27" super-HD monitors are just not worth it...q

The 2560x1440 res is very worthwhile if you're running software that can take advantage of it; such as 3d software that can require a lot of controls visible.
 
My next monitor will be as larger RES as possible. Not size. RES. When editing photos you can't have enough res really. Also IPS for good colour representation.
 
I run 3 screens, a 30" @ 2560 x 1600 with a 20" in portrait @ 1200 x 1600 either side of it. I'm using autocad in an architectural environment and desktop space is absolutely vital for me.
 
'It kinda makes the point a bit moot really. What the point would be is that within the UK, 27" 2560x1440 monitors represent poor value for money relative to other displays, rather than it being anything to do with 27" 2560x1440 itself.'

Agree with you there Spoffle I recently bought a 1080p 27" monitor and I have to be honest, if there had been a 1440p 27" available in the uk for the same money then I would probably have bought it. Having said that I'm really liking 1080p @ 27" because, as someone eluded to earlier, I'm finding it agrees with my aging eyes! :D
 
Using my DGM next to my 1080p is great, I have all monitoring programs and folding software on the 1080p and can have a movie or browsing on the dgm, or vice versa if I need be, it's great when I do work as I can have everything open at the same time and be able to research on the Internet and still have many other windows open.

It's not needed per se but if the money's there and it's making my life easier why not, it's also easy to turn the DGM around and chill in bed whilst watching a film, my 37' wall mounted tv is pretty much redundant now as it's so useful.
 
kissenger said:
No they are good. And if you can get a Catleap for less than 250GBP it's a good deal. I'm just saying that 1440p screens aren't worth the massive price premium that comes with most of them in the UK.
Click to expand...

Always the same though. My old PVA NEC 24" screen had a price of £600 when I bought it and any half decent 24" screens cost £300+ upwards. My previous NEC 20" screen cost £400. Prior to that I had a 17.4" screen which cost £450.

Technology moves on and prices fall. The fact that 27" IPS screens can be had for £200 is a good thing. Give it a year or two and all 27" screens will be under £300.
 
I've been using a 1440p monitor for the past couple of months, and moving between it and my 1080p laptop, everything now just feels so cramped on the laptop when it felt fine before. I think it would be impossible for me to go back to a 1080p monitor now and be satisfied. I couldn't live without the extra real estate I get with the 1440p, which has greatly improved my productivity.
 
Last edited:
kissenger said:
Thought I'd post this here to see what you guys think.

I recently bought a 27", 1440p monitor. A Yamakasi Catleap to be precise. It's a really nice monitor as far as black levels, colour depth, response time, etc, etc go, but I'm just not that impressed by these super-HD monitors in general. Here's why:

1) They just 'feel' like a TV sitting on your desk. This might sound like sacrilege to some, but there is such a thing as too much screen space.

2) I don't think the extra resolution makes games look better. It just looks like there's more on screen. What really makes a game look good is detailed textures and MSAA and that's not dependent on resolution. As a matter of fact, I would go as far as to say that 1440/1600p can make some games look worse because all of that extra resolution exposes the lack of detail in some games' textures. Very few games have texture packs which were designed with 1400/1600p in mind.

3) Because of all the extra pixels, SLI/Xfire is almost essential if you want to max games out. This brings its own problems.

4) All the next gen consoles are HD, not super-HD, so we can be pretty sure that all upcoming games will be made with 1080p in mind as the 'default' resolution.

There are some advantages to super-HD monitors (e.g. dead pixels are less noticable, the extra screen space is good for multitasking), but I just don't think these are the future of monitors, so I've decided to 'downgrade' to a quality 1200p monitor. What do you guys think?
Click to expand...


Should have got one of these mate. Got one myself and they are excellent.

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=MO-003-DG
 
I have a 30inch IPS monitor but I prefer to use a 27 inch 1080p 120hz monitor instead. It's also easier on the graphics card and the 27 inch is an LED which has low power consumption which I really like.
 
I love my Hazro 27" 2560x1440 monitor. Text is brilliantly crisp for the apps I use the high res makes it by far the best monitor I have ever owned from that point of view.
 
Discounting my smaller monitors I've had in the past, 24" 1920x1200 was good and had that for a long time. Upgraded and I use the word loosely to a 1920x1080 that had better specs but was disappointed at the perceived loss of clarity of images and text.

Now running Dell 2713's and find the resolution great for both image work and gaming.

I don't think I want to send the message to game developers that "Hey look guys we know the PC is great and the graphics potential is massive compared to consoles but nobody wants anything above 1080p so don't bother with any development above that. Forget pushing the boundaries of tech until the next console refresh which will probably end up using slightly out of date hardware that's only just current generation compared to the PC"

If people don't want to run higher resolutions, don't want to spend money on upgrades to keep up with the latest games/game engines as technology improves then why bother gaming on a PC ? Get yourself a console which is pretty trouble free and cheaper and get a cheap off the shelf PC for anything else.

I agree that higher resolution monitors are expensive (probably more than they have to be) but we have seen some great value IPS screens in the last 6/12 months that have made higher resolution gaming available to a much wider audience. That coupled with the advances in SLi/XFire and the possibility to use a couple of medium priced cards together to get the performance of the top tier cards and still have the performance to allow for some eye candy.

I don't see why we have to start a race to the bottom where graphics are just good enough. I want everyone on higher resolutions, I want the developers to see a massive market for high resolution textures and multi screen support and game engines that wring every last ounce of performance out of my kit.

Sorry if I'm rambling a little, just got off shift so need ZZZZZZ's
 
LtMatt said:
Should have got one of these mate. Got one myself and they are excellent.

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=MO-003-DG
Click to expand...

I had one very similar to that mate. I believe all these monitors with '270' somewhere in the title use the same LG panel, except the Catleap I had was an A- panel whereas your DGM is probably an A+.

I will say that since I've gone back to 1200p it does feel a bit cramped. I especially miss all the extra desktop space you get with 1440p. However, on the other hand I installed FC3 last night and was only barely able to max it with my 7970 at 4xMSAA at 1080p so I shudder to think what it would have done to my card at 1440p :eek:

I've set up my old LG 1200p monitor next to my Asus PA248 to give myself some extra desktop space and this seems to be a good compromise for me. Dual monitors for working, single monitor at 1080p 1:1 pixel mapping for gaming. It's still probably not as good as one 1440p as far as the desktop goes, but it'll do me for now. As far as gaming goes, I don't really mind going from 1440p to 1080p too much, so it's fine.
 
Most people are talking about 1440p monitors, in relation to gaming.
What if we removed gaming from the equation -
which is better: 2 x 24" 1080p monitors OR 1 x 27" 1440p monitor?

I have 2 monitors on my desk, with a plasma screen for videos.
I personally prefer to have 2 separate monitors, rather than 1 big monitor, especially when I am programing and debugging (web based applications).
 
sunama said:
Most people are talking about 1440p monitors, in relation to gaming.
What if we removed gaming from the equation -
which is better: 2 x 24" 1080p monitors OR 1 x 27" 1440p monitor?

I have 2 monitors on my desk, with a plasma screen for videos.
I personally prefer to have 2 separate monitors, rather than 1 big monitor, especially when I am programing and debugging (web based applications).
Click to expand...

If I had the choice I'd say the 27" 1440p would be better because the lack of vertical pixels at 1080p is a bit of a PITA, but I would say it all depends on if you can deal with the smaller text size at 1440p. It did strain my eyes at times.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom