What monitor for GTX 1080/1070?

ShakeNBake

ShakeNBake

ShakeNBake

Associate
Joined
26 Feb 2010
Posts
1,260
Location
Surrey, UK
What monitor would be best for each GPU?

4k 60Hz..?

I'm looking for something good for gaming, already have a 24" 1080p 144Hz screen for 'competitive' games, looking for something that's a bit better for 'cinematic' games (so decent colours/blacks, 60Hz refresh rate is fine, low response time though cos I hate motion blur).

Something like these?
£500 4k gsync https://www.overclockers.co.uk/acer...descreen-led-monitor-black-red-mo-097-ac.html
£300 4k non g-sync https://www.overclockers.co.uk/aoc-...g-widescreen-led-monitor-black-mo-044-ao.html
 
Consider ultrawides if 'cinematic' is really part of your wants. ALso, response time is nothing to do with motion blur, that's more to do with Hz and refresh rate, so you really should consider higher Hz gaming panels. Might have to up the budget though considerably to get the good superwide high Hz gaming orientated ones.

Also, the new 1080 still will not be enough be enough to do 4k gaming proper justice at high/max settings on recent and imminent titles, even when 'only' pushing 60Hz. 1080Ti might be, but that's some way off yet...
 
Motion blur is down to response time:

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/speccontent.htm#response time

Response Time is the spec which many people, especially gamers, have come to regard as the most important. In practical terms the spec is designed to refer to the speed of the liquid crystal pixels and how quickly they can change from one colour to another, and therefore how fast the picture can be redrawn. The faster this transition can change, the better, and with more fluid changes the images can change overall a lot faster. This helps reduce the effects of blurring and ghosting in games and movies which can be an issue if response time is too slow. As a general rule of thumb, the lower the response time, the better.

Do not rely entirely on response time specs quoted by manufacturers as a be all and end all to the monitor’s performance. Different manufacturers have different ways of measuring their response time, and one 5ms panel might not be the same in real use to another 5ms panel for instance. Panel technology also plays a part here, and don't get confused with standard response times and grey to grey (G2G) figures. However, response times can be treated a guide to the performance of the screen, and as a rule of thumb, the lower the better.
Click to expand...

Refresh rate plays a big part in pixel response time but to achieve the "full" benefit of those higher refresh rate gaming screens, you also need to be getting those FPS too i.e. 100+FPS


And yes, if you want a "cinematic" experience, definitely look at 21.9 monitors, if the 1080 doesn't support adaptive sync, then you will have to stomach the cost and pay an extra £350 for the acer X34 gsync version though.... or settle with a non-sync one or a 2560x1080 display.
 
Last edited:
Angst said:
I beg to differ 4k is great even at 24".
Click to expand...

Depends on how close you are - I'm using a 4k screen from 50cm away - it's 27" and it's fine for web browsing... I also have 2 1080p screens and a 1440p screen (in the process of upgrading all the smaller ones to 2560x1440)

Because I mostly use the 4k one for movies I occassionally sit back to watch stuff, and leaning back to the 3+ feet mark the normal sized text on it gets pretty small, so I can see why people advise against the use of a 4k 28" screen... you have to be closer than about 75cm to see the difference between lower res full HD screens, and unless you're scaling things text gets hard to read pretty quickly past the half metre mark.

So, while it's unfair to say 28" 4K is pointless, it's understandably accurate for many use case scenarios.

With a budget of £500 there are probably better gaming options - something in the realms of a PG278Q, or for productivity (ignoring colour accuracy) there are plenty of bigger 4K screens that might make more sense maybe a 21:9 ...

Speaking personally I'd want something that has the option of both good colour and good refresh rates... so the previous gen of 144hz G-sync screens make a lot of sense... £530 is only slightly over the budget range and does a lot of good things... for that sort of money the 21:9 offerings at the moment aren't as interesting if you want G-Sync ... in my opinion
 
Nexus18 said:
Motion blur is down to response time:

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/speccontent.htm#response time



Refresh rate plays a big part in pixel response time but to achieve the "full" benefit of those higher refresh rate gaming screens, you also need to be getting those FPS too i.e. 100+FPS


And yes, if you want a "cinematic" experience, definitely look at 21.9 monitors, if the 1080 doesn't support adaptive sync, then you will have to stomach the cost and pay an extra £350 for the acer X34 gsync version though.... or settle with a non-sync one or a 2560x1080 display.
Click to expand...

Aye, well pointed out bud, for some reason I always get response time and 'lag' mixed up. Don't know why :)
 
eazyrider said:
x34 gsync, best value nvidia monitor.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say the X34 is the best value, but I would say it's the best. And yes, I have got one.
I never thought those words would come out of my mouth about an Acer monitor by the way :D

I see there's been a naughty price hike on here recently too for the X34, presumably as the Asus 34 superwide seems to be unavailable, anywhere.
 
For the 1070/1080, the best monitor isn't available yet. While the X34 is great, and I also have one, it is not perfect what with the scan-lines issue, potential for coil whine and high probability of BLB/glow on many panels. The announced panels from LG have the potential to blow the X34 out the water if they (or someone) release a G-Sync version. Unfortunately, the price will no doubt be sky high and we have no idea when they'll be released yet, perhaps not until 2017 the way monitor releases seem to go these days. Until then, I would definitely vote for the X34, it's really very good. :)
 
wunkley said:
Consider ultrawides if 'cinematic' is really part of your wants.

Also, the new 1080 still will not be enough be enough to do 4k gaming proper justice at high/max settings on recent and imminent titles, even when 'only' pushing 60Hz. 1080Ti might be, but that's some way off yet...
Click to expand...

I'm not too fussed about ultra wide / curved screens, happy with a bog standard 16:9 format screen. Not really looking to spend over £500.

I'm also not too fussed about running the newest super demanding games at 4k 60Hz. Just stuff like Dark Souls 3 and Blizzard games. Would a 1080/1070 be able to handle that? Or better to wait longer for more powerful cards to make the jump up to 4k..?
 
Safetytrousers said:
Guess I was lucky too, I have none of those things and mine clocks to 100 with no problem (finding a long DP cable that will handle high Hz is a different matter).
Click to expand...

I use the Lindy Chroma cable in 3M if its of any use, No issue running the ASUS panel. Works decent. A tad pricey though but meh does the job.
 
ShakeNBake said:
I'm not too fussed about ultra wide / curved screens, happy with a bog standard 16:9 format screen. Not really looking to spend over £500.

I'm also not too fussed about running the newest super demanding games at 4k 60Hz. Just stuff like Dark Souls 3 and Blizzard games. Would a 1080/1070 be able to handle that? Or better to wait longer for more powerful cards to make the jump up to 4k..?
Click to expand...

Must say, you don't really seem to be the target audience for the 1080... it's an enthusiast card designed to do the things you don't seem that bothered about. Save your pennies and go with the 1070 and one of the 27" IPS G-Sync monitors. You'll be happy.
 
El_MUERkO said:
At 28" 4k is pointless, better to go for a 144hz at that size.
Click to expand...

Correct me if I'm wrong but I'm guessing you haven't seen 4k at 28 inches?

I long thought the same thing myself but I just acquired myself the Acer xb281hk - same as quoted by the OP and you definitely notice the 4k.

I have windows set to 125% and compared to my 1440p Samsung the 4k is pin sharp.

Gaming is a joy, Just Cause 3 at 4k with Gsync just makes me wonder how I lived with life at a lower resolution.
 
atomic7431 said:
I have an X34 and for once was lucky, i have no scan lines, no BLB/Glow or coil whine. The only thing mine wont do is 100hz (95 instead) but that could be my own fault as the lead which came with the screen has been miss placed.

https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=29346670&postcount=2436
Click to expand...

Safetytrousers said:
Guess I was lucky too, I have none of those things and mine clocks to 100 with no problem (finding a long DP cable that will handle high Hz is a different matter).
Click to expand...

I guarantee you've got scanlines fellas. There isn't an X34 or Asus PG348Q out there that hasn't. They both use the exact same LG panel, gsync module etc.

I didn't think I had them either, at first, but they do appear under very specific circumstances. It's not however the end of the world as there is a way to completely mitigate the scanline issue! :) Read on if intrerested...

The 'scanlines' (most visible on left hand half of screen) only appear under specific refresh rates vs actual framerate scenarios, along with whatever overclock setting you're running in the OSD - ie OFF, or 75,80,85,90,95,100. It's not just if Gsync is on either. It's more complex than that....

Most of this is from overclock.net http://www.overclock.net/t/1573121/acer-predator-x34-owners-club/370 with a bit of my own embellishments....

...X34 owners simply need to understand that they have to adjust their monitor's overclock to match the average frame rate of whatever game they're playing (ie to mitigate scanlines, framerate dips should be no more than 10-15fps compared to the set monitor's refresh rate, as seen in table image file).

a1qeTBm.png

If you're averaging 80 frames per second in a game, then for that game you can to overclock to 80Hz (not just leave your overclock at 100Hz). If you're only averaging 60 frames in a game, then disable the overclock entirely (hugely important, especially as the lower the framerate, especially under 50FPS - the more prominent the scanlines are!). If you have a game in which you can run easily at 100 frames, then just max out the overclock.

I also find it hard to believe you have absolutely no backlight bleed. At all ;)? That's also virtually unheard of on the curved 21:9 34 inch LG panel that's used in a number of different models (Dell, LG itself, Acer, Asus etc etc)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom