Chicken Dinner Gaming Community

Author Topic: PC monitor discussion - What are you currently looking into and want to buy?  (Read 295 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline BLUEVOODU

  • Administrator
  • Silencer
  • *****
  • Posts: 959
    • bluevoodu
    • R2EN546
    • View Profile
What monitors are you looking into at this point?  Monitors have progressed in the last couple years.  What features, styles, and resolutions / glass are you looking at for purchase?

At some point... I would like to upgrade mine.  I'm not totally sold on the curved monitors... or the ultra wide monitors... though some are a bit more tempting these days as the format is more acceptable on computers and gaming consoles.  IE native formats without having to run software to fix resolution issues with software.

I'm looking at the following:
SAMSUNG C32HG70 Dark Blue Gray 31.5" 1ms (GTG) 2560 x 1440 (2K) 144Hz, VA LCD/LED FreeSync 2 Curved Monitor, VESA Mountable, Height/Tilt/Swivel/Pivot Adjustable - newegg.com

Samsung UH750 28" Screen LED-Lit Monitor (LU28H750UQNXZA)  - Amazon.com

Post it up!




Offline BLUEVOODU

  • Administrator
  • Silencer
  • *****
  • Posts: 959
    • bluevoodu
    • R2EN546
    • View Profile
No one is looking at monitors?

@BlastMode7 do you have any input?

Offline Polygon

  • Green PIG
  • *
  • Posts: 23
    • BlastMode7
    • View Profile
I haven't too much. I've been pretty happy with my LG 34" ultrawide. I would like to move to something that can do 100Hz+ with GSync but I can't find anything that does but also has good color accuracy as I use this for production work as well that I wouldn't have to hock a kidney to buy. I've kinda of given up looking. :/
« Last Edit: May 14, 2018, 01:11:38 AM by BlastMode7 »

Offline CreepinDeth

  • Helmet PIG
  • *
  • Posts: 148
    • View Profile
It's a weird time for monitors. 4K is the next big thing but HDR is still behind HDTVs for some reason. Also, G-Sync/Freesync are muddying the waters a bit too.

I myself just want a color accurate 1080p screen like this - Dell Ultrasharp U2415

I think when it comes to monitors, most just get an inexpensive, 16:9/16:10 monitor and call it day since they already spent most of their money on the PC components.

Offline Polygon

  • Green PIG
  • *
  • Posts: 23
    • BlastMode7
    • View Profile
I honestly have my reservations about 4k monitors being the next big thing for computers. I really think it's going to be ultrawides.

Offline CreepinDeth

  • Helmet PIG
  • *
  • Posts: 148
    • View Profile
Ultrawides will only gain traction if game devs start supporting it more. Because of consoles, you're probably going to see more games have 4K resolutions over ultrawide aspect ratios. However, I wouldn't be suprised if 2160p ultrawide monitors become more of a thing.

Offline targetrasp

  • Simon Belmont
  • Posts: 462
    • bcalrogers
    • View Profile
I think the nomenclature gets muddy here, at least for me.

I've heard people talk about 4k, ultrawide, and 4k ultrawide... and I don't know how you get 4k ultrawide


To me :

4k = 4096 x 2160
ultrawide 3440 x 1440

4k ultrawide = ?

So for the purpose of this discussion I'm going to assume the first two resolutions..

I'd assume 4k would dominate gaming, even moving forward. With 4K blueray and consoles and television manufacturers going that route now, why would devs deviate? More and more gaming PCs are being played on the living room television (thanks vr), I don't imagine computer games rushing off to a different resolution.

ultrawide has a great advantage in business computing. More screen realestate for multiple apps up and less demand on graphics card, not to mention no pesky beezle when computer to a multiple monitor scenerio. I use two monitors at work and three monitors at home and it limits me to how i can size the applications i have open. I can't span something inbetween two monitors.

Offline CreepinDeth

  • Helmet PIG
  • *
  • Posts: 148
    • View Profile
Definitely needs some clarification. One is an aspect ratio, the other is a resolution (amount of pixels HorizontalxVertical)

Ultrawide=21:9 aspect ratio
4K=3840x2160p resolution (traditional 16:9 aspect ratio that all TVs and most monitors come in)

3440x1440 is an Ultrawide aspect ratio as you mentioned. However, this can still be called a 1440p monitor because the vertical amount of pixels doesn't change, just the horizontal pixels. A 4K ultrawide would be 4300x2160? That's my guess based on some fuzzy math but I hope you get a clear picture of what an ultrawide 4K monitor would be like.

Offline targetrasp

  • Simon Belmont
  • Posts: 462
    • bcalrogers
    • View Profile
I thought 3840 was only UHD...

Offline CreepinDeth

  • Helmet PIG
  • *
  • Posts: 148
    • View Profile
UHD=4K when it comes to monitors and TVs. So, yes, you're correct.

Offline Polygon

  • Green PIG
  • *
  • Posts: 23
    • BlastMode7
    • View Profile
Ultrawides will only gain traction if game devs start supporting it more. Because of consoles, you're probably going to see more games have 4K resolutions over ultrawide aspect ratios. However, I wouldn't be suprised if 2160p ultrawide monitors become more of a thing.

You might be surprised at how many games support 21:9, and that list is growing. Plying games at 4k isn't really feasible. Even top end computers struggle to do it at 60FPS at the elusive high, and above, settings. Consoles can't even do 4k natively.

Offline CreepinDeth

  • Helmet PIG
  • *
  • Posts: 148
    • View Profile
Is there a list? I would be interesting in seeing to see if it makes sense for me to go ultrawide (and if there isn't a list, maybe we should start one on this board.) I do like having the extra real estate for work as well like Targetrasp mentioned.

Consoles aren't that powerful but devs are still making it happen one way or another because it's a great bullet point to have on the box. The latest 1080Ti/Vega64 graphics cards come really close at playing a lot of newer games in 4K/60FPS as well. I see that gap become even smaller with the newer cards this year.
« Last Edit: May 14, 2018, 10:44:49 PM by CreepinDeth »

Offline targetrasp

  • Simon Belmont
  • Posts: 462
    • bcalrogers
    • View Profile
I think I've suffered from assuming bloggers talking about what type of monitor they prefer knew what they were talking about when it came to resolution and aspect ration. I also think marketing makes the pure technical definition muddy...

 
 I grabbed this off of some wiki site:


720p = 1280 x 720 - is usually known as HD or “HD Ready” resolution
1080p = 1920 x 1080 - is usually known as FHD or “Full HD” resolution
1440p = 2560 x 1440 - commonly known as QHD or Quad HD resolution, and typically seen on gaming monitors and on high-end smartphones. 1440p is four times the resolution of 720p HD or “HD ready”.
2160p = 3840 x 2160 - commonly known as 4K, UHD or Ultra HD resolution. It’s a very large display resolution and it’s found on high-end TVs and monitors. 2160p is called 4K because it offers four times the pixels of 1080p FHD or “Full HD”.
4320p = 7680 x 4320 - is known as 8K and it offers 16 times more pixels than the regular 1080p FHD or “Full HD” resolution.



The above is only in 16x9 aspect ration correct? 4k isn't the vertical pixels (not even sure how i'd got that notion in my head), its 4 times the total pixels of full HD (8 million ish).. So theoretically 4k can be offered in any aspect ratio including whatever aspect ration people are calling ultrawide.

3840 x 1600 is an ultrawide aspect ration but resolution wise is a little more than 6 million pixels, i've seen LG call this UHD, but not slap the 4k sticker on it...


Offline Polygon

  • Green PIG
  • *
  • Posts: 23
    • BlastMode7
    • View Profile
Is there a list? I would be interesting in seeing to see if it makes sense for me to go ultrawide (and if there isn't a list, maybe we should start one on this board.) I do like having the extra real estate for work as well like Targetrasp mentioned.

Consoles aren't that powerful but devs are still making it happen one way or another because it's a great bullet point to have on the box. The latest 1080Ti/Vega64 graphics cards come really close at playing a lot of newer games in 4K/60FPS as well. I see that gap become even smaller with the newer cards this year.

Here's a list, not sure how complete it is.

http://www.wsgf.org/mgl/uws

But yeah, they're making it work on consoles with things like checkerboard rendering and upscaling. There's no comparison between native 4k and what they're doing on consoles. The cost to play native 4k @ 60FPS is very high and most PC guys seem to be more interested in higher frame rates with a higher refresh that 4k resolution. That's different for consoles since 21:9 TVs aren't really a thing. However, I'm seeing more and more people connect their latest gen consoles to monitors.

I think I've suffered from assuming bloggers talking about what type of monitor they prefer knew what they were talking about when it came to resolution and aspect ration. I also think marketing makes the pure technical definition muddy...

 
 I grabbed this off of some wiki site:


720p = 1280 x 720 - is usually known as HD or “HD Ready” resolution
1080p = 1920 x 1080 - is usually known as FHD or “Full HD” resolution
1440p = 2560 x 1440 - commonly known as QHD or Quad HD resolution, and typically seen on gaming monitors and on high-end smartphones. 1440p is four times the resolution of 720p HD or “HD ready”.
2160p = 3840 x 2160 - commonly known as 4K, UHD or Ultra HD resolution. It’s a very large display resolution and it’s found on high-end TVs and monitors. 2160p is called 4K because it offers four times the pixels of 1080p FHD or “Full HD”.
4320p = 7680 x 4320 - is known as 8K and it offers 16 times more pixels than the regular 1080p FHD or “Full HD” resolution.



The above is only in 16x9 aspect ration correct? 4k isn't the vertical pixels (not even sure how i'd got that notion in my head), its 4 times the total pixels of full HD (8 million ish).. So theoretically 4k can be offered in any aspect ratio including whatever aspect ration people are calling ultrawide.

3840 x 1600 is an ultrawide aspect ration but resolution wise is a little more than 6 million pixels, i've seen LG call this UHD, but not slap the 4k sticker on it...

Yes, those above resolutions are all 16:9 aspect ratios. As for 3840x1600, that is a 21:9 ultrawide. Ultrawides are a little tougher as the resolution can vary greatly with the size. The 3840x1600 resolution would be used on something around a 38" monitor. My 3440x1440 monitor is a 34" and as they get smaller, they can get down to 2560x1080. Something like 3440x1440 is considered a 2.5K I believe.

Offline CreepinDeth

  • Helmet PIG
  • *
  • Posts: 148
    • View Profile
Is there a list? I would be interesting in seeing to see if it makes sense for me to go ultrawide (and if there isn't a list, maybe we should start one on this board.) I do like having the extra real estate for work as well like Targetrasp mentioned.

Consoles aren't that powerful but devs are still making it happen one way or another because it's a great bullet point to have on the box. The latest 1080Ti/Vega64 graphics cards come really close at playing a lot of newer games in 4K/60FPS as well. I see that gap become even smaller with the newer cards this year.

Here's a list, not sure how complete it is.

http://www.wsgf.org/mgl/uws

But yeah, they're making it work on consoles with things like checkerboard rendering and upscaling. There's no comparison between native 4k and what they're doing on consoles. The cost to play native 4k @ 60FPS is very high and most PC guys seem to be more interested in higher frame rates with a higher refresh that 4k resolution. That's different for consoles since 21:9 TVs aren't really a thing. However, I'm seeing more and more people connect their latest gen consoles to monitors.

Cool, thanks for the list. I'll check it out.

As for console 4K, a lot of games are starting to do native, not all of course but as devs get more experience, you'll see that number increase. I agree, upscaling in any form is not as good as native but devs can have console do upscaling and PC go native. Yes, cost at the moment is prohibitive to some players but once these new video cards come out, I see that being less and less. I guess we'll seee in a year or two.

Offline Polygon

  • Green PIG
  • *
  • Posts: 23
    • BlastMode7
    • View Profile

Cool, thanks for the list. I'll check it out.

As for console 4K, a lot of games are starting to do native, not all of course but as devs get more experience, you'll see that number increase. I agree, upscaling in any form is not as good as native but devs can have console do upscaling and PC go native. Yes, cost at the moment is prohibitive to some players but once these new video cards come out, I see that being less and less. I guess we'll seee in a year or two.

No problem.

While the new nVidia cards should improve things with 4k, it still won't get near the 100+ FPS and that is something the people with the money to buy those components really cares about. Plus, a 4k monitor that does more than 60Hz is really expensive. If 4k takes of for PC gaming, I think it's going to be at least a year before it does.