31.5" 2560x1440 165 Hz VA G-Sync - LG 32GK850G

w1ze1 said:
******** AFAICT 32" 1440p is ideal as was 24" 1080p, 1440p on 27" in some instances due to crap Windows scaling can be small even with 20/20.
Click to expand...

*** **** Funny that you "claim" 1080p 24 inch is ok do you? Funny i am on that exact res on my Eizo FG2421 and i can tell you now its unacceptable to me and i find it offensive without 8xMSAA which looks crap compared to 4K downsampled. Maybe you are one of those human eye 24fps people because this is subjective but the image quality at these PPI's is downright disgusting when games shun these settings. AFAICT sir that most games now like Playerunknown only have other poor blurry AA options like SMAA and TAA which make the problem WORSE.

And you base it all on scaling, Something going forward will matter less if you only game on the monitor and second Overwatch is a perfect example of how scaling in games will automatically be done on the fly anyways soon. If we base everything also on text font size what do we do going forward? Do we shun high pixel counts and use resolution advances to build bigger more expensive monitors? Whats wrong £800 27 inch panels not enough? Wait we can rumble up another scam how about 40 inch 4k gaming monitors? Yep lets keep the exact same ppi since 1080p launched in 2007 or 1995 if you see Quake was coded for 1080p and 95 ppi.


Face it for gaming these monitors are an excuse to keep the same image quality but get more money from users. Bigger monitors mean bigger costs and bigger profit for LG.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Daniel - LG said:
FOr some reason I have noticed the new freesync ones have HDR but G-Sync does not - I am going to find out why
Click to expand...

That's what I asked earlier :p

But yes, would be interested to know, as it somewhat throws a spanner in the works for me. I already have a 1080 (that may change in future) but would much rather have HDR than GSync.....but I want both :p And the moon on a stick :D
 
Rofflay said:
******* Funny that you "claim" 1080p 24 inch is ok do you? Funny i am on that exact res on my Eizo FG2421 and i can tell you now its unacceptable to me and i find it offensive without 8xMSAA which looks crap compared to. Maybe you are one of those human eye 24fps people because this is subjective but the image quality at these PPI's is downright disgusting when games shun these settings. AFAICT sir that most games now like Playerunknown only have other poor blurry AA options like SMAA and TAA which make the problem WORSE.

And you base it all on scaling, Something going forward will matter less if you only game on the monitor and second Overwatch is a perfect example of how scaling in games will automatically be done on the fly anyways soon. If we base everything also on text font size what do we do going forward? Do we shun high pixel counts and use resolution advances to build bigger more expensive monitors? Whats wrong £800 27 inch panels not enough? Wait we can rumble up another scam how about 40 inch 4k gaming monitors? Yep lets keep the exact same ppi since 1080p launched in 2007 or 1995 if you see Quake was coded for 1080p and 95 ppi.


Face it for gaming these monitors are an excuse to keep the same image quality but get more money from users. Bigger monitors mean bigger costs and bigger profit for LG.
Click to expand...


Jesus what another rant (cannot read it all past 1st line), I was basically trying to help the other peep understand what you last rant meant, in that 24" 1080p and 32" 1440p have basically the same PPI or that is what I took from it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
carrot1401 said:
That's what I asked earlier :p

But yes, would be interested to know, as it somewhat throws a spanner in the works for me. I already have a 1080 (that may change in future) but would much rather have HDR than GSync.....but I want both :p And the moon on a stick :D
Click to expand...

Nvidia have specified that anything with the gsync + HDR label on has to be able to do so at a peak luminance of 1000nits, so the panels are not up to spec - the freesync ones out now listed as "HDR" are not going to be giving the full benefit

the gsync HDR ones are supposed to be out in the new year
 
i prefer G-Sync if I had to choose, just turn your monitors settings up to get current fake HDR most have if you must.
 
andybird123 said:
Nvidia have specified that anything with the gsync + HDR label on has to be able to do so at a peak luminance of 1000nits, so the panels are not up to spec - the freesync ones out now listed as "HDR" are not going to be giving the full benefit

the gsync HDR ones are supposed to be out in the new year
Click to expand...

That would explain it! So the freesync ones are effectively fake HDR....
 
what the price difference between the following?

