Monitor Buying Guide - June 2018

[Chaosphere]

It's a question that comes up time and time again. I gave some monitor advice recently in discord, and thought it best to put that advice in a more concrete form here for future reference.

First of all, let's look at what technology monitors currently offer. Understanding the following terms, and what they mean to YOU is the key to finding the right monitor.

• Resolution - Most are 1080p (1920x1080), 1440p (2560x1440), or 4K (3840x2160). This is simply the number of pixels your GPU has to create for every frame it sends to the monitor.

More pixels = more work for the GPU. It has to create more pixels in every frame.

• Refresh Rate - 60Hz, 100Hz, 144Hz, 240Hz. This is the number of times a second the monitor refreshes the screen. Higher / faster is generally better, giving you smoother overall motion. Most say the benefit from 60 to 144Hz is significant, both for gaming and regular PC use. 240Hz is more for those that demand the quickest response times for top tier twitch gaming - looking at you, CS Gods.

Faster refresh rate = more work for the GPU. It has to create more frames in every second.

• Adaptive Sync - GSync and FreeSync. These technologies aim to eliminate the tearing that occurs when your GPU does not quite match the refresh rate of your monitor. Tearing can happen with ANY refresh rate (60, 144, 240, etc). These technologies aim to remove this effect.

GSync is an nVidia technology. You can only take advantage of this if your GPU is made by nVidia, and your monitor supports the tech.

FreeSync is an AMD technology. You can only take advantage of this if your GPU is made by AMD, and your monitor supports the tech.

These technologies are generally desirable, but do come at a cost premium in most cases, particularly GSync. Note that either will also introduce small amounts of input lag, which may put the twitch gamers off. See below for more on input lag. These do not otherwise affect the workload on your GPU.

Vsync vs Gsync / Freesync? These techs are very similar. Key differences below -

If your GPU runs the game HIGHER than your refresh rate (for example, you pump out a constant 100 fps on a 60Hz screen), there is NO difference between the 2 technologies at all.

If your GPU CAN'T keep up with that 60Hz, and dips to say 57 fps, GSync / Freesync MATCH the refresh rate (so, they force the monitor to display 57Hz).
VSync does not affect the refresh rate, but instead cuts the fps to a value that syncs with the monitor, usually at 2:1 - so, 30 fps on a 60Hz panel.

Both technologies eliminate tearing, but IF you are getting frequent drops in framerate, the switching from 60 fps to 30 fps and back again is very noticeable (and ugly). This is why the new technologies (Gsync and Freesync are 'better'. They keep a 1:1 sync between monitor and GPU, no matter what, giving you the smoothest stutter-free experience.

• Input Lag / Response Time - the time it takes for your mouse click to result in an action on screen. Monitors quote this in milliseconds, usually somewhere between 1 and 5 ms. Faster is better. This does not otherwise affect the workload on your GPU.



• HDR - The new buzzword, HDR is high dynamic range, also known as being able to show really dark bits and really bright bits at the same time. Blacker blacks and whiter whites. This does not affect the work done by your GPU, and a monitor that supports HDR content will always be 'better' than one that doesn't. Note that to fully support HDR, the monitor must be able to achieve 1,000 nits of brightness. There are few that currently can, and they are expensive. This is something to keep an eye on, but not relevant to most for now.



• Colour Space - I'm choosing to neglect this area for now, although it is of particular importance if you use your monitor for content creation (photo and video editing, for example). Almost all current monitors support 99% of the sRGB colour space, which is sufficient for regular PC use and gaming. A well calibrated sRGB monitor is of more use to most than a wide gamut display, which tend to be targeted more at professionals doing very colour sensitive work. If you'd like to know more about this topic feel free to ask me here or via PM.



• Panel Type - TN, IPS, VA. I'll try to simplify the key differences below -

TN - quickest response times, awful viewing angles (tilt your head, colours change), low contrast and saturation - colours look washed out. These are the cheapest panels to manufacture. Despite the comparatively poor colour performance, the other panel types can't match the responsiveness of TN panels (no matter what numbers the manufacturers quote), and TN panels may be a wise choice for 240Hz monitors. Otherwise, I can't recommend a TN panel unless you're buying a sub £200 monitor.

IPS & VA - slower response times, good viewing angles, high contrast and saturation. I'm lumping these 2 together as although there are differences, they are often small. These technologies trade blow for blow, and differences and more down to what particular VA or IPS panel you choose. VA are becoming more popular with manufacturers, as they are able to hit the contrast levels required for HDR. I wouldn't be put off by either a VA or an IPS panel, just read the reviews first to see how that particular panel fares.
[/list]

GPU = Graphics Card (Graphics Processing Unit).
Hz = relating to refresh rate, this is the number of times the monitor refreshes itself every second.
FPS =frames per second, the number of times your GPU sends a frame to the monitor each second. Ideally you want the refresh rate (Hz) and the FPS to be identical, at all times.


I highlighted some of the above in bold as it is worth thinking about your GPU for a second. If you upgrade your monitor to one with a higher resolution or a higher refresh rate, you are increasing the work of your GPU.

Sure, you can force your GPU to run games at 1080p on your new 4K monitor...but then why buy the 4K monitor? Likewise, games will happily run at 60 frames per second on a 144Hz screen - but why not just stick to the 60Hz screen and save some cash?

A monitor upgrade often means a GPU upgrade too. Think carefully before you buy that 4K 144Hz monitor, your GTX 760 will never be able to take advantage of the tech the monitor has to offer, and a 1080Ti isn't cheap.

So what do you do then? Well, I would look at the technologies above, and decide on what is relevant to you. Do you prefer fast paced competitive gaming? Prioritise low input lag and a high refresh rate. Keep the resolution at 1080p or make sure you have the graphics horsepower to handle all of those pixels at 144 FPS. If you're more of a casual gamer, getting 144Hz rather than 100 isn't really a necessity. You'd probably get more from a monitor that supports HDR, or a higher resolution.

There is more to this discussion that I will add in time (panel types, sizes, curves and so on), but maybe this will help someone in the meantime!

Cheers all.

[sulky_uk]

nice post chaos,

Just to give you guys an idea as i know some have older processors but newer Gpus:

my 4970 I7 and a 1070 gtx mini  will happily play on high/epic all recent games at 1440p (2560x1440) at 144hz. Although its best to go with 60 hz as the average frame rate on ARK, Conan and Arma is about 65fps, although cs go i can go to 144fps  with vsync, so switch to 144hz.

tried a 4k with the set up above, sits in the 30fps, so the 1440p option works best  for it

[Chaosphere]

Yep, a 1070/1080/Ti should handle most things at 1440p and at least 100Hz fairly well. Going much above that, or playing games with more demanding settings, may be difficult.

If you want guaranteed 120+ FPS, 1080p may be the sweet spot for now. Many of the pros play with this sort of set up, for example.

4K 144Hz is ahead of the game right now, and you're looking at the 1100 series if you really want to get the most out of these specs.

[albert]

So what 144Hz is worth a punt at this point? I keep seeing the horribly expensive PG279Q pop up as good but then ASUS ROG gets slated for inconsistent QC.

[Chaosphere]

Well, it all depends on what else you want from your screen. The bleeding edge is always going to be expensive - these 4K HDR 144Hz beasts from Asus/Acer are over £2,000!

These are extreme overkill, though, and as we see more and more HDR screens the price should hopefully start to drop. The problem at the moment is that nVidia are (allegedly) charging manufacturers $500 for the GSync HDR module alone. This of course drives the cost up for us consumers.

So what about a 144Hz screen right now. The way I see it you have a few options -

1) Buy cheap as a tester - there are loads of 1920x1080 144Hz TN panels out there for £100-200. Many of these are 24" - I wouldn't go much bigger with a 1080p screen, personally. These are TN panels, which means poor viewing angles and 'worse*' colour than their more expensive IPS counterparts, but response times are generally quicker on a TN. There are IPS versions of these, but I don't think the specs are worth spending more on, so can't recommend anything but the budget conscious TNs when buying these screens.

As an example, HERE is one I found on Amazon.

*IPS panels tend to have a wider gamut due to the different backlight technology used. Not all IPS screens are created equal though, and a 99% sRGB ONLY 8-bit IPS will be more or less equivalent in terms of colour accuracy to a 99% sRGB 8-bit TN. It's only when we start to get into extended gamuts like AdobeRGB that IPS panels outstrip the TNs. If you're not using the monitor for particularly colour sensitive work, a TN will likely suit you just fine, and I wouldn't worry too much about this stuff.

2) Buy mid range - there are some nice 27" 2560x1440 (a perfect combination of size and resolution, in my opinion) screens out there. These specs tend to come at a £400-500 price minimum, at which point I would probably start to recommend IPS over TN if only for the viewing angles. HERE is a TN panel with these specs, and HERE is an IPS one. THe price difference makes IPS worth it, in my opinion. Both will still be great monitors, but you may notice colour shift on the TN at regular viewing distances.

3) Buy a big screen behemoth - most of the curved 32-34" screens feature 1440p screens (3400x1440 due to the wider aspect ratio) and 100 or 120Hz refresh rates (the latter usually an overclock of a 100Hz panel). They tend to be IPS (TN tech really doesn't play well with bigger screens), and often come with the added cost of GSynch - more on that below. The difference between 120 and 144hz is not that noticeable, so I wouldn't be too put off by that. 100 to 144 is a bigger leap of course, but I can't say what the real world difference is - you'd have to find out for yourself.

These panels do tend to be expensive, like THIS one, but you can get some without GSync for a bit less. I think if you wanted a wide, curved display, one of these could do you well for a few years. Keep in mind that most do say these wide displays are not good for competitive FPS gaming, and that the more standard 'non-curved' 24-27" screens are better suited for this sort of use. This is a matter of personal preference of course, but it is a fairly common observation - you won't see any pros playing on a big curved monitor.




Gsync. Do you need it? This is really personal - everyone interprets tear differently. To some it is very noticeable and GSync is an absolute must. Others, like me, aren't as put off by the odd bit of tearing, and may hardly notice GSync at all. If in doubt, I would say go for it. It adds a few ms of screen lag, but this is generally accepted against the benefit of reduced tearing. Personally I play on a 144Hz screen WITHOUT GSync, lock my frame rates to 144Hz in-game, and have not yet been bothered by any significant tearing. Your experience may differ! If you're buying a high refresh rate as a test (like I did), go cheap and skip GSync. If you're buying it as a permanent monitor, spend a bit more and get the tech - with option 2 above, the cost difference isn't great.



Finally, there is also the option of waiting. This is a case of waiting either for the price to drop on the top end, or for something more 'middle of the road' to come along. There are 2 monitors I am waiting for -

1) a 27" 1440p 144Hz+ True HDR panel. As far as I know, there are none listed yet.
2) a 34" Curved 144Hz+ True HDR panel. These are coming later this year.

I picked up a cheap TN 1080p 144Hz monitor as a tester, originally planning to use it alongside my old 60Hz 1440p IPS panel. Within a day I had listed the old panel on eBay, as I couldn't go back to 60Hz, even for desktop use. It really is worth the upgrade. I plan to keep this monitor going until one of the above is available - I just hope they are priced considerably lower than the 4K versions! I'm not looking at 4K, as I don't fancy buying the 8 GPUs needed to push 8.3 million pixels 144 times a second :roflmao:.

Hope that is of some help, Albert. If you find a particular model, have a read of the reviews before buying. The ones I have linked here are not personal recommendations - I have never tried the screens, I am just going off of the listed specs!

[albert]

Thanks mate, I can understand quite a bit more about the thought process now.

I was searching around and I quite often look at the Amazon warehouse for such products. Monitor returns are one of the biggest gamers gripe on the Internet. People get hot up about dead pixels or light bleed. So your 4-500 £ mid-range is actually about the price of a top range "As new" boxed with all items warehouse item.

I'm going to check these (page 3 is As New non-damaged items, page 1-2 are varying degrees of damage):  https://www.amazon.de/gp/offer-listing/B017EVR2VM/ref=olp_page_3?ie=UTF8&f_used=true&f_usedAcceptable=true&f_usedGood=true&f_usedLikeNew=true&f_usedVeryGood=true&startIndex=20

[Chaosphere]

That Asus sits nicely in that middle tier (option 2) spec wise, but I do think that particular model was plagued with bad light bleed. I believe Milli has one and could maybe share some pictures, I'll give him a nudge.

If that is a deal breaker or not is up to you. It's still a great monitor, it all depends how much it would bother you during gaming.

I'll note that the bleed is due to the panel more than the manufacturer (Asus). The Acer version with the same panel had exactly the same problem, but ended up getting nowhere near as much attention for it. Sadly this means if you want to avoid the issue you have to avoid that 165Hz panel and go for one of the native 144Hz ones at similar spec.

[albert]

I generally don't worry about bleed too much, most of that can be fixed with tuning. The old Spider Pro has paid for itself over and over. I've never even tried a monitor over 60Hz so with all the positive feedback from the FPS playing community and the general advancement in the tech, I think I'll find a suitable used one and give it a go. That model still is regarded as the best out there. Wish me luck!

[Chaosphere]

If the bleed doesn't bother you then it will be a fantastic screen. It wouldn't stop me buying one either, for what it's worth!

GL!

[lionheart]

One of the best upgrades I have made to my gaming rig ( and I do a lot!) was the purchase of my wide screen monitor, puts gaming into a different league.

[Chaosphere]

One of the best upgrades I have made to my gaming rig ( and I do a lot!) was the purchase of my wide screen monitor, puts gaming into a different league.

I think most would agree. As I said above, many people seem to say they have a negative impact on individual performance in competitive FPS, but in reality I suspect the difference is small. For any other gaming, or for us who are never going to be hitting headshots left right and centre either way, they are likely a great and very immersive choice.

[Milli]

Chaos gave me a nudge but was planning to reply at some point anyways

Just recently purchased the PG279Q - Chaos found a good deal from seller on ebay so pulled trigger and bought it

It's a great monitor imo - yes it suffers from backlight bleed - but I never notice it.
It is a 144hz panel but overclocks to 166hz in the OSD with just a simple couple button presses and reboot of screen.

Pictured I have it sitting next to my X34A Predator, and really happy with it, would def recommend to anyone
Attached some pics (If for no other reason to show off my new room/setup)

[ATTACH=CONFIG]4536[/ATTACH]
Full Desk
[ATTACH=CONFIG]4537[/ATTACH]
PG279Q
[ATTACH=CONFIG]4538[/ATTACH]
Blank Screensaver (night time will show bleed better)
[ATTACH=CONFIG]4539[/ATTACH]
Shameless artwork photo

[SithAfrikaan]

Great set up Milli!

[albert]

One of the best upgrades I have made to my gaming rig ( and I do a lot!) was the purchase of my wide screen monitor, puts gaming into a different league.

Just I need (call that desire and enjoy having) 2 screens on my desk as I play games a lot that aren't all action and a bit of web research and browsing on wikis is part of the game. Plus my desk space is limited. I'd love to try the bigger monitors but I think not quite yet.

[albert]

Great set up Milli!

I suspect the took his largest waste paper basket and forearm and swept all the other crap off the desk before taking the photo ok ok I won't judge others by my own horrible messy standards, I respect your OCD for neat and tidy Milli!