I'm looking for a new gaymen monitor. What do I go for, /v/?
I've been using pic related and I need an upgrade.
Is 4k a meme? Should I go for it? Should I stick with 1080p 1920x1080? What monitors do you use?
If you want it for gaming, 120/144Hz monitors are the only acceptable ones. Colors are for fucking faggots.
Make sure it's IPS desu senpai
i just use my tv now. lol i guess ima pleb.
>>336223759
Wait for 4k monitors to not be shit. Settling now for 1440p 144hz is a meme, it's slated to be the shortest generation ever. Unless, of course, money is no object, in which case, what the fuck are you doing asking here?
>>336223997
Fuck off m8
1080p 60hz ips is life
>>336223759
4k is a meme unless your hardware is top of the line.
144Hz at anything above 1080p is also a meme for the same reason.
Get a 2560x1440 Korean monitor and overclock it to 96Hz for best of both worlds.
http://www.koreanmonitor.com/guide-2015/
If you got the money...
4k
IPS
freesync
At least 27".
OP here, I'm looking at the Dell UltraSharp U2412M. It's looking like a great monitor for me, but it's 1920x1200. Am I correct in saying this isn't ideal for vidya? I'm pretty ignorant on monitors, but I rarely see options for 1920x1200 compared to 1080 in settings menus.
>>336223759
The newest model of the ROG Swift is 1440p, 165hz,Gsync, IPS quality colors. It's also like $900 but hey if you want perfection.
I don't notice the colors being 'bad' with my PG278Q and it's sammiched between two 1080p IPS 60hz panels. It's definitely not AS good, but it's not bad at all. Gladly trade slightly better colors for 144hz and Gsync.
I've got two monitors, one 60Hz IPS and one 144Hz TN with G-sync. Both are 2560x1440.
I'd recommend a 144Hz monitor if you play fast moving games like FPS. Aiming and moving feel buttery smooth.
The best resolution is dictated by your graphics card. If you have a high end card, might as well enjoy 2560x1440. If not, probably better with 1920x1080 to keep framerates high. Don't fall for the 4K meme, it's shit for gaming.
>>336227882
1920x1200 is a 16:10 ratio rather than the more common 16:9 (used for 1920x1080). For some shitty reason 16:9 is really popular while 16:10 monitors are rare.
1200p is God-tier, better for gaming than 1080p. More pixels means more work for your GPU but the extra vertical screen real estate is worth having. If 1600p screens weren't so fucking expensive I'd have one.
>>336228224
So, should I go for it then? I'm just a little worried things will look weird as I'll have to use other resolutions in game options. For example, New Vegas doesn't have a 1920x1200 resolution option.
>>336228497
I had a 1200p monitor for ten years or so before I replaced it with a 1440p one last year. I never had any problems getting the correct resolution in games.
I can't be specific with New Vegas but I played a bunch of other Gamebryo engine games including FO3 and they worked fine.
>>336228497
1920x1200 won't appear as an option if your monitor only goes to 1920x1080. Just like 2560x1440 won't appear.
>>336228497
Kind in mind a lot of games will not display a resolution for you to pick from the options menu if your monitor doesn't support it.
1440p @ 144/165hz TN is master race for games
1080p @ 120/144hz TN is also acceptable
>>336223997
144hz is overkill
Not many games support it, and every other game looks awful in comparison.
>>336228653
>>336228709
>>336228786
Of course. I feel stupid now. I think I'm gonna go with this. It's DVI and not HDMI, which is a bit of a hassle but other than that it's pretty good.
>turn up digital vibrance/saturation
>my TN panel now looks as good as my old IPS panel
lmao
4k is beautiful if you've got a card that can handle it well. 980 works just fine.
You really do notice the difference when you switch between 4K and 1080 at the same part of the same game. Shit just looks blurry in comparison.
>>336228795
but I wouldn't trade the IPS colours for the TN response timeand how did you get that video? it's surreal watching someone else post my shit
>>336228905
>he fell for the 60hz meme
>>336228934
i got it from /g/, i only save the good stuff so you should feel honored
Any brand monitor is good as long as you get the resolution and refresh rate you want?
>>336228795
I did not know anything about IPS, TN, and VA panels. Thanks to your webm I am more informed.
>>336229164
i personally would avoid asus and acer, i've heard they have bad QA, so you might end up sending the panel back a few times until you got one without backlight bleeding. i would recommend dell and eizo. benq seems also ok.
>>336223759
1080p and 60hz is the most compatible.
Soon 4k @ 60hz will be the most compatible, since it scales down to 1080p no problems.
16:9 display ratio is the most compatible.
TN, IPS and PLS have different upsides and downsides.
144hz and 21:9 are just a waste of money but most 144hz monitors have good (low) input lag.
Gsync and Freesync are a meme, just lock your frames to the highest stable frames you can get. If you can't you a) have shit hardware and shouldn't be spending on gimmick monitors but on better cpu/gpu b) you bought a game at release and you get shitty frames/optimization while playing your beta version of said game.
1980x1080/4k 60hz/144hz is what you should look for.
>>336229292
I see. Are there brands that are notorious for dead pixels?
>>336229479
not that i know of, ask >>>/g/sqt
>>336229479
It's hardly an issue any more.
They all have different policies for dead pixels.
Some only cover up to 3 or 5.
Some cover against any at all.
You'd have to check for yourself.
>>336229479
Perfect pixels is included in many purchases now. Dead pixel monitors have to sold as refurbished where I am.
