looking for advice on a 4k gaming monitor, just upgraded my rig so i need a new monitor to go with it. currently use a 32" 120hz vizio tv 1080. seems like 27-28inch is the sweet spot for 4k, so im open to suggestions.
IMHO if your talking 27" I'd just go for 2k with a high refresh rate.
How much coin are you looking to spend?
I've been looking myself - I like the 24-27" size range (much bigger, and i have to start physically moving my head to see stuff in the corners with how I sit at a desk). I'm still holding out with my 1920x1200 (I would miss the extra inch on a straight 1080p monitor), one of which is probably close to 10 years old and I can't believe it still is working.
In my research so far, most people are recommending a good quality 2K with higher refresh rate over higher resolution - at least unless you are willing to get into the larger screen sizes. Windows still supposedly has DPI issues with smaller screens (from what I'm hearing, is pretty much anything under about 32").
I have, in the past, always been a resolution guy - higher resolution is better. And for me, as long as it can remain consistent I can live with 30fps, so I don't know how much a 120-144Hz monitor will do for me. But I'm hoping to make it into a Fry's or something where I can put my eyes to it and see for myself.
I can sorta understand the argument. You can "fake" resolution, that's what anti-aliasing is all about. But you can't really fake refresh rate. That being said, I can definitely appreciate the difference in DPI on my MBP Retina (2880x1800). So I think it's one of those things that I'm just going to have to look at to be able to decide which I prefer myself when I do my next monitor upgrade.
I recommend using a good 1080p display with a high refresh rate over a 4k monitor. 4k has 3 drawbacks currently. 1st the highest refresh rate is 60 hz. 2nd a lot of games are not optimized to be displayed at 4k. 3rd there are only a couple GPUs out currently that will allow you to get 4k at 60 fps.
When going up to 4k you are looking at quadrupling the amount of pixels to render. When you increase the refresh rate to 120hz you are doubling it.
Right now I use an LG UD88 which is a fantastic monitor, but I mostly use my monitor for things that require image quality like image editing. I can play most games at 4k but there are trade-offs. If you still want a 4k display. I would highly recommend the LG UD88 or its cheaper counterpart the LG UD68. The UD88 is also calibrated by a technician before it's shipped out.
You could always sit a little further away from the monitor. Being 48 years old, I kind of have to to focus on it easily. (Actually that is something anyone in their late 30s or older should consider as during the life of the monitor they won't be able to focus as closely)
I went for ASUS MG28UQ. It should be around $550. I bought 3 with a nice discount. Not sure about the current price.
I already had a 65" 4K TV so I wasn't sure about the small monitor 4K resolution to matter, but then I tested and realized it does matter and it matters very much. Now I'm not saying you should be getting this model but these are the stuff you should be checking out.
Definitely one with HDMI 2.0 - otherwise you'll be getting 30hz at 4k if you ever wanted to use HDMI port and DisplayPort 1.2 -- not any lower versions.
IPS or TN: this was a no brainer if price didn't matter, IPS could win most fights. But with the release of 10-bit TN, the quality has increased enough to compete again. I liked the 10-bit TN more, but this is something you have to check for personally.
Swivel and tilt are rather important when you get a big monitor on your desk. It is for me since I arrange them differently while doing differrnt things. Try to get a flexible one.
Response time: really depends on the games you are playing. I did a Q3A test myself and I had a noticeable improved accuracy with 1ms compared to 6ms. But if you are not in FPS and being crazy about it, you shouldn't care.
Refresh rate is capped at 60hz when I was buying, not sure if that has changed now. I didn't care for this personally because that does it for me.
HDR is another factor you should be considering, which I didn't and I regret it now!
Post edited by ConstantineMerus on
Constantine, The Console Poster
"One of the most difficult tasks men can perform, however much others may despise it, is the invention of good games and it cannot be done by men out of touch with their instinctive selves." - Carl Jung
my specs are i7 7700, 32gigs ram 1080 gtx so i think i can handle true 4k.
I've got the 7700k @5.15Ghz with 64g ram and a 1080. I run a 46" 4k 60hz Samsung for a flight sim.
I also have a 4770k @4.6Ghz with 16g ram and a Titan X running a 27" 2k 144hz G-sync IPS Acer.
The 27" 2k looks awesome and performs totally flawlessly. It just never lags or tears and it just "feels" good. The 4k is totally awesome for the flightsim, the movements aren't as fast and it really shows the tiny details like cars and trucks driving along the highways 36000ft below you. A city looks breath taking.
Today:
A 27" 4k will look a little better than the 2k , but a good 2k 144hz will "feel" a lot better than a 4k
4k for 24-27 inch monitors is completely useless (32+ inch and you might see some difference), buy yourself best 1440p 60 Hz monitor and youll have MUCH better experience instead falling for PR tricks that are designed to just pull more money out of your wallet for something you cant even notice.
