|
I have a BenQ 3201PH. It’s highly color-accurate, but the contrast sucks. There is also a flickering issue that pops up occasionally, though it doesn’t bother me and I don’t really know whether it’s the monitor or the video card.
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 00:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 15:17 |
|
|
There are loads of decent 4k/32" monitors. I'm not aware of any outstanding options that aren't silly expensive. There is really no good source for all-around monitor reviews. Almost no one reviews them in a way that is even slightly competent and objective, and the places that do don't have the budget to review many of them. In general, monitor shopping is about picking out a few options that look attractive, and then trying to find out how common problems are.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 01:19
|
|
|
One way to make sure you get a decent monitor is to look for the main features that are easy for anyone to test: So contrast, peak brightness, color space, response time, viewing angles. Pick a panel that is at least competent in all of these and then buy yourself an entry level colorometer like an i1 display pro which will allow you to relatively easily sort out every other quirk a given display may have. Even if a site did competent and objective reviews of a display, it is still largely pointless because there is panel to panel variation, so the majority of reviews looking at the actual picture quality are only relevant to the exact display being reviewed (meaning you would literally have to buy the actual single unit they used to perform all their tests and calibration for the review to truly be relevant).
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 01:55
|
|
|
K8.0 posted:There are loads of decent 4k/32" monitors. I'm not aware of any outstanding options that aren't silly expensive. TFT Central is an excellent resource - highly recommended.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 02:05
|
|
|
BabyRyoga posted:Are there any 60hz 4k monitors @ 32 in size that aren't garbage these days? Looking to maybe add one to my desktop. Gaming will still be done on my 27in 144hz gsync monitor, but it might be nice to have a 32 incher for multimedia/etc. I've been mostly happy with my refurb BenQ PD3200U. It did die on me within 3 weeks of having it, but since getting back from warranty RMA it's been solid. Flickers sometimes, but color accuracy is great. Also FYI I got a coupon from BenQ in my inbox yesterday that's 25% off refurb monitors from their outlet site. Coupon code is RANDOM25 in case it helps.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 02:15
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:TFT Central is an excellent resource - highly recommended. They are. They also review maybe 1% of the monitors a consumer might realistically consider. Even for the high refresh gaming monitors they focus on, there are a lot of monitors they just never review, because they're both based in the UK and operating on a limited budget.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 07:02
|
|
|
The Rat posted:I've been mostly happy with my refurb BenQ PD3200U. It did die on me within 3 weeks of having it, but since getting back from warranty RMA it's been solid. Flickers sometimes, but color accuracy is great. Doesn't seem like that code works, for whatever reason. Shame, because getting one of those monitors for under 400 bucks would be a pretty good buy, it sounds like. I am still very indecisive.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 07:53
|
|
|
BabyRyoga posted:Are there any 60hz 4k monitors @ 32 in size that aren't garbage these days? Looking to maybe add one to my desktop. Gaming will still be done on my 27in 144hz gsync monitor, but it might be nice to have a 32 incher for multimedia/etc. Samsung U32H850. Great picture but at least here it was pretty expensive.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 08:47
|
|
|
I think I'm gonna be looking for a new monitor soon, my 10 year old one is starting to scream really loudly when turning on. Like, CRT noises, except it's an LCD. What's the best 4k IPS screen to buy these days? Somewhere around 30" is good, and as high refresh rate as possible since I intend to use it until it dies, so I imagine in 5 more years high refresh rate will be a thing in most games even at 4k. e: Is it still this one? https://www.amazon.de/dp/B07JNQ92F6 Truga fucked around with this message at 18:27 on Sep 27, 2019 |
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 18:21
|
|
|
Every high refresh rate 4k monitor is still bad at this point. The XV273K is definitely the least bad for the money, but I wouldn't buy one. It's a 10 bit 144hz monitor, but because DP 1.4 sucks it can only do 8 bit 120hz or have horrible artifacting. The response times also aren't quite up to par with what they should be. 4k high refresh will not be a real thing until either DP 2.0 monitors and GPUs are available, or Nvidia properly supports HDMI 2.1 across the board and we get good HDMI 2.1 monitors. My advice is that if you want a 4k monitor, just buy a decent 60hz one and swap it over to being your secondary in a couple years when there are high refresh 4k monitors that are actually good.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 18:35
|
|
|
Ok, but a decent 4k dell is like 600 eurobux, and that thing is 700. Also, 120Hz is plenty good enough for me for the next 10 years. Also 10bit is hdr, which is extremely whatever since it's just HDR400?
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 18:39
|
|
|
Dell's 4k monitors are quite expensive. There are other good options at far lower prices. The XV273K is a functional monitor if you want to buy one, but I don't think it's worth the money. The fact that you've hung on to your last monitor for ten years probably means you aren't the sort of obscene spender who has a 2080Ti and will upgrade as soon as possible to try to actually drive decent framerates at 4k anyway.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 19:51
|
|
|
With the PS5 right around the corner, I'd expect a bump in gpu/cpu load anyway. Unless Ampere is absolutely amazing it doesn't seem likely that high refresh 4k will be any easier, at least not for contemporary new games.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 20:24
|
|
|
All the 2d games i play run just fine on my 980Ti at 2560x1600, and most will probably run fine at 4k as long as I don't go for very high settings. I was gonna buy a new pc this year to get more out of VR, but this and my laptop acting up kinda throws a spanner in that idea lol. e: is there really nothing decent at 4k that will do ~120hz and freesync? OTOH, the sound the monitor is making sounds like a bad capacitor or power supply so maybe i can fix it... Truga fucked around with this message at 02:13 on Sep 28, 2019 |
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2019 01:39
|
|
|
It's a little more than twice the pixels. Stuff that's not GPU bound would be fine, anything GPU bound would halve the framerate. Do the 2d games you're playing even support >60hz? I've found that most of them don't tend to. You need to consider everything you want to use the monitor for, now and into the future, to help you decide how much money to spend and on what.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2019 03:24
|
|
|
Sorry, by 2D I meant not-VR. Currently all the games I run happily hover at 70-90 fps, except poe and ksp, which are both very much cpu bound when frames start to drop.  Jumping to 4K I don't see the framerate dropping much, I'll just disable AO, drop down antialias and similar bullshit that doesn't make much difference but eats 25% framerate each. The problem with buying a cheaper monitor now is, I've been wanting a higher resolution screen for a long rear end time, and I'm not interested in having multiple screens on my gamebox, it'd just help break my attention span, so I'd sell it when I bought a new one, and you know the thing with reselling poo poo, as soon as I opened the box it already lost 30% value. I'd rather just buy a good thing now and hope it lasts 10 years again instead at this point. I've had this monitor for 10 years, and despite having 2560x1600 in 2009, I had no issues with game performance. I'd just have to drop a few settings when needed until 980Ti arrived.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2019 12:17
|
|
|
Bringing up the 980 Ti again reminds me - that GPU only supports DP 1.2, which will only do something like 75 or 80hz at 4k. Also no Freesync support, since that only comes into play with the 10 series. If you want a monitor upgrade, you're really going to need a GPU upgrade. Maybe in your situation the XV273K is the best buy, but I will tell you a few things : 1. Hardly anyone uses two monitors and then is willing to go back to one. It's too drat good. For me, it actually helps keep me immersed in games, since I've been able to turn notification sounds off pretty much entirely and just glance at my other monitor to make sure nothing needs my attention. 2. You have to compare the money you lose on potentially selling a monitor to what you gain by buying something later that might cost less and give you more. 3. 4K gaming is still really not there. You're really underestimating how demanding it is. Even a 2080Ti will typically only be doing somewhere in the 60-100 FPS range in most modern games at 4K. Unless you're mostly playing like 5+ year old games, it's not reasonable to expect to hit 120 FPS with anything less even with settings turned down. Like Stickman said, this is about to get a whole lot worse with the next-gen consoles coming out and driving up graphical demands again. Even GTA V only does 80 FPS or something on a 2080 Ti.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2019 21:09
