VOGONS


First post, by Robhalfordfan

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

Hi all

not 100% sure this would valid on here all, if not, I apologize in advance

I am upgrading my graphics card and looks I will need a new monitor but not sure what would the best/good enough for pc gaming

I am looking for a pc monitor that does at least full HD (1920x1080) and maybe dip into 2k/4k-ish area

i will be only doing a single monitor setup

the gpu is Geforce GTX 1070 Super

http://www.palit.com/palit/vgapro.php?id=2629&lang=en

The available ports on the GPU are 1x HDMI, 1x DVI-D, 3x display ports

no idea which is better

Any help would be greatly appreciated

Last edited by Robhalfordfan on 2020-02-19, 11:44. Edited 2 times in total.

Reply 1 of 16, by imi

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

you should be getting a monitor that natively has the resolution you use most, though with a 4k display interpolation is not that much of an issue anymore, but still something to consider.

if your GPU can run most games at 1440p that might be a resolution to consider.

for me at least resolution also depends a lot on size.

as for specific monitors... it really depends on what you are looking for quality-wise.

Reply 3 of 16, by duga3

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

DisplayPort is best.

I think it would also help others to know:

1. GPU model
2. Favorite games (or game types: fast-paced pvp shooters, mmorpgs, singleplayer adventure rpgs, etc.. AND years such as 2020+, 1999-2002, etc...)
3. Preferred aspect ratio (4:3, 16:9, 16:10, 21:9, 32:9, etc...)
4. How long you want to use it before replacing (2 years, 5, 10,...?)
5. Max price

I would recommend to consider a used monitor. For example a lot of monitors from 2 years ago can be found for like 30-50% of their original price in a used market now. If you can try before you buy then you should be okay, statistically speaking. For example Asus PG279Q cost 800usd (new) 2 years ago and now you can buy it used for like 350usd. I would recommend to specifically find popular (higher-end) models which cater to people who upgrade often.

The PG279Q users probably switched to newer ultrawides soon after, seeking to simply replace the (totally fine) "old" monitor with something new and shiny. This makes it less likely there is something wrong with the monitor. High-end tech is usually only expensive when it is released, before it is pushed out with incrementally better technology in 1-2 years.

Blurbusters.com has some very knowledgeable people behind it so you can check there for some recommendations. Also Rtings.com has some detailed reviews. These sites offer quality information about both new monitors and older (2017-2018) monitors. And if you want to follow the buzz around upcoming monitors, try Tftcentral.co.uk

98/XP multi-boot system with P55 chipset (build log)

Reply 4 of 16, by Robhalfordfan

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
imi wrote on 2020-02-18, 16:45:
you should be getting a monitor that natively has the resolution you use most, though with a 4k display interpolation is not tha […]
Show full quote

you should be getting a monitor that natively has the resolution you use most, though with a 4k display interpolation is not that much of an issue anymore, but still something to consider.

if your GPU can run most games at 1440p that might be a resolution to consider.

for me at least resolution also depends a lot on size.

as for specific monitors... it really depends on what you are looking for quality-wise.

i have never played games at 2k or 4k and thinking of future proofing but the card is gtx 1070 super jetsteam

http://www.palit.com/palit/vgapro.php?id=2629&lang=en

Reply 5 of 16, by Robhalfordfan

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
Oetker wrote on 2020-02-18, 19:08:

Look into things like 140+Hz support, gsync/freesync, HDR, panel types and decide which of those are important to you.

no idea at i have never played or watched anything above 1080p

Reply 6 of 16, by Robhalfordfan

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
duga3 wrote on 2020-02-18, 23:22:
DisplayPort is best. […]
Show full quote

DisplayPort is best.

I think it would also help others to know:

1. GPU model
2. Favorite games (or game types: fast-paced pvp shooters, mmorpgs, singleplayer adventure rpgs, etc.. AND years such as 2020+, 1999-2002, etc...)
3. Preferred aspect ratio (4:3, 16:9, 16:10, 21:9, 32:9, etc...)
4. How long you want to use it before replacing (2 years, 5, 10,...?)
5. Max price

I would recommend to consider a used monitor. For example a lot of monitors from 2 years ago can be found for like 30-50% of their original price in a used market now. If you can try before you buy then you should be okay, statistically speaking. For example Asus PG279Q cost 800usd (new) 2 years ago and now you can buy it used for like 350usd. I would recommend to specifically find popular (higher-end) models which cater to people who upgrade often.

The PG279Q users probably switched to newer ultrawides soon after, seeking to simply replace the (totally fine) "old" monitor with something new and shiny. This makes it less likely there is something wrong with the monitor. High-end tech is usually only expensive when it is released, before it is pushed out with incrementally better technology in 1-2 years.