IMHO if your talking 27" I'd just go for 2k with a high refresh rate.
How much coin are you looking to spend?
That depends on the price but I have to admit that I don't really see a huge difference between 2K and 4K in 27", I have a really hard time seeing any difference at all. There is a huge difference between 1080p and 2K though.
For 4K I think you need at least 30" to see much difference.
If you are going for 2K I would suggest a Dell screen, Dell have several really good 2K 27" screens.
for my distance to my screen, 32" is the sweet spot, i tried a 42" a few years ago and felt sea sick. The few searches i did for 32" 4k gaming monitors i didnt find anything appealing. only found a few 27" im not interested in the 21x9 aspect ratio since alot of games dont support it
You will probably need to wait a little, but this is the monitor you are looking for. You may also need to wait a bit longer for a version with nVidia active sync if it's important to you. Price will run about $800, and there will probably be other versions from partners like Dell who will charge less for the same panel.
Ignore the 4k proponents. The difference is so minimal and the performance hit so large go with the 2k monitors, not to mention the extra price. Oh and an I7 is not mandatory, the I5 does just as well at the same frequency in most cases.
Comments
How much coin are you looking to spend?
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
In my research so far, most people are recommending a good quality 2K with higher refresh rate over higher resolution - at least unless you are willing to get into the larger screen sizes. Windows still supposedly has DPI issues with smaller screens (from what I'm hearing, is pretty much anything under about 32").
I have, in the past, always been a resolution guy - higher resolution is better. And for me, as long as it can remain consistent I can live with 30fps, so I don't know how much a 120-144Hz monitor will do for me. But I'm hoping to make it into a Fry's or something where I can put my eyes to it and see for myself.
I can sorta understand the argument. You can "fake" resolution, that's what anti-aliasing is all about. But you can't really fake refresh rate. That being said, I can definitely appreciate the difference in DPI on my MBP Retina (2880x1800). So I think it's one of those things that I'm just going to have to look at to be able to decide which I prefer myself when I do my next monitor upgrade.
Also, so ready for OLED it isn't funny.
When going up to 4k you are looking at quadrupling the amount of pixels to render. When you increase the refresh rate to 120hz you are doubling it.
Right now I use an LG UD88 which is a fantastic monitor, but I mostly use my monitor for things that require image quality like image editing. I can play most games at 4k but there are trade-offs. If you still want a 4k display. I would highly recommend the LG UD88 or its cheaper counterpart the LG UD68. The UD88 is also calibrated by a technician before it's shipped out.
I already had a 65" 4K TV so I wasn't sure about the small monitor 4K resolution to matter, but then I tested and realized it does matter and it matters very much. Now I'm not saying you should be getting this model but these are the stuff you should be checking out.
Definitely one with HDMI 2.0 - otherwise you'll be getting 30hz at 4k if you ever wanted to use HDMI port and DisplayPort 1.2 -- not any lower versions.
IPS or TN: this was a no brainer if price didn't matter, IPS could win most fights. But with the release of 10-bit TN, the quality has increased enough to compete again. I liked the 10-bit TN more, but this is something you have to check for personally.
Swivel and tilt are rather important when you get a big monitor on your desk. It is for me since I arrange them differently while doing differrnt things. Try to get a flexible one.
Response time: really depends on the games you are playing. I did a Q3A test myself and I had a noticeable improved accuracy with 1ms compared to 6ms. But if you are not in FPS and being crazy about it, you shouldn't care.
Refresh rate is capped at 60hz when I was buying, not sure if that has changed now. I didn't care for this personally because that does it for me.
HDR is another factor you should be considering, which I didn't and I regret it now!
I also have a 4770k @4.6Ghz with 16g ram and a Titan X running a 27" 2k 144hz G-sync IPS Acer.
The 27" 2k looks awesome and performs totally flawlessly. It just never lags or tears and it just "feels" good. The 4k is totally awesome for the flightsim, the movements aren't as fast and it really shows the tiny details like cars and trucks driving along the highways 36000ft below you. A city looks breath taking.
Today:
A 27" 4k will look a little better than the 2k , but a good 2k 144hz will "feel" a lot better than a 4k
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
For 4K I think you need at least 30" to see much difference.
If you are going for 2K I would suggest a Dell screen, Dell have several really good 2K 27" screens.
You will probably need to wait a little, but this is the monitor you are looking for. You may also need to wait a bit longer for a version with nVidia active sync if it's important to you. Price will run about $800, and there will probably be other versions from partners like Dell who will charge less for the same panel.