|
|
|
Well, fine but: I just got a spare monitor now because the old one just decided it won't work anymore. It's a dell 27" 4K@60 and my findings are: In FF14 I'm seeing ~60FPS in goonhaus, which is probably the worst performing spot to be in the entire game, 70-80 everywhere else, with only marginally worse settings (which I don't really notice because lol 4k looks way better by default). Path of exile is still hardlocked at 60 vsync at the same settings I was playing on my old monitor, until I start casting poo poo, and like I said earlier, that poo poo's CPU bound, and still doesn't go below 40fps, same as before. Also, I've used 2 monitors for years, it wasn't for me. I ended up giving one to my brother when his died about a decade ago and haven't missed it at all. I think I'll be going for VX273K, if I can't fix the old one. Thanks for the input tho, I'm really hoping the old one can be fixed so I can use it until there's a better 4K screen around. Truga fucked around with this message at 12:27 on Sep 29, 2019 |
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2019 12:08
|
|
|
This isn't quite a monitor question but this is the crew that I think has the best chance at giving me the answer. Situation: two televisions, one xbox, hdmi splitteer. want to be able to swap the xbox between either tv (1080p, not 4k on either console nor displays) i tried this before and the colors and poo poo were all fucky and there looked like weird artifacting? like the image itself was clear, ish. I'm not sure if the idea itself is even viable, so for all I know even in the best case scenario this is what it would look like. My suspicion is that the weak link would literally be the HDMI splitter i have. I have two of them but theyre the same two. anyway, halp
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2019 16:17
|
|
|
Sounds like you don't actually need an HDMI splitter and need some sort of passive HDMI switch(going the other way most people use a switch for). But yeah, it's likely your HDMI splitter was bad.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2019 17:32
|
|
|
Nvidia control panel > Change resolution > Check the color settings. Probably on something compressed. Nvidia is reaaaally bad about defaulting to absolutely terrible settings over HDMI.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2019 17:46
|
|
|
Constellation I posted:Sounds like you don't actually need an HDMI splitter and need some sort of passive HDMI switch(going the other way most people use a switch for). But yeah, it's likely your HDMI splitter was bad. Thank you!! If this is true could you/ somebody maybe link me one that's recommended The devices I'm seeing appear to be the same so I'm not really sure what to buy
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2019 19:05
|
|
|
Statutory Ape posted:Thank you!! If this is true could you/ somebody maybe link me one that's recommended Just type HDMI switch into Amazon. I have the amazon basics one, works great for ten bucks.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2019 20:10
|
|
|
Ok I have a displayport dell monitor now and have the thing where every time it sleeps all the windows get moved around because it's "disconnected". What menu is the energy saving thing in?
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2019 21:46
|
|
|
Truga posted:Ok I have a displayport dell monitor now and have the thing where every time it sleeps all the windows get moved around because it's "disconnected". What menu is the energy saving thing in?
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2019 00:51
|
|
|
I couldn't find it, but it turns out it's something else and I can't do anything about it so I just installed a persistent windows tray thing i found on some forum. The windows experience lmao.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2019 10:53
|
|
|
Second opinion requested: In the short term I'm looking for a new (or new to me) monitor. I'm considering either an ultra wide screen (I saw a used LG 34" 3440x1440 monitor for sale locally for $350) 1440p monitor, or a traditional widescreen 1440p monitor. I don't game much so I'm not as concerned about high refresh rates, I'm more concerned about productivity. The ultrawide would be cool since there would be that much more screen real estate but I could probably get away with a single, traditional 1440p monitor. Anyone want to weigh in on these two choices? I have 2 27" 1440p monitors at work and I like them, but I don't think I can justify buying two new monitors (unless I found a sweet deal on used ones or something). Seems like the ultrawide would be a good compromise between the two. Additional background: I haven't even have our computer set up at a desk in over a year, it's next to my component rack in the basement (ran out of room upstairs). I'm getting tired of doing things on my cellphone or a 1080p laptop, and would prefer to have a dedicated workspace that would be more comfortable to work at. This in itself is why I can't really justify going crazy and getting two brand new monitors or something, just because I've been doing without for so long.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2019 14:04
|
|
|
K8.0 posted:I don't know poo poo about KVMs, but I do wonder if you actually need one or if you would be better off with some kind of software solution, since in most two-desktop situations the second one is typically being used as a compute machine rather than an interactive thing. Constellation I posted:Yeah, is there any actual benefit to your 2nd desktop being physically plugged in to the 2 monitors and I/O? Can't you just remote in to the weaker machine? ..btt posted:A KVM with only one video out isn't going to achieve what you want. You can probably find one that does two video at once but they get quite expensive past the basic level. I have one that supports high refresh/g-sync and it cost around £150. Also, be aware if you have a fancy keyboard or mouse they might not work 100% with a KVM since some emulate rather than just pass through so you aren't disconnecting/reconnecting every time you hit the button. You will want the KVM to emulate the monitor when disconnected though or your windows will constantly get rearranged. Most, if not all will do this. Thanks for all the suggestions. I ended up looking into the remote desktop suggestion and that works well, without needing to buy anything.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2019 14:31
|
|
|
dreesemonkey posted:Second opinion requested: In the short term I'm looking for a new (or new to me) monitor. I'm considering either an ultra wide screen (I saw a used LG 34" 3440x1440 monitor for sale locally for $350) 1440p monitor, or a traditional widescreen 1440p monitor. I don't think 1440p monitors are the best value for productivity. Decent 4k IPS monitors have come down in price to the point that you should probably start by looking at them.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2019 15:12
|
|
|
K8.0 posted:I don't think 1440p monitors are the best value for productivity. Decent 4k IPS monitors have come down in price to the point that you should probably start by looking at them. What size 4k monitor would I need for using native resolution? 32"+?
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2019 15:36
|
|
|
Personally I think 32" is kinda the sweet spot for 4k, but 27" is much more available. Regardless, in general running at 4k you're going to be using scaling in windows to make text larger. It doesn't necessarily have to be quite as large as it would be on a lower PPI screen since there is some added clarity, but yeah just don't worry about it too much and set it to something that works well for you.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2019 16:06
|
|
|
K8.0 posted:Personally I think 32" is kinda the sweet spot for 4k, but 27" is much more available. Regardless, in general running at 4k you're going to be using scaling in windows to make text larger. It doesn't necessarily have to be quite as large as it would be on a lower PPI screen since there is some added clarity, but yeah just don't worry about it too much and set it to something that works well for you. Thanks for the info. I might have to check out staples or best buy or something to see if they have any monitors I can see in person to test the size/scaling.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2019 16:53
|
|
|
Anyone have anything to say about this monitor? https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07K3P7ZBS/ Apparently it goes on sale at Costco sometimes for $270, though $299 for a 32" 4k that doesn't SEEM to have any major flaws is already sounding good. Mostly want to use it for general use/watching stuff, as I still have a 1440p monitor that is way superior spec-wise for gaming.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2019 23:25
|
|
|
dreesemonkey posted:What size 4k monitor would I need for using native resolution? 32"+? K8.0 posted:Personally I think 32" is kinda the sweet spot for 4k, but 27" is much more available. Regardless, in general running at 4k you're going to be using scaling in windows to make text larger. It doesn't necessarily have to be quite as large as it would be on a lower PPI screen since there is some added clarity, but yeah just don't worry about it too much and set it to something that works well for you. I've actually been thinking a bit about monitors more in terms of PPI rather than geometry, lately. It seems to me that the sweet-spot for comfortable desktop size is ~100-110 PPI, or some integer multiple thereof (only because of legacy resolution dependent UIs, which most desktop environments still have). This is the resolution range of 1440p 27" monitors and 1600p 30" monitors. Apple seems to agree, as you'll note that all their 'retina' displays are double this, in the range of 200-220 PPI, which would allow them to use simple integer scaling of their UIs. That's why some of their retina displays have unusual, nonstandard geometries, such as the upcoming XDR display, which is 32" with a geometry of 6016x3384 (certainly non-standard) which gives a nice PPI of 218. I use a 32" 2160p monitor, and I can't use it at 100% (i.e. no) scaling, I have to use it at 125% which gives a feature size about equal to a 100 PPI monitor. The downside is that older windows programs are blurry when this scaling is applied to them. It's kind of frustrating to move your mouse over the tray icons and see some fuzzy menus and some non-fuzzy ones. As it happens, the 43" 4k panels that are out there are about 100 PPI, so they are comfortable to use without any scaling, but are of course enormous. If you want to be able to use integer scaling on a monitor of common size (i.e. 27" or 32") you would be looking for a 27" 5k monitor, which is 217 PPI. Using a 200% scaling rate on one of these would be great for old UIs, they wouldn't be fuzzy and would appear as they would on a 27" 1440p monitor. It's no surprise that the 5k displays apple sell are 27". To get in the n(100-110) PPI range for 4k you would need a monitor between 20" and 22" - I don't think they exist, and not sure anyone would want one anyway. Panels nowadays seem to fall into certain bands of PPI - 110-110, ~137, ~163, and ~217. I think the first and last are the good ones that lead to less crap with scaling, but for what must be cost reasons panels tend to be in the middle two bands nowadays. I'd love it if the XDR's panel became more widely adopted and not so drat expensive, it's perfect.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2019 00:43
|
|
|
I noticed that the effort post on the first page makes a point of saying monitors are not televisions, but is this still the place for television questions? I didn’t see a dedicated television thread, but I might have skimmed over it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2019 02:50
|
|
|
Veni Vidi Ameche! posted:I noticed that the effort post on the first page makes a point of saying monitors are not televisions, but is this still the place for television questions? I didn’t see a dedicated television thread, but I might have skimmed over it. LG OLED, highest-end Vizio, Sony 900F or 950G, don't buy a Samsung. Also, the TV thread is in Inspect Your Gadgets: https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3523461 BIG HEADLINE fucked around with this message at 04:33 on Oct 1, 2019 |
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2019 03:57
|
|
|
Truga posted:Ok I have a displayport dell monitor now and have the thing where every time it sleeps all the windows get moved around because it's "disconnected". What menu is the energy saving thing in? Truga posted:I couldn't find it, but it turns out it's something else and I can't do anything about it so I just installed a persistent windows tray thing i found on some forum.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2019 04:26
|
|
|
BabyRyoga posted:Anyone have anything to say about this monitor?
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2019 05:24
|
|
|
Looks to be a VA panel, apparently not super bright, for that price it's hard to say it's not a good value for desktop/media use. You should probably spend more time searching than I did, but I didn't see anything bad.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2019 05:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 15:17 |
|
|
xPanda posted:I've actually been thinking a bit about monitors more in terms of PPI rather than geometry, lately. It seems to me that the sweet-spot for comfortable desktop size is ~100-110 PPI, or some integer multiple thereof (only because of legacy resolution dependent UIs, which most desktop environments still have). This is the resolution range of 1440p 27" monitors and 1600p 30" monitors. Apple seems to agree, as you'll note that all their 'retina' displays are double this, in the range of 200-220 PPI, which would allow them to use simple integer scaling of their UIs. That's why some of their retina displays have unusual, nonstandard geometries, such as the upcoming XDR display, which is 32" with a geometry of 6016x3384 (certainly non-standard) which gives a nice PPI of 218. This is why 43" 4k displays exist - if you don't like scaling. I combined 2x27" 1440p displays with a 43" 4k in a PLP setup and it's amazing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2019 06:37
|
|
