planning on playing games where you can't cap out your FPS, *Sync will allow things to look "smoother" while preserving a much higher actual framerate than a monitor without *Sync is able to. My personal opinion is *Sync is cool as hell, but if you're gonna get it, go whole-hog; the added cost of GSync, in particular, is high enough that I can't fathom dropping $750 on something from Acer that may or may not be total poo poo. Hence I'm waiting for a GSync 34" ultrawide, preferably from ASUS or whatnot. Even if it does end up being from Acer, the extra few hundred for a 34" Ultrawide over a 27" seems like money well spent.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2015 19:43
|
|
|
What is a good way for me to approximate my PC performance after making a resolution upgrade? I posted in this thread a few weeks ago when I was thinking about splurging on a monitor, and I think my old monitor took offense to that because it immediately crapped out entirely. Now it's not a splurge, I have nothing at all and need to get a replacement. I've decided that the Crossover 2795 is definitely the best option for me but I'm unsure how my pc will handle a bump to resolution. I was running a mediocre video card (Geforce gtx 750 ti) at 1680x1050 and everything I threw at it worked great at like 50-60+ fps on mostly max settings. I don't really play the most recent AAA titles but I'd like see if I'll be okay or if it's looking like a new GPU is in my future as well. Every benchmark I've found through googling gives performance metrics but it's hard for me to equate that to real world values. It'll be a shame if I have to take a big quality hit in order to keep playing on a new monitor but I'm unsure how much more resource intensive 2560x1440 will be.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2015 20:27
|
|
|
DrDork posted:I hear your worries, but rest assured they are ill-founded. The Korean 1440p's have been the go-to monitor in this thread for a long time, and we've yet to see someone come back and complain about any major issues--maybe a little niggling one here or there, but it's a lot easier to accept that there's a bit of backlight bleed on your $200 monitor than your $800 one. You have a good point. I'll look more into the Crossover. At that price it may be better to get a less problematic 2K screen even if it is less than 144 Hz and doesn't have all the bells and whistles and then upgrade again (making the crossover secondary) when prices and quality settle a bit.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2015 20:30
|
|
|
Teeter posted:I was running a mediocre video card (Geforce gtx 750 ti) at 1680x1050 and everything I threw at it worked great at like 50-60+ fps on mostly max settings. I don't really play the most recent AAA titles but I'd like see if I'll be okay or if it's looking like a new GPU is in my future as well. Every benchmark I've found through googling gives performance metrics but it's hard for me to equate that to real world values. It'll be a shame if I have to take a big quality hit in order to keep playing on a new monitor but I'm unsure how much more resource intensive 2560x1440 will be. Hate to be the bearer of bad news, but if you're planning on playing newish games, you're likely gonna need a new card. The 750Ti was a low-range card when it launched a year ago, and now you're looking at needing double or more the graphical power. The upside is that this is a great time of year to be buying video cards: depending on your preferences, either look for a deal on a 960 4GB, grab a used one off Amazon from people dumping them to upgrade, or check out EVGA's b-stock offerings. For reference, here's a benchmark from Fallout 4 that includes the 750Ti (1080p = 2.07M pixels, or 18% more than your current monitor): 
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2015 20:43
|
|
|
xorex posted:You have a good point. I'll look more into the Crossover. At that price it may be better to get a less problematic 2K screen even if it is less than 144 Hz and doesn't have all the bells and whistles and then upgrade again (making the crossover secondary) when prices and quality settle a bit.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2015 20:44
|
|
Teeter posted:What is a good way for me to approximate my PC performance after making a resolution upgrade? I posted in this thread a few weeks ago when I was thinking about splurging on a monitor, and I think my old monitor took offense to that because it immediately crapped out entirely. Now it's not a splurge, I have nothing at all and need to get a replacement. I've decided that the Crossover 2795 is definitely the best option for me but I'm unsure how my pc will handle a bump to resolution. You will need to move up to a better card for 1440p, definitely. Your current card just does not have enough VRAM to handle that resolution so your performance will nosedive when it starts hitting system memory. Your cheapest option is a reference blower 290 which will be loud but will handle 1440p pretty well or getting a EVGA B-stock 970 which will be way the hell quieter, cooler, use less power and be faster since it won't run into thermal throttling the way a blower based 290 would.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2015 20:45
|
|
|
Great, thanks for info. I assumed it would be quite a jump since it's double the pixels but wasn't sure if it's truly twice as needy from hardware. I'd say that 95% of my gaming is currently split between War Thunder and Heroes of the Storm which are not the most system intensive, perfect for a "value card" like the 750ti when it came out, but I'm sure they'll definitely take a hit with the upgraded resolution. I'll see when I can scratch together some cash for a GPU, thank you for the links
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2015 20:57
|
|
|
Teeter posted:What is a good way for me to approximate my PC performance after making a resolution upgrade? I posted in this thread a few weeks ago when I was thinking about splurging on a monitor, and I think my old monitor took offense to that because it immediately crapped out entirely. Now it's not a splurge, I have nothing at all and need to get a replacement. I've decided that the Crossover 2795 is definitely the best option for me but I'm unsure how my pc will handle a bump to resolution. There have been some really good deals on 970's lately, I snagged mine for $290 from Newegg and I've seen them as low as $270 for the cheaper Zotac boards.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2015 21:04
|
|
|
So, if I'm looking for 144hz IPS monitor, it appears I'm going to be spending $600+? Nothing cheaper out there yet? 
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2015 23:53
|
|
|
MF_James posted:So, if I'm looking for 144hz IPS monitor, it appears I'm going to be spending $600+? Nothing cheaper out there yet? e; in fact, the 144Hz monitors on the horizon aren't even cheaper--they're just expected to have better QC and/or be larger/widescreen/curved, and hence even more expensive. DrDork fucked around with this message at 00:01 on Nov 24, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2015 23:57
|
|
|
DrDork posted:Pretty much. Ugh, what's so bad about TN panels? Do they just have poo poo viewing angles?
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2015 23:59
|
|
MF_James posted:Ugh, what's so bad about TN panels? Do they just have poo poo viewing angles? Bad viewing angles, bad colors, they tend to appear sort of washed out, at least to me.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 00:04
|
|
|
Pretty much. Also poo poo color reproduction. They're not terrible if all you're ever going to do with it is Office and CS:GO or something similar, but if you want to watch movies, or enjoy the visuals in games like TW3, they make a noticeable difference. Even if you're not terribly interested in the colors, on 27" and up TN's, a lot of them produce noticeable color shift in the corners. I mean, they won't kill your dog or anything, but if you're going to spend money on a monitor, it should probably be an IPS, especially since once you start talking 27" 1440p 144Hz or better, the price difference between TN and IPS shrinks substantially; you're probably paying over $500 anyhow, might as well kick in another $100-$200 and make it IPS.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 00:06
|
|
|
DrDork posted:Pretty much. Also poo poo color reproduction. They're not terrible if all you're ever going to do with it is Office and CS:GO or something similar, but if you want to watch movies, or enjoy the visuals in games like TW3, they make a noticeable difference. Even if you're not terribly interested in the colors, on 27" and up TN's, a lot of them produce noticeable color shift in the corners. Funny you should mention! I generally play CS:GO, TES:O, and some other older games, I try newer games and then just fall back on stuff I know when I lose interest. Mostly looking to upgrade my lovely 21" ASUS LED that has a stuck red pixel in the middle of the screen. I was hoping to upgrade to something super nice because I do occasionally watch movies/TV on it if my GF is watching something I don't like on our actual TV, otherwise I just run the TV as a second monitor and watch from that. Maybe I'll settle for a smaller 144hz TN Panel for now and upgrade when the monitor's either A) Price goes down so they don't cost such a large % of my monthly pay or B) My pay gets bumped up to create the same effect.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 00:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 15:32 |
|
|
If you're not in like the global elite of CS:GO players, chances are you won't really need 144Hz. In which case, may I recommend the Crossover 2795? 27" 1440p IPS and easily overclockable to ~100Hz for $300? Yeah, it's not 144Hz, but it's also not $600 and plagued with hideous QA issues.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 01:12
|
|