|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:So, for your purposes, yeah, I think the 42" C2 is probably your best bet. There aren't really any other competitors worth looking at in this space right now. Though be aware that the launch price is, I believe, expected to be more along the lines of $1200. $900 to $1000 will happen later in the year though. Thanks for the information — I’ll definitely look at that monitor. Just lol if I’m paying $1200 for a 42” when I got a 48” C1 for $800 during Black Friday. The C1 was already a minor improvement on the CX, the C2 sounds like barely any improvement beyond a 42” model being available.
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2022 00:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 15:53 |
|
|
So it is time for me to hunt down some monitors and I need some recommendations. I need two 27' 1440p (4K is fine too if somehow the price increase is justifiable) displays with minimal bezels. One of these should be a g-sync/freesync gaming monitor and the other a simple 60hz thing for having discord/youtube video on in the background. I have a VESA setup and will mount them side by side so the stands are completely irrelevant. I sure wish 16:10 was still a thing that was affordable, I'm kind of sick and tired of 16:9 and how terrible it is for anything but movies.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 16:38
|
|
|
TheCoach posted:So it is time for me to hunt down some monitors and I need some recommendations. Dell has some new 16:10 27" and 32" monitors I believe. They aren't gaming monitors though. EDIT: Here it is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iiz2v4SkEvI xgalaxy fucked around with this message at 18:36 on Feb 14, 2022 |
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 18:34
|
|
|
They're not gaming monitors and they're double the cost of almost-as-large 16:9 gaming monitors
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 18:40
|
|
|
repiv posted:They're not gaming monitors and they're double the cost of almost-as-large 16:9 gaming monitors Yea. Not 4k either for that cost. So meh.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 18:43
|
|
|
There's probably other recommendations but late last year I got this Pixio Prime 27" 165hz 1440p monitor and this HP 27" 165hz 1440p monitor. They're about the same for picture quality so I assume the use the same panel. The Pixio has a slightly smaller lower bezel but the sides and top are the same 10-12mm bezels. The HP has HDMI and DP inputs with a headphone output and an internal power supply so it takes a regular computer power cable. The Pixio has two HDMI ports, a DP port and a headphone output and uses a power brick. I have them both VESA mounted. The HP has a bit less gamer aesthetic without the weird embossed stuff on the rear but they're both pretty much the same on the front besides one saying Pixio and one saying HP. Most other monitors with the same stats in the same price range are probably using the same panel so it just comes down to the company's support, how the case looks and what they've added to the controllers. In terms of features I think the Pixio is a better monitor. It came with more cables and has an extra HDMI port. I also prefer the external power supply because it if goes bad it's easier to replace. The HP is fine though, since it's almost the same monitor besides those small differences. I'd recommend either unless there's other considerations, but I paid $239.99 for the HP and $279.99 for the Pixio. Right now the HP is 299.99 and the pixio is 259.99. I'd consider getting two of the same monitor so your setup is identical and you won't save much getting a 60 or 75hz panel, but I'd definitely look for deals. It seems like right now the 27" gaming monitors are the best value for dollar since the prices on 22-24" have gone up.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 20:21
|
|
|
Side by side mounting was mentioned, so I'll need to give my cents on the matter. I have three monitors on L-setup. 27" on the center, another 27" on the side for Irssi and Discord and a 24" above the center monitor mostly dedicated to YouTube duties. Today the top monitor had a problem, possibly with the HDMI input, it couldn't receive signal. So I needed to move my YouTube browser to the side monitor and after watching a couple dozen minutes of video I concluded that the ergonomics were horrendous. I needed to turn my chair to watch the videos and if I wanted to do some forums browsing at the same time I had to twist my neck way too much. Side monitor is suitabe for Irssi, Discord and other stuff you only need to glance at and read an occasional short post. Anything you need to watch continuously has to go on the top. Anyone who has the possibility owes it to themselves to try vertical mounting. Maybe it would be better if the bottom monitors were layed out symmetrically, but I don't think I could live with a bezels in the middle. There's a one monitor that takes large majority of my time and it deserves an unobstructed, central view. I think after this experience I'll move my side-27"er to the top. Why didn't I do that in the beginning? It's a modern IPS monitor, much better for videos than the ancient 24" TN.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2022 00:01
|
|
|
So if I have a HDR display somehow(I really don’t just asking hypothetically) but all I’m doing is graphic design stuff should I just turn off HDR on the monitor menus and turn off HDR in windows? Also how does MacOS handle 3rd party HDR displays? Does it just work?
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2022 02:30
|
|
|
Deals-wise what should I be looking for for a typical 1440p 60 hz monitor? Will be used for games occasionally but no need for higher refresh rate.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2022 02:38
|
|
|
Shaocaholica posted:So if I have a HDR display somehow(I really don’t just asking hypothetically) but all I’m doing is graphic design stuff should I just turn off HDR on the monitor menus and turn off HDR in windows? What kind of graphic design? If you're making things that will get printed, a wider gamut may actually be useful to you, but I don't really know what specifically you should be looking for. If you're doing graphic design for the web then yeah, sRGB is what you want to target, and then you'll want to look for a monitor that has an sRGB emulation mode and preferably also lets you calibrate the sRGB mode (Rtings mentions this in their reviews when it's present and also tests sRGB calibration). IME MacOS does enable HDR by default when you plug in a 3rd party HDR-capable monitor, but as mentioned earlier on this page not all HDR capable monitors are well behaved, so it may or may not work automagically out of the box.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2022 04:38
|
|
|
Ohio State BOOniversity posted:Deals-wise what should I be looking for for a typical 1440p 60 hz monitor? Will be used for games occasionally but no need for higher refresh rate. Personally I went with a cheap Acer 1440p 75hz monitor as my WFH display. It has freesync, so actually handles gaming okayish, too. It's an individual thing, but I find 75hz a lot more comfortable than 60hz. My personal display is a 144hz freesync monitor, but that would be overkill for my work laptop.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2022 05:10
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K88TWstPN7U Gahh, I want it, but I really wish it was a 4K display. I want a real end-game monitor. Something where I would feel like I don't need better picture quality than what it's offering for a very long time. It seems like we're so close, but it's probably not going to happen this year, is it? There was a report that came out that indicated that Samsung most likely won't scale up production on QD-OLED until 2024. Yield rates have a lot of room for improvement in the meantime though (they're like 30% or less right now), which could result in more panel types being made as samsung refines the manufacturing process. I hope at some point they get around to a 32" 4K panel. I would buy that so fast. Dr. Video Games 0031 fucked around with this message at 08:08 on Feb 15, 2022 |
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2022 08:05
|
|
|
Rexxed posted:There's probably other recommendations but late last year I got this Pixio Prime 27" 165hz 1440p monitor and this HP 27" 165hz 1440p monitor. They're about the same for picture quality so I assume the use the same panel. The Pixio has a slightly smaller lower bezel but the sides and top are the same 10-12mm bezels. The HP has HDMI and DP inputs with a headphone output and an internal power supply so it takes a regular computer power cable. The Pixio has two HDMI ports, a DP port and a headphone output and uses a power brick. I have them both VESA mounted. The HP has a bit less gamer aesthetic without the weird embossed stuff on the rear but they're both pretty much the same on the front besides one saying Pixio and one saying HP. Probably should have mentioned I'm in Europe so Pixio stuff isn't even a thing even on amazon and the HP monitor seems to no longer be sold I can only find out of stock listings or the 1080p version out there...
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2022 11:04
|
|
|
That HP monitor uses an LG panel, and it's a pretty good one. LG sells that panel to at least HP, Dell, and Lenovo, but probably more. There are a lot of 27" 1440p 165Hz displays that will also look very good but not use that panel though, but the differences will likely only manifest in small stuff that most people won't notice (e.g. plus or minus 10% coverage of the adobe rgb color space, plus or minus a millisecond or two in response times, etc). Here's a review of the PX277 from october 2020: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvm5BakaWqs It makes me think that it doesn't use that LG panel due to the 1000:1 contrast ratio (the LG one is lower), lower maximum brightness, slightly worse color range (though both fully cover the sRGB color space), and some slower response times. But again, these differences are likely going to be rather small to most people's eyes. It seems like a decent choice for a sub-$300 1440p gaming monitor. edit: Here's a Hardware Unboxed review of the Dell S2721DGF from that same month. The HP X27q uses the same panel as the S2721DGF, so you can compare the characteristics against the PX277, which shows up in the comparison charts here. I'd say these monitors use a higher-quality panel overall, but they may not be worth the extra $40 for some people. vvvv Yeah, the HP X27q is a great deal when you can get it on sale. Dr. Video Games 0031 fucked around with this message at 14:08 on Feb 15, 2022 |
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2022 11:16
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:That HP monitor uses an LG panel, and it's a pretty good one. LG sells that panel to at least HP, Dell, and Lenovo, but probably more. There are a lot of 27" 1440p 165Hz displays that will also look very good but not use that panel though, but the differences will likely only manifest in small stuff that most people won't notice (e.g. plus or minus 10% coverage of the adobe rgb color space, plus or minus a millisecond or two in response times, etc). Interesting, I hadn't looked at much beyond the resolution, refresh rate, and price before ordering. I guess the HP was a really good deal at $240! I have it mounted above the pixio as a secondary display on another PC so I haven't really given them the same side by side comparison. TheCoach posted:Probably should have mentioned I'm in Europe so Pixio stuff isn't even a thing even on amazon and the HP monitor seems to no longer be sold I can only find out of stock listings or the 1080p version out there... I'd look at local prices for IPS 27" 1440p monitors in your price range, then do a little research on each model. PCPartpicker does have a monitor section so here's the listing for France, 1440p, sorted by lowest price (I didn't filter for the size or refresh rate but you can edit things as you want). You can change it to the appropriate country and work on more filtering to get a good overview: https://fr.pcpartpicker.com/products/monitor/#r=256001440&P=2&sort=price&page=1
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2022 14:02
|
|
|
I guess there's no info on when will the 42" LG OLED become available?
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2022 14:27
|
|
|
OK so I did some local research and currently I'm looking at One of these for the main gaming monitor: https://www.displaydb.com/compare/asus-tuf-gaming-vg27aq1a/asus-tuf-gaming-vg27aq 8 euro difference (371 vs 379) between these, which one should I take? And as the side, this looks reasonable and has a vesa mount located in more or lessthe same sot as the asus monitors: https://iiyama.com/gl_en/products/g-master-g2740qsu-b1/ 247 euros for this guy
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2022 14:57
|
|
|
Huh. New developments in the saga of my M27Q causing strange behavior. I've noticed that with GPU-intensive games (in this case, Dyson Sphere Program, Lost Ark, and surprisingly Project Warlock), my secondary monitor has started to update on a delay compared to the audio & the main monitor (the M27Q). With PW and DSP it's maybe a second of delay, but I hit nearly a 10 second delay between the audio and video components of Discord notifications with Lost Ark last night. The extra strange wrinkle is that this wasn't happening at all with Red Dead Redemption 2, which is even higher demand than any of the others listed (at least with my settings the way they are). I know something is already fucky with the M27Q to some degree, because having it plugged in adds 20 seconds to my PC's boot time. Overall I haven't been having issues, though, so aside from asking in a couple places I haven't really checked into it much. This behavior is weird though - is the GPU supposed to prioritize the primary monitor so heavily that the secondary monitor doesn't even get a single frame in 10+ seconds? (GPU is an RX 580 for context.)
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2022 17:23
|
|
|
Does 165hz VRR still look better than not when under 60fps? 40fps? Is VRR even doing anything special at those lower frame rates? I mean 60hz vsync basically drops to 30fps if the timing is missed. I guess that's less drastic of a jump with a 165hz display.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2022 20:28
|
|
|
you are describing the gsync or freesync range, where VRR works. high end will go longer (mine is 30-165), low end less so, say 100-144 to pull a number from my butt.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2022 20:34
|
|
|
Why is there a low threshold? Shouldn't it work down to 1fps? VRR should be capable of perceived refresh rates that are whole number divisors of the native refresh rate right?
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2022 20:37
|
|
|
Shaocaholica posted:Does 165hz VRR still look better than not when under 60fps? 40fps? Is VRR even doing anything special at those lower frame rates? I mean 60hz vsync basically drops to 30fps if the timing is missed. I guess that's less drastic of a jump with a 165hz display. Yeah it still works down to whatever the minimum hertz that the *sync technology on the panel handles. I think mine are 48-165hz (using displayport, HDMI is 144hz). It's not common for my framerate to get below that but it can happen and it suddenly seems choppier when it does. I've found in general that going from a 96hz overclocked Crossover to the freesync monitor that it's easier to track targets in FPS games and things feel less choppy in situations where they were before but I might not have noticed previously. In some cases I was probably losing a lot of frames with the old monitor and just didn't know it because the refresh rate was high but not synced to the monitor at all. I still play a good amount of Planetside 2 and in that game taking off in an aircraft shows a lot of the map if you keep your render distance high (which I do), so I was just accustomed to seeing the framerate drop and get choppy but I didn't really know I was until I got the new monitor and CPU. It's a CPU bound game when you turn down the graphics to a level that most people do to be competitive. With a newer CPU in my system now I almost never get below 60 FPS even when there's a couple of hundred people fighting in a small area. It does have some culling but still has the potential to get chunky.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2022 20:45
|
|
|
Well, I decided what I wanted was the LG 27GP950-B. Only it turns out the drat thing is sold out everywhere! That's my mistake for actually doing research 
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2022 01:25
|
|
|
Shaocaholica posted:Why is there a low threshold? Shouldn't it work down to 1fps? VRR should be capable of perceived refresh rates that are whole number divisors of the native refresh rate right? Because LCDs can't just hold an image forever. They have to be refreshed, or the image fades to gray and the LCD can actually be damaged. However, your GPU can just re-send the same frame. As long as your maximum refresh rate is at least 2.5x your minimum refresh rate, your GPU will just multiply the framerate to keep it in the VRR window and it's a non-issue. VRR is still a significant benefit at lower frame rates, because your GPU creating frames at 45 FPS (every 22ms) looks a lot better when those frames spaced 22ms of game time apart are displayed every 22ms than displayed at patterns of 16 and 33ms. It's not going to make bad framerates look good, but it is less bad. K8.0 fucked around with this message at 01:35 on Feb 16, 2022 |
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2022 01:29
|
|
|
K8.0 posted:Because LCDs can't just hold an image forever. They have to be refreshed, or the image fades to gray and the LCD can actually be damaged. However, your GPU can just re-send the same frame. As long as your maximum refresh rate is at least 2.5x your minimum refresh rate, your GPU will just multiply the framerate to keep it in the VRR window and it's a non-issue. It doesn't really work this cleanly in practice for most monitors, though. A lot of monitors will stop doing VRR when they go under 48 fps, for instance. I think only g-sync ultimate monitors are capable of going under that consistently.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2022 01:33
|
|
|
I feel like game devs are always gonna be targeting 40-60fps(single player graphics showcase games) to get the most out of hardware so having VRR work really well for 35-75 fps should be a priority?
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2022 02:36
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:It doesn't really work this cleanly in practice for most monitors, though. A lot of monitors will stop doing VRR when they go under 48 fps, for instance. I think only g-sync ultimate monitors are capable of going under that consistently. I've played around with it repeatedly by playing with frame limits. I've not seen it NOT work since Nvidia introduced the feature. Probably because at that point it has nothing to do with the monitor, the GPU knows it can't send a signal less than the minimum refresh rate and it has to double frames one way or another. I think some of the flickering people sometimes experience appears to have to do with LFC engaging and disengaging with monitors that don't seem to handle large fluctuations in refresh rate very well - if you have a 48hz minimum refresh and you're right around 48hz, the GPU is going to wind up asking the monitor to do 49hz, then 88, etc. For my monitor that's not a problem, but I've seen videos of poor behavior in that kind of circumstance.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2022 03:28
|
|
|
That still doesn’t make sense to me. A 165hz display just humming along at 165hz. When a new frame comes it gets displayed at the next interval. If no new frame is ready just refresh with the last frame. That should have a lower bound of 0fps. I mean that’s not even VRR is it? Lol what even is VRR anymore?
Shaocaholica fucked around with this message at 05:34 on Feb 16, 2022 |
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2022 05:32
|
|
|
Shaocaholica posted:That still doesn’t make sense to me. A 165hz display just humming along at 165hz. When a new frame comes it gets displayed at the next interval. If no new frame is ready just refresh with the last frame. That should have a lower bound of 0fps. I mean that’s not even VRR is it? Lol what even is VRR anymore? What you're describing is not VRR but standard behavior that all monitors already engage in. VRR means that a monitor will refresh as soon as it gets a new frame instead of waiting for the next refresh point, up to x number of times a second (its max refresh rate). But if it takes too long to get a frame while VRR is enabled, then a duplicate frame must be displayed instead because monitors can't hold an image forever without refreshing. In practice, this means if you're getting 40 frames a second, a your gpu might send two of every frame, making it so your monitor is now refreshing at 80 times a second. The GPU will still be sending in frames as soon as it gets them, but it's just sending in duplicate in-between frames when necessary. If the GPU doesn't do the frame duplication, then what will happen at 40fps is that your monitor will just be stuck at its lowest natural refresh rate (48hz usually) and standard non-VRR behavior will occur. Dr. Video Games 0031 fucked around with this message at 06:13 on Feb 16, 2022 |
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2022 06:10
|
|
|
https://www.techpowerup.com/292032/cooler-master-unveils-its-first-mini-led-displays-with-quantum-dot-technology New Mini LED displays announced by...... Cooler Master? loving sure, why not. No information on zone count yet, but $700 for the 1440p panel is largely reasonable compared to the competition. AOC's upcoming 27" 1440p miniLED display is expected to be north of $1000 for some reason. Same goes for everyone else I'm aware of. It is interesting seeing everyone get in on the monitor game. There was some market research that came out last year about how well gaming monitors are selling, and it seems everyone is trying to get in on that wave. Though ultimately, almost all of the panels are still coming from the same 5 companies (LG, Innolux, AUO, Samsung, BOE) edit: I'm blind. 576 local dimming zones for both. That's not bad for 27". Dr. Video Games 0031 fucked around with this message at 08:12 on Feb 16, 2022 |
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2022 07:43
|
|
|
Is anyone using a loving 48" panel for gaming? I am sort of interested in OLED, very interested in going to something bigger than I have now, and interested in 4k. Right now I have a 27" in landscape and a 27" next to it in portrait. If I draw a square that is bounded by the left and right sides of each monitor, and then the top and bottom of the portrait-oriented one, that is more or less a 48" screen. Google tells me if I have a 48" computer display I want to be a minimum of 2.5' from it, which is about how I have stuff set up and I can easily get myself another foot. The only display that really currently meets these criteria is the AORUS FO48U 48" which is a grand, which isn't bad, though also only 120hz. I think what I'd really like is a 37--43" 4k OLED at 144hz or higher, but no one is making them now. I am going to cut a piece of cardboard to be a 16:9 48" square and see how that looks on my desk, but, curious if people have thoughts or other suggestions. I do not think I want an ultrawide and I am meh on curved displays but I would look at them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2022 15:34
|
|
|
I have a 32" 4K display and it feels absolutely massive. Have no idea how people's eyeballs don't just pop out their heads like marbles with a 48" OLED.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2022 16:26
|
|
|
Cabbages and Kings posted:Big monitor business Please post back with what your thoughts are. I have been asking myself the same thing recently. 48" seems just a touch too big from the YouTube videos I've seen of people doing it, but who knows.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2022 16:38
|
|
|
a dingus posted:Please post back with what your thoughts are. I have been asking myself the same thing recently. 48" seems just a touch too big from the YouTube videos I've seen of people doing it, but who knows. 42" or 37" seems like more of a sweetspot but they don't exist, yet. LG has some upcoming in OLED but I think the smaller ones may not do the fast refresh rates. frytechnician posted:I have a 32" 4K display and it feels absolutely massive. Have no idea how people's eyeballs don't just pop out their heads like marbles with a 48" OLED. Hmm, I have a 27" that feels fine until I load up something like Forza with a wheel, or even just a gorgeous pixel art scroller, and it feels small. Keep in mind that my other main avenue of gaming is on a 12' screen from a 1080p projector, so that may be breaking my brain. I am not expecting to do this any time real soon, still paying off the kegerator from Christmas and I am on a strict "one bullshit purchase at a time, interest free or not" plan, lest I spiral into total insolvency.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2022 17:08
|
|
|
Cabbages and Kings posted:I think what I'd really like is a 37--43" 4k OLED at 144hz or higher, but no one is making them now. LG is going to release a 42" C2, and it's coming within a couple months. It's 120hz instead of 144hz, but the near-instant response times of OLED will probably make that TV clearer in motion and give it less input lag than a 144hz LCD.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2022 23:18
|
|
|
What resolutions do PS5/XBSX support? Can you plug one of these consoles into a 'PC' monitor with VRR and have it work at the native resolution? Obviously FHD/UHD will be supported but what about QHD?
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2022 03:33
|
|
|
Xboxes support 1440p and VRR monitors already PS5 is more awkward, it will only output 1080p or 4k so to use it with a 1440p monitor the display ideally needs to accept a 4k signal and handle downscaling internally. VRR isn't currently supported either but that's at least planned.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2022 04:21
|
|
|
Oh PS5 doesn't do VRR at all?
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2022 04:34
|
|
|
Not yet, no
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2022 04:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 15:53 |
|
|
it's not super common in tvs as i understand it, which is what consoles tend to target. could be mistaken?
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2022 04:49
|
|