Recommendation, gsync, ultra wide monitor for gaming up to £1k

colec

colec

colec

Associate
Joined
25 Jun 2007
Posts
3
After some recommendations for a new monitor. Thanks in advance
Wanting ultra wide with gsync for gaming. Mainly pc gaming (90%) , but also one I Will be able to use on next gen consoles .
Budget around £1k.
I currently have a Acer Predator XB271 and play on 1440 resolution. May play in 4k in the next few years after upgrade and don’t want to update monitor again .

Currently the x34 is winning , but I was hoping for 4k and hdr, but the x35 just doesn’t seem worth the extra 1k

Thanks
 

markymoo

markymoo

markymoo

Associate
Joined
4 Nov 2010
Posts
377
Fyter said:
These two are arguably the best on the market when it comes to IPS panels:

https://www.overclockers.co.uk/lg-3...-led-curved-backlit-gaming-mon-mo-15l-lg.html
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/lg-3...-curved-widescreen-led-monitor-mo-14w-lg.html
Click to expand...

What’s the difference between those two?

Top one says Freesync Premium and bottom one says Freesync 2. Which is better?
I ask as I have a Vega 56 however the top one also has Gysnc which could be futur proof should I switch my card.

I can see top one is 160hz and bottom 144hz (won’t matter on my setup as Vega 56 and i7 2600k so won’t get anywhere near those.

Is the top one a newer version of bottom? Or is one aimed at Nvidea and other AMD?
 

Fyter

Fyter

Fyter

Associate
Joined
25 May 2012
Posts
161
LiE said:
I've pre-order the 34GN850. It looks like an amazing monitor.
Click to expand...
Yes its a great monitor but I think its a bit too expensive in the modern market since you can now get 3440x1440 144hz for just under 400. I think a 600-750 price tag would have been more reasonable premium for the better LG panel. LG's business and their marketing, we cannot do much about it I guess.
 

LiE

LiE

LiE

Caporegime
Joined
2 Aug 2005
Posts
25,626
Location
Milton Keynes
Fyter said:
Yes its a great monitor but I think its a bit too expensive in the modern market since you can now get 3440x1440 144hz for just under 400. I think a 600-750 price tag would have been more reasonable premium for the better LG panel. LG's business and their marketing, we cannot do much about it I guess.
Click to expand...

Yep it's the price these top end monitors cost sadly. The £400 Iiyama has good specs but looks like QC is poor and it has some issues.
 

markymoo

markymoo

markymoo

Associate
Joined
4 Nov 2010
Posts
377
Just found https://www.displayspecifications.com/en/comparison/44df116098
This explains difference in both monitors. Looks like the 34GN850 has a few nice upgrades. Though Freesync Premium is one step down from Frysnc2 of the other monitor. Even though I have a Vega56, would seem more of a sensible choice out of the two. Plus uses less power.

Do Overclockers deal with any issues/replacements, should you have any dead pixels or extreme light bleed? I do get 8% off with work at the Indian food sounding retail outlet. However may be willing to pay the bit extra to have peace of mind.
 

colec

colec

colec

Associate
OP
Joined
25 Jun 2007
Posts
3

Fyter

Fyter

Fyter

Associate
Joined
25 May 2012
Posts
161
LiE said:
Yep it's the price these top end monitors cost sadly. The £400 Iiyama has good specs but looks like QC is poor and it has some issues.
Click to expand...
Hopefully iiyama can iron out these minor issues we have experienced. They have a solid warranty scheme. I will be in the market for one if they manage to sort it out as I don't belive the LGs are worth 2.5 times the iiyama monitor. Id rather spend the cash on a better GPU/SSD/CPU.
 

Fyter

Fyter

Fyter

Associate
Joined
25 May 2012
Posts
161
Woodsta888 said:
https://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/acer_nitro_xv273k.htm

4k 120hz IPS G-sync compatible. One of 16 monitors to get TFT recommended.
Click to expand...
4K 120hz is very demanding, not sure if its worth switching to 4K yet as we don't have the hardware capable of running all games at such framerates at that particular resolution. 1440p is the sweet spot at the moment, high end cards can run most games at higher resfresh rates, maybe optimise a few settings if need be. Hopefully Ampere/Hopper can make 4K gaming more mainstream for the PC gamers.
 

Woodsta888

Woodsta888

Woodsta888

Soldato
Joined
24 Sep 2013
Posts
2,890
Location
Exmouth, Devon
Fyter said:
4K 120hz is very demanding, not sure if its worth switching to 4K yet as we don't have the hardware capable of running all games at such framerates at that particular resolution. 1440p is the sweet spot at the moment, high end cards can run most games at higher resfresh rates, maybe optimise a few settings if need be. Hopefully Ampere/Hopper can make 4K gaming more mainstream for the PC gamers.
Click to expand...

Was answering the OP as he specced 4k. And I've been running 4k for years. FRamerates in reviews are with everything turned on; particularly post processing settings designed to make potato resolutions look better. With 4k you can turn them all off.

Unless you have OLED then HDR is a gimmick with anything less than 1000 nits.

Keep an eye out for TV LG B9, C9 though smallest 55 inch sometimes can be had for ~£1000 new in sales, Full HDR and G-sync but can only game PC @ 120hz x 1440P until gfx cards with HDMI 2.1. For future console gaming that's where I'd be looking at. New LG CX 48 inch is a bit smaller but more expensive.

LG OLED TV for proper HDR or like I did drop the HDR. That ACer does have HDR but only 400 nits and not worth it. Cant use VRR with it on either I don't think.
 

Fyter

Fyter

Fyter

Associate
Joined
25 May 2012
Posts
161
I comparedf
colec said:
thanks buddy, as i prefer Nvidia regarding gpu is the 850 the better option, or will 950 with freesync2 still work fine for adaptive sync? these two models seem very simular
Click to expand...
https://www.displayspecifications.com/en/comparison/e328116b87

Apologies for the delay in my response. You will need to get the g variant of the 950 since the hz range is better than the f (30-120 hz vs 55-144hz) if you want 950 but i still think the 850 is the better option since its 48-144hz and apparently overclockable to 160hz. It works on both AMD and Nvidia and the freesync premium low frame rate compensation feature is also available on gsynch compatible by nvidia cards.
 

Fyter

Fyter

Fyter

Associate
Joined
25 May 2012
Posts
161
Woodsta888 said:
Was answering the OP as he specced 4k. And I've been running 4k for years. FRamerates in reviews are with everything turned on; particularly post processing settings designed to make potato resolutions look better. With 4k you can turn them all off.

Unless you have OLED then HDR is a gimmick with anything less than 1000 nits.

Keep an eye out for TV LG B9, C9 though smallest 55 inch sometimes can be had for ~£1000 new in sales, Full HDR and G-sync but can only game PC @ 120hz x 1440P until gfx cards with HDMI 2.1. For future console gaming that's where I'd be looking at. New LG CX 48 inch is a bit smaller but more expensive.

LG OLED TV for proper HDR or like I did drop the HDR. That ACer does have HDR but only 400 nits and not worth it. Cant use VRR with it on either I don't think.
Click to expand...

Sorry I must have overlooked the 4K part. I agree OLED is the future at least if you want the true HDR experience, the only problem is its expensive and we dont have a lot of oled monitors on the market yet thus prices are ridiculously high atm. Hopefully in the future there will be more competition, thus we can get smaller screen sizes at more affordable prices, perhaps ultrawide 144hz panels.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom