Any monitors worthwhile yet?

Nexus18

Nexus18

Nexus18

Caporegime
Joined
4 Jun 2009
Posts
32,268
Been a while since I've looked in to monitors.

What's the latest then? Anything worthwhile or still much the same as 4 years ago?

Really want to get something 34" 1440 or perhaps 27" 1440 100+HZ with freesync and great IQ but don't want to be spending more than like £500.........

Not fussed on HDR as no LCD monitor is good at it.
 
Last edited:
Nexus18 said:
Been a while since I've looked in to monitors.

What's the latest then? Anything worthwhile or still much the same as 4 years ago?

Really want to get something 34" 1440 or perhaps 27" 1440 100+HZ with freesync and great IQ but don't want to be spending more than like £500.........

Not fussed on HDR as no LCD monitor is good at it.
Click to expand...


Monitors are still a rip off as they have been for years compared to TVs.
I think the best advantage PC-gamers have in regards to monitors is our access to 21:9 and 32:9 montiors and the ability for our GPUs to scale to them.

For £500-600 you can get a ultrawide 100hz+ IPS screen which I think will be amazing value.

Its good you're not worrying about HDR because you're completley right in that its simply not a technology we're going to see being implimented properly because of how unfeasible FALD and OLED are in such small screens or screens which use static material.
 
Yet madly, and I know it’s not ultrawise, Philips are releasing a 120hz 31.5” 4K hdr600 screen for well under £500. Makes the £1500 to £2500 the monitor makers are wanting for their current screens look like the ripoff that they are.
 
Yup seems much the same then!

Seen that new 27" 1440 144HZ freesync 1ms IPS screen for £480 or whatever price it is, which seemed alright value but then looked at reviews and its contrast ratio is a pitiful 800:1 :o
 
Last edited:
Not yet and not for years to come, at least from all the panel info we have thus far. For monitors, really, the saving grace will have to come from dual-layer LCD but it remains to be seen if that will be able to come down in cost for those dimensions. Otherwise, for gaming (if you like the size), it's all TV all the time, the tech is just better.

Contrast is one thing but the bigger story is really HDR, which is an even bigger game changer visually than ray tracing. That's the biggest difference imo.
 
Greebo said:
Yet madly, and I know it’s not ultrawise, Philips are releasing a 120hz 31.5” 4K hdr600 screen for well under £500. Makes the £1500 to £2500 the monitor makers are wanting for their current screens look like the ripoff that they are.
Click to expand...

What monitor is that? consider me interested
 
Still never see the appeal in getting anything bigger than 27”, they are small for what they are, but surely bigger is worse if it’s ok your desk with how close you sit.
 
sadbuttrue said:
Unfortunately Phillips have the same shocking attitude towards PWM as Samsung, so that 31.5" is likely a dead duck already.
Click to expand...

Yes I cannot believe Samsung and others are still using PWM for back light dimming this day and age!
 
ExoMale said:
Still never see the appeal in getting anything bigger than 27”, they are small for what they are, but surely bigger is worse if it’s ok your desk with how close you sit.
Click to expand...

27" is in my opinion too small to fully appreciate 4k uhd , yes they look nice and better than lower res screens for content but 4k content on 32" monitors to my eyes looks much better. its a suck it and see thing. (almost litrally)
 
27” is too small as I don’t want it 30cm or less from my eyes. 32” is THE perfect size for 4K on a desktop. 43” is too big and reduces the ppi too much.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom