What 1080p monitor has the best picture quality while having less than 5ms of input lag? 60hz maximum refresh rate is fine with me.
get 1080i instead
bump for answers
Acer T232HLbmidz
>>54728961
For what possible purpose?
pretty much any IPS monitor. I have the ASUS MX279H, kind of big for a 1080p but you get used to it, 9ms input lag, 5ms response time and the colors look so much more vibrant than my samsung TN.
>>54728961
>interlaced
ew, anon why?
This one looks really nice.
http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/eizo-foris-fs2434-gaming-monitor-has-6-mm-ultra-slim-frame.html
>>54732838
>23"
What is this 1999?
>>54732912
I thought 23-24 inches was perfect for 1080p.
>>54732929
No 25" is the upper limit
27" @ 1440p would be perfect for me but all the screens are overpriced as fuck
>>54728953
>input lag
you mean output lag
>>54732961
i think you mean putt putt lag
>>54732945
>twice as many pixels
>cost twice as much
>overpriced
>>54732971
Its retarded though better spec 4k screens are cheaper
Anything about this one?
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Iiyama-ProLite-XU2590HS-B1-25-Inch-Monitor/dp/B00Z1OIMCS
>25
>AH-IPS
>cheap
>>54733026
4k 24" screens are great if your operating system supports scaling well.
>>54733026
There are no 144hz 4k monitors though
>>54733050
I know Windows 10 supports it fairly well but Ingame the text and UI look retarded i was looking at the 28" screens and it was hilariously bad
Plus 4K is still unplayable
>>54733061
Dell has one
>>54733035
>AH-IPS
Might as well get TN or a true 8bit 4k ips panel
>>54733082
I thought AH-IPS is best IPS
>>54733070
Well, 120hz and only works over USB-C/thunderbolt
It also costs 4k
>>54733061
we barely got 60Hz 4k monitors in the past few years sorted out. monitors will take a while before we can do 144Hz at 4k (and don't even hold your breath for DisplayPort; DP 1.4 was only finalized in the last few months and it's not going to do any better than 4k@120Hz (or 5k@60Hz or 8k@30Hz).
They're not even talking about DP 1.5 (or I haven't heard about it at all). and if they do start talking about it, there's no guarantee it'll actually deliver what we need.
>>54733070
>Windows 10 supports it fairly well
lol, maybe if you have no other reference.
24mc57hq-p
Is a 4k monitor worth it yet? I was planning on going with a good 1080 or 1440 like OP but the new rig I'm building will definitely be able to handle 4k.
>>54733177
i have a pair of 4k monitors for my hackintosh, and it probably depends heavily on what you do.
if your operating system doesn't scale well (although at 24" it should only need to scale to 2x, no weird interpolation or anything), or if you're doing something like playing video games, you might not really care that much about the resolution as much as you care about things like refresh rates.
almost everything i do on my computer is text-based work (i'm a grad student, so i'm writing papers, reading papers, writing code, etc...), and reading text on a "retina" kind of screen is absolutely great.
if you don't use an OS that scales well, or if your use case involves little text, then it's entirely likely that you wouldn't really appreciate the features in 4k. and worse, there are some significant costs (like many monitors only manage 30Hz, and even if you get one that does 60Hz you're probably talking about a dedicated video card just to get over the hurdle to drive them (integrated graphics on motherboards don't seem to support DP 1.2 or better (at least last time i checked, admittedly a while ago), meaning you wouldn't even be able to do 4k@60Hz).
>>54733222
I'm talking gaming mostly. I would have a dedicated graphics card to handle it, but if 4k 60hz monitors are too spensive I suppose it wouldn't be worth it on my budget