Blurbusters.com has some very knowledgeable people behind it so you can check there for some recommendations. Also Rtings.com has some detailed reviews. These sites offer quality information about both new monitors and older (2017-2018) monitors. And if you want to follow the buzz around upcoming monitors, try Tftcentral.co.uk

the gpu is - gtx 1070 super http://www.palit.com/palit/vgapro.php?id=2629&lang=en

fav games - mixed but single player games - muti player/online, i am not really bothered at all

type of games - fps to story driven to rpgs and years would be anything from 2010- ish to now as it the gtx 970 sli i have at moment is starting to dip into mid/low range for gaming for me

aspect ratio - widescreen - 16:9 i assuming is what i am use to - never thought about it - maybe dip into 2k/4k, maybe

time of use - would use for a long time as the monitor i have been using before is 10+ years and made for vista and would like a monitor that i don't have to worry about replacing anytime soon

max price - not sure as i don't what kind i am looking for

Reply 7 of 16, by texterted

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

HW Unboxed did a video yesterday which may help.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yBgY__4q0U8

Cheers

Ted

98se:- Asus A8v Dlx. A-64 3000+, 512 mb ddr, nVidia 4400Ti, SB Live.
XP Pro:- Asus P5 Q SE Plus, C2D E8400, 4 Gig DDR2, Radeon HD4870, SB Audigy 2ZS.
Windows Home Server v1 :- Gigabyte GA-EP43, c2D E8400, Bunch of SATA HDD's.

Reply 8 of 16, by dionb

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

Nobody mentioned panel type yet, but that's one of the more important factors. There are a lot of names, but you basically have four choices:

TN: cheap, fastest, but awful viewing angles and colour shift. Iffy white and black levels.
VA: arguably slowest, wide angles and very saturated colour. Best black levels other than OLED, white less perfect. Ideal for films.
IPS: slightly slower than TN, good viewing angles, best colour reproduction. Best white levels other than OLED, but black less perfect. Best affordable all-rounder.
OLED: viciously expensive, perfect viewing angles, perfect colour and black and white levels. If budget is no issue, take this - but likely to be a factor 10 more expensive than the others.

Note that "speed" here relates to the physical switching from grey to grey, it's not an indicator of (input) lag. A slow screen will ghost on very fast movement, but you will see the movement straight away. Input lag is a different category and is determined by the screen electronics, not the panel type. Generally, the more processing a screen does, the higher the lag - that's why televisions are less ideal for gaming. Input lag is possibly the worst factor for gaming, but there are no good specifications to determine it, you need a good independent review comparing the exact model you want with others to determine it, regardless of panel type. You are better off with a slow VA panel with low input lag than a 144Hz TN panel with input lag in the tens of ms (and yes, even in that category they exist).

Personally I can't stand TN panels and their shifting colour as soon as you move your head. My go-to screens are Dell 'business' IPS screens. Good build-quality, decent price, no nonsense and fast enough that I don't notice any lag or ghosting (but I'm not an FPS gamer, my reflexes are not what they were 25 years ago and even then I was nowhere near a pro). I forget the exact model # I have now, but it's a QHD (2560x1440) resolution screen that pairs nicely with my GTX1070.

Reply 10 of 16, by duga3

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

For most people I would go with 120+ Hz, low lag IPS and simply not game in a dark room or try to win matches in Quake or anything e-sports related in first person. And turn off any in-game motion blur, because it is already a built-in feature of those LCD monitors. I would be wary of bad units with beyond spec levels of backlight bleed - so always make sure you can return it for no reason.

VA/QLED is hyped for nice black levels but in the grand scheme of things (OLED, CRT, PLASMA,..) it is almost as bad as IPS, so why bother. TN panel has bad picture overall. QLED pixels look fuzzy, like on a TV. OLED is too expensive with other drawbacks.

By the way, you can also substitute Gsync by making sure your FPS is not dipping below refresh rate. This is usually easy if you prepare for it, starting with your personal choice of GPU/monitor. This is also why I would discourage 4K with 1070 if you play graphically intensive AAA games released after 2010 - you will not be able to max them out perfectly. Even with 2080ti I would not recommend it, but I know many people do it (because there is nothing better).

I would go with 1440p. On old low spec games you can use DSR (2880p). On new games you can use native 1440p and still have room for higher settings and some AA. Also, new graphically intensive games have shit AA tech so they kind of need 4K+, but there are no GPUs fast enough to handle that perfectly anyway, so again, why bother now. I have no problem waiting for a few years for example and then playing what I "missed" with a much better gear. For example my 1080Ti rig is great as a SGSSAA machine for pre-DX10 games which do not use DirectSound3D/+EAX. But I dont particularly enjoy new games, with a few exceptions maybe, so if you really like new games then you have no choice but to play them now of course.

98/XP multi-boot system with P55 chipset (build log)

Reply 12 of 16, by Robhalfordfan

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
dionb wrote on 2020-02-19, 16:24:
Nobody mentioned panel type yet, but that's one of the more important factors. There are a lot of names, but you basically have […]
Show full quote

Nobody mentioned panel type yet, but that's one of the more important factors. There are a lot of names, but you basically have four choices:

TN: cheap, fastest, but awful viewing angles and colour shift. Iffy white and black levels.
VA: arguably slowest, wide angles and very saturated colour. Best black levels other than OLED, white less perfect. Ideal for films.
IPS: slightly slower than TN, good viewing angles, best colour reproduction. Best white levels other than OLED, but black less perfect. Best affordable all-rounder.
OLED: viciously expensive, perfect viewing angles, perfect colour and black and white levels. If budget is no issue, take this - but likely to be a factor 10 more expensive than the others.

Note that "speed" here relates to the physical switching from grey to grey, it's not an indicator of (input) lag. A slow screen will ghost on very fast movement, but you will see the movement straight away. Input lag is a different category and is determined by the screen electronics, not the panel type. Generally, the more processing a screen does, the higher the lag - that's why televisions are less ideal for gaming. Input lag is possibly the worst factor for gaming, but there are no good specifications to determine it, you need a good independent review comparing the exact model you want with others to determine it, regardless of panel type. You are better off with a slow VA panel with low input lag than a 144Hz TN panel with input lag in the tens of ms (and yes, even in that category they exist).

Personally I can't stand TN panels and their shifting colour as soon as you move your head. My go-to screens are Dell 'business' IPS screens. Good build-quality, decent price, no nonsense and fast enough that I don't notice any lag or ghosting (but I'm not an FPS gamer, my reflexes are not what they were 25 years ago and even then I was nowhere near a pro). I forget the exact model # I have now, but it's a QHD (2560x1440) resolution screen that pairs nicely with my GTX1070.

what would the best for noob who is use to full hd gaming and want to dipping into higher 4k stuff (even if it is just future proofing)

Reply 13 of 16, by Robhalfordfan

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
duga3 wrote on 2020-02-19, 22:54:
For most people I would go with 120+ Hz, low lag IPS and simply not game in a dark room or try to win matches in Quake or anythi […]
Show full quote

For most people I would go with 120+ Hz, low lag IPS and simply not game in a dark room or try to win matches in Quake or anything e-sports related in first person. And turn off any in-game motion blur, because it is already a built-in feature of those LCD monitors. I would be wary of bad units with beyond spec levels of backlight bleed - so always make sure you can return it for no reason.

VA/QLED is hyped for nice black levels but in the grand scheme of things (OLED, CRT, PLASMA,..) it is almost as bad as IPS, so why bother. TN panel has bad picture overall. QLED pixels look fuzzy, like on a TV. OLED is too expensive with other drawbacks.

By the way, you can also substitute Gsync by making sure your FPS is not dipping below refresh rate. This is usually easy if you prepare for it, starting with your personal choice of GPU/monitor. This is also why I would discourage 4K with 1070 if you play graphically intensive AAA games released after 2010 - you will not be able to max them out perfectly. Even with 2080ti I would not recommend it, but I know many people do it (because there is nothing better).

I would go with 1440p. On old low spec games you can use DSR (2880p). On new games you can use native 1440p and still have room for higher settings and some AA. Also, new graphically intensive games have shit AA tech so they kind of need 4K+, but there are no GPUs fast enough to handle that perfectly anyway, so again, why bother now. I have no problem waiting for a few years for example and then playing what I "missed" with a much better gear. For example my 1080Ti rig is great as a SGSSAA machine for pre-DX10 games which do not use DirectSound3D/+EAX. But I dont particularly enjoy new games, with a few exceptions maybe, so if you really like new games then you have no choice but to play them now of course.

i never had to think about panel type and refresh rate, i am use just let my gpu set all of that and never had screen tearing or any noticeable issues

what is sgssaa and what is dsr and i heard of g-sync

the picture there, looks excellent enough to me

i am not looking to go full hog in 4k or ulta 4k stuff because i know i cant afford that with all the bells and whistles and i am thinking about starting to dip into that coming from full hd gaming for years

a basic 4k monitor with g-sync and a display port would suit me for now or am i aiming too low for future proofing and not fully understanding

Last edited by Robhalfordfan on 2020-02-20, 12:00. Edited 2 times in total.

Reply 14 of 16, by Robhalfordfan

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
Robhalfordfan wrote on 2020-02-20, 11:47:
dionb wrote on 2020-02-19, 16:24:
Nobody mentioned panel type yet, but that's one of the more important factors. There are a lot of names, but you basically have […]
Show full quote

Nobody mentioned panel type yet, but that's one of the more important factors. There are a lot of names, but you basically have four choices:

TN: cheap, fastest, but awful viewing angles and colour shift. Iffy white and black levels.
VA: arguably slowest, wide angles and very saturated colour. Best black levels other than OLED, white less perfect. Ideal for films.
IPS: slightly slower than TN, good viewing angles, best colour reproduction. Best white levels other than OLED, but black less perfect. Best affordable all-rounder.
OLED: viciously expensive, perfect viewing angles, perfect colour and black and white levels. If budget is no issue, take this - but likely to be a factor 10 more expensive than the others.

Note that "speed" here relates to the physical switching from grey to grey, it's not an indicator of (input) lag. A slow screen will ghost on very fast movement, but you will see the movement straight away. Input lag is a different category and is determined by the screen electronics, not the panel type. Generally, the more processing a screen does, the higher the lag - that's why televisions are less ideal for gaming. Input lag is possibly the worst factor for gaming, but there are no good specifications to determine it, you need a good independent review comparing the exact model you want with others to determine it, regardless of panel type. You are better off with a slow VA panel with low input lag than a 144Hz TN panel with input lag in the tens of ms (and yes, even in that category they exist).

Personally I can't stand TN panels and their shifting colour as soon as you move your head. My go-to screens are Dell 'business' IPS screens. Good build-quality, decent price, no nonsense and fast enough that I don't notice any lag or ghosting (but I'm not an FPS gamer, my reflexes are not what they were 25 years ago and even then I was nowhere near a pro). I forget the exact model # I have now, but it's a QHD (2560x1440) resolution screen that pairs nicely with my GTX1070.

what would the best for noob who is use to full hd gaming and want to start dipping into higher 4k stuff (even if it is just future proofing)

Reply 15 of 16, by dionb

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
Robhalfordfan wrote on 2020-02-20, 11:47:

[...]

what would the best for noob who is use to full hd gaming and want to dipping into higher 4k stuff (even if it is just future proofing)

That's a pretty personal thing. You're the one who's going to be looking at the screen for long periods. As I said, I simply can't stand TN panels and I generally gravitate towards IPS. But that's me. Other people are far less obsessed with the colour shifts of TN and are irritated by backlight bleed or 'sparkle' of IPS. The only hard recommendation I can do is go to a place with multiple different monitors (or failing that televisions) and having a critical look at what's on offer. If unsure, look at laptops. Cheap low-end devices tend to have TN panels. You can instantly recognize them by the colour shift when you raise or lower the lid a bit. High-end devices (including all Apple stuff) tend to have IPS panels.

The size and coatings may differ, but fundamental characteristics of panels are pretty universal, and once you're aware of that you'll quickly develop a preference.

Preferences aside, TN is cheaper than the rest, particularly when it comes to fast (>60Hz) panels. If you really can't see any difference or don't care about it, TN will get you more other stuff for your money.

Reply 16 of 16, by Robhalfordfan

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
dionb wrote on 2020-02-24, 23:18:
That's a pretty personal thing. You're the one who's going to be looking at the screen for long periods. As I said, I simply can […]
Show full quote
Robhalfordfan wrote on 2020-02-20, 11:47:

[...]

what would the best for noob who is use to full hd gaming and want to dipping into higher 4k stuff (even if it is just future proofing)

That's a pretty personal thing. You're the one who's going to be looking at the screen for long periods. As I said, I simply can't stand TN panels and I generally gravitate towards IPS. But that's me. Other people are far less obsessed with the colour shifts of TN and are irritated by backlight bleed or 'sparkle' of IPS. The only hard recommendation I can do is go to a place with multiple different monitors (or failing that televisions) and having a critical look at what's on offer. If unsure, look at laptops. Cheap low-end devices tend to have TN panels. You can instantly recognize them by the colour shift when you raise or lower the lid a bit. High-end devices (including all Apple stuff) tend to have IPS panels.

The size and coatings may differ, but fundamental characteristics of panels are pretty universal, and once you're aware of that you'll quickly develop a preference.

Preferences aside, TN is cheaper than the rest, particularly when it comes to fast (>60Hz) panels. If you really can't see any difference or don't care about it, TN will get you more other stuff for your money.

ok dokey, thank you and will keep in mind