- 34" Ultrawide Curved, Nano IPS, 3440x1440, G-Sync 120Hz, DCI-P3 98%
- 34" Ultrawide Curved, Nano IPS, 3440x1440, Freesync, 144Hz, HDR, DCI-P3 98%

same specs same monitor ?,....


i bet its at least 400 to 500 quid + if im wrong i will tear off the nails from all of my fingers, Nvidia need a cut, they need a slice of the cake.
 
Daniel - LG said:
Hi Everyone :)

So - it is my understanding that yes it will be coming to the UK, along with quite a few different gaming models, we are stepping up our gaming range in 2018.

it is also my understanding that this is a VA panel, not IPS - but it will also overclock to 165Hz
...
- 32" 2560x1440 VA, G-Sync, 165Hz
Click to expand...
Hi Daniel-LG!

I'm specifically rather interested to see how this new 32GK850G pans out in reviews... it seems to be about the only 32" 2560x1440 VA screen that isn't going curved, and I would really prefer to avoid curved if I can.

I understand this model may just about be ready for shipping over in the US... Would you have any idea whether LG would be sending out a review unit over to http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/ ?
I really don't much trust anyone else to review monitors well these days... and I'd really like to see how well this model stacks up against the Samsung C32HG70 (and various other recent curved VAs) when looking at the full range of pixel-transition times.
I don't doubt as a VA, it won't be up with the IPS panels, but if it edges out other VA panels at all and manages to limit the worst of the black-smearing, it might make for a very appealing mix overall.
 
Doug2507 said:
So does this nano tech reduce glow?
Click to expand...
Now that *would* be interesting to know. I could put up with a ~1000:1 static contrast if it weren't for that damnable IPS-glow. Makes me feel like there's something in my eye. An IPS screen with the glow solved (or at least reduced) added to the colour accuracy and response time benefits over VA would probably make for an ideal package.
...well, almost ideal. I'd still prefer if it came in "flat".
 
Here is a review of the monitor (use google translate)

http://playwares.com/dpreview/55862022#

Is seems is a very beautiful monitor, and LG has exceeded any expectation, especially

The LG 32GK850G supports four levels of response time with performance related display settings (OSD). The default setting for the response time is fast, with a response time of about 4 ms. The response time is relatively high (slow) at 6 ms, and slightly slower (faster) at very fast. The response time of the 4th step supports a fast response time which does not exceed 7ms overall, and the refresh rate setting of the default 144Hz and the maximum 165Hz when overclocking is added, There is an advantage that you can enjoy the game with a feeling that the feeling is considerably low.
Click to expand...

if google translate works here, avg 7ms response times and 165hz overclock......
 
Panos said:
Here is a review of the monitor (use google translate)
http://playwares.com/dpreview/55862022#
Is seems is a very beautiful monitor, and LG has exceeded any expectation, especially
...
if google translate works here, avg 7ms response times and 165hz overclock......
Click to expand...
Wow, there appears to be a full response time chart (although I can't tell what each table refers to - I presume either one for each refresh rate, or one for each overdrive setting?)
- and it looks almost too good to be true... *no* 20ms+ black-to-grey transitions? Unless there's massive overdrive overshoot, that seems borderline unbelievable for a VA-based panel... zero black-smear?!

I'd REALLY like to see this confirmed by tftcentral.co.uk. If it holds up there, LG could have created the holy-grail of gaming monitors!

Trying not to get my hopes up too much :-P
 
On the lookout for a new screen, this seems to tick all the boxes. My current VA is too slow and gives trails on anything black. (Acer z35) I haven't looked through this entire thread but are there any words on pricing?
 
gavinh87 said:
On the lookout for a new screen, this seems to tick all the boxes. My current VA is too slow and gives trails on anything black. (Acer z35) I haven't looked through this entire thread but are there any words on pricing?
Click to expand...
From that Korean review, converting from Korean Won, it comes out around £700. Newegg have it listed in the US for $850, which converted and with VAT added, would put it around £750.
So, knowing the UK market... probably somewhere around £1000 :-P
(Hopefully not)
 
If that Korean review actually bears out in some other reviews, and this really has solved the black-smear issue, I'd pretty much take their arm off at any price under a grand.
...I really find it hard to believe it's going to turn out to be *that* good though... there has to be some annoying compromise in there, or it wouldn't be a proper modern gaming monitor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom