What monitor do you use for gaming, /v/?
I can't decide between getting a 1440p 60hz monitor or a 1080p 144hz monitor.
Get the latter or wait a few years for 4k
>>337587727
Meme resolution, go 1440 60hz. 144hz is for competitive fps fags
>>337587649
5" 1080p screen? Screen diagonal matters.
Why not a 1440p 144hz monitor?
There are even a few low input lag IPS models out there.
Only problem is all of them are expensive and have QC issues (fucking asus and acer). If you get a good model you're set for the foreseeable future, though. Latency won't go down by much anymore and hitting more than 60 fps on 4k is going to be a huge pain for quite a few years to come.
>>337587649
I use both, 24" 1080p 144hz for FPS games, 32" 1440p 60hz for all other games. 27" 5K 60hz for work and creation.
65" 720p TV heh...suck it PCplebs
and it only has a 55ms delay
>>337587649
You need a very powerful graphics card the higher you go bro. 144hz is a meme for competitive fps fags. It's better to get a 1ms response time aswell so there's no ghosting.
Rule of thumb 1080p cut off point is 24 inch. 27 inch+ it looks stretched.
>I want my game to look like shit for the placebo effect that I can actually utilize the extra 6.9ms frame rate of 144hz
Is a 27" 4k monitor a meme resolution?
>>337588390
>It's better to get a 1ms response time aswell so there's no ghosting.
there hasnt been any ghosting on any quality lcd monitor for well over 10 years, even cheap ones
>>337587649
Which one you should get depends on what kind of games you play. 144hz is essential for racing, FPS and rhythm games.
>>337587649
get a monitor that can do
4k at 60fps with freesync that can do 1080p at 144hz.
Where is 1680x1050?
My current monitor, Acer P203w is running with this res as native, serving me well since like 8 years or more.
But lately started to loudly creak during the night and in general when I turn it off.
Does it mean that I need new one?
1440p if you actually use your computer, 1080p isn't a high enough resolution.
>no 900p on op pic
1080p60 higher fps or res are still too demanding/require parts that are too expensive
>>337587976
>Only problem is all of them are expensive and have QC issues (fucking asus and acer)
That's exactly why I'm avoiding them completely
>>337587649
If you play multiplayer games that will benefit from a 144 hz monitor, then go with that. If not, go with the 1440p monitor.
Do you want to play games that would look better with higher resolution textures or games that would look better with absolutely no motion blur
4k at high density. Everything looks so clear.
![EIZO-Foris-FS2735[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/giSeUGv.jpg "EIZO-Foris-FS2735[1].jpg")
1440p 144hz IPS
http://www.144hzmonitors.com/monitors/eizo-foris-fs2735-144hz-1440p-ips-gaming-monitor/
>>337587649
Using a 2560x1440 144hz freesync IPS.
>>337588390
>>337587861
>Samefagging this hard
>>337588773
The Eizo FS2735 uses the same panel as the Asus and Acer screens, and has no QC issues what so ever. The only downside is the fact that it has FreeSync instead of gsync, oh and its >$1000
>>337587649
>337587649
27"1440p IPS, but don't expect great blacks.
>>337587649
1440p
Is perfect, not too high like 4K to affect performance and its look better than 1080P.
>>337587649
1360*768 if the game allows it
720p otherwise
I am a fucking mole so higher resolutions usually make the text super tiny and it hurts my head to force myself to read it
I went for 144hz since I play a lot of fast paced competitive fps games, but I can see why people who play more singleplayer games would go for the higer res.
>>337589186
It has the same panel and almost no QC issues, yeah. But it's also $400 more expensive than Asus/Acer, probably stemming from the fact they can't use half of the shitty panels they get from AU Optronics.
It's a good choice if you don't mind the ridiculous price and really don't want to deal with shitty BLB infested monitors.
If that's not the case then all you can really do is try to get a decent current model or wait for more manufacturers to release those kinds of monitors and/or the price to come down.
1024x768 @ 120hz CRT
>>337588643
Please respond ;_;
Even if I would need one, like OP, I dont realyl know, what other monitor should I get. My desk wont fit anything bigger than 21-22''.
I have one of those weird resolutions.
1680x1050.
>>337590463
http://www.prad.de/en/index.html
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/
>tfw 1440p and try to play older games
It's a good thing I kept my old 1080p one, because so many games don't go up to 1440p. It's great for new games, though.
Trying to get morrowind to play at 1440p.
>>337590519
How is that resolution "weird"?
>>337590547
Oh thanks.
But I still dont know, if I should aim for another 20'', 21 or 22?
>>337590238
>pay 600 bucks for a shitty monitor
>pay 1000 for an excellent one
Gee, I wonder what I should pick. But really, all I want is a monitor with that panel with gsync that doesnt have QC issues. Why doesn't it exsist? Why does Eizo insist on using Freesync? Why can't Nvidijew support freesync so I can drop a grand on the literal monitor of my dreams?
>>337590419
>2016
>CRT
>>>/vr/
>>337591118
you could alwaysswitch to AMD
>>337590684
Most games are fine, just run the rest in 720p fo dat native upscaling.
>>337587649
What budget do you have OP? I got a a 27' 1440p 144hz TN for $450, no regrets so far.
>>337591357
Nigger, I would, but if I want to play at 1440p with 144 fps I'm going to need the fastest GPU on the market. And guess who provides those? I wish I could ignore this shitty company, but they still make the best products, if you have the money.
>>337591409
>TN
IPS is like mechanical keyboards and 144 fps. Once you've seen the better alternative, you never want to go back.
>>337591118
As I said, if you get a good Asus you're set. With Amazon or Newegg you can keep replacing them until you get a good one, but it's annoying as fuck.
If Eizo hadn't opted to go with freesync then yeah, they would be the obvious choice (even despite the fact that the proprietary g-sync module would have jacked the price even higher).
I've been waiting for a good 1440p/120+hz/IPS monitor ever since I bought my current monitors almost 5 years ago. Now there finally are some that are not garbage korean overclock crap, but they either have BLB out the ass or include DOA technology I don't care about. Thanks, monitor manufacturers. Guess I'll have to wait another year or so.
Why are all these monitors so fucking shitty
>literally every single monitor has 3-4 stars
>70% success in reviews with 30% complete failures/dead pixels
I didnt know the monitor market was this shit
I'll just stick with my trusty and tested 1920x1080 iiyama thanks
How are ultra wide monitor for games?
Who else here /awkward resolution/? I play in 1366x768.
go for the 1440p, 144hz is pretty much useless since barely any games use it and it will end up just fucking with you harder if you play any games locked to 30
>>337587649
4k IPS. Competitive PC gaming is dead so there's no point to play at a higher hertz. Fighting games are the only competitive genre left and they're all 60 fps.
>>337587976
>4k is going to be a huge pain for quite a few years to come.
its not a pain for me right now, beyond not being able to play everything at max
but i didn't buy a midget 4k with 180 pixels an inch or whatever, so i dont deal with scaling issues
>>337591678
Being a hardware enthusiast is suffering. It's a perpetual waiting game.
>tfw bought a 144hz screen five months before gsync came out.
>>337592039
>barely any games support it
It's for shooters, and every shooter supports it
>if you play a game locked to 30
literally no differece playing 30fps on a 60hz or a 144hz monitor
that being said, don't get one unless you play a lot of shooters
4k is a meme, and even NASA-tier computers can't get a good, solid 60 at 4k.
It's the future, surely, but its a future so distant that you should pay for it just yet.
1080p is too low.
The sweetspot is 1440p at 144hrz.
>>337592203
>its not a pain for me right now, beyond not being able to play everything at max
That's what I meant. You're going to have a hard time playing new games at 4k on ultra settings while getting 100+fps (you know, where 120/144hz kidna starts to matter) for quite a while to come.
That or you SLI/quad-SLI whatever the fastest card is out there at the moment.
>>337592392
144 hz is just a meme
Enjoy your youth while you can, after 25-30 years you won't be able to play anymore fps and 144hz will be absolutely useless for you
>>337592392
NASA tier computers probably dont even have dedicated graphics cards so there's no surprise there.
and any game you can run at a steady 144fps at 1440p, you can probably run at 60 at 4k
>>337592284
>literally no differece playing 30fps on a 60hz or a 144hz monitor
Yes there is. Do you even math?
30 is an even divisor of 60, so playing 30 fps on a 60hz display means that two consecutive frames will always be the same. If you play 30 on 120, four consecutive frames will always be the same. If you play 30 on 144, every 4.8 consecutive frames will always be the same. You can't divide frames evenly, you either get tearing or stutter.
>>337592525
if you're buying 144hz for competitive edge in multiplayer games, you're probably turning down all those fancy graphics that just occlude your vision anyways.
otherwise you're wasting your time
>>337592719
Good thing you can set every 144hz monitor to 120hz via driver options, then.
>>337587649
>144hz
meme frequency
>>337592824
>competitive edge
Nice meme.
And if you're turning down the all the graphics options for your "competitive edge" you'd never play on a monitor big enough for 4k vs. 1440p or even 1080p to matter.
>>337591658
I know the colors are rough, but I was used to a TN panel from years of laptop gaming. In-game I don't notice much of a difference unless there's lots of gradients, like in skyboxes.
For OP, I'd probably recommend a 1080p 144hz IPS, 24' or lower for good pixel density. 144hz is like magic, the aesthetics are like 30 vs 60 all over again, it just *feels* amazing in most games.
>He doesn't use a 21:9 monitor
>>337593718
>going wider not taller
9:5 was the ideal aspect ratio this whole wider screen has gotten out of control
I have crossover 2795, IPS, 1440p, 100hz. Was 350 USD from korea. Only downside is is dualink dvid only, so no scaler. Also can only adjust colors in windows, it has no osd except a brightness backlight button.
Anyone use HDTVs? I'm pretty close to buying http://www.amazon.com/dp/B01CG8NEOW/
I have a 2008 Bravia sitting around and its absolutely amazing, but it's way too hot and bulky. No point in sitting so close to a monitor.
144hz monitors are amazing if you play fast videogames.
I.e. racing and fps, they really give you an edge.
I currently do 1440p IPS and a 1080p 144hz TN (BenQ), best of both worlds.
I'll get a 1440p 144Hz next year when they release 1080 HBM models.
Still rocking a 780ti, does me fine at 1080p 144hz.
>>337594045
>Anyone use HDTVs
ofc. Vizio masterrace
>>337594045
I used an HDTV as a monitor for years (it was 1080p), and now I'm near sighted as fuck. It ruined me eyes.
>>337594045
has 50 gazillion unnecessary marketing gimmicks to appeal to idiot 'home theater' crowd
except input lag in the 40ms+ territory, minimum
Do you guys know if there is a 24' 1440p 144Hz monitor on the market.
It's like all of 1440p 144Hz are 27'...
>>337593803
but 21:9 gives me a higher fov without having to change any base settings and less prone to warping at higher fov
>>337588550
Factually incorrect.
Even my Samsung s5 has ghosting from going grey to black. When I scroll down with spoiler text on the Tomorrow 4chan theme, there is ghosting present on my s5.
And yes, ghosting was still a common issue for IPS up until 2011 you little shit.
Also
>this one underage poorfaggot calling 120/144hz a "meme"
It literally improves every genre in terms of responsiveness and feedback.
Are you a casual ASSFAGGOTS player? Then of course you shouldn't get a high refresh rate panel.
>>337594681
what is an acceptable response time? Is 5ms okay?
>>337590808
It really is a weird resolution. You should definitely at least get 1080p.
>>337587649
Friendly reminder not to get an AOC 120hz+ monitor, unless you like frameskipping and therefore fake 120hz or 144hz support
The G-Sync models are alright, though.
>>337595346
if you mean real response time, yes, 5ms is incredibly low for combined processing/pixel delay
if you mean advertised response time, that number is meaningless bullshit, you have to go look at real review sites that test the actual response time to know anything
anything around 20 or less is playable to me.
>>337595621
I was working/playing on it since like 8 years so I dont see a problem.
1080p? The 1920x1080? But thats 16:9, basically like 16:10 only wider.
>>337593718
this, from a 720p laptop I got a 970 and a 2560x1080 monitor, by the time 970's insufficient for most new games I'l switch to 3440x1440
People who choose resolution over refresh rate haven't tried 144hz
>>337595802
he's probably 15 years old and doesn't remember when 1920x1200 and 1680x1050 were the standard monitor resolutions before HDTVs bled in and changed the standard
>>337595802
16:9 actually gives you an FOV advantage in all games.
I've used a 1050p before, it was okay. But you really should step up to 1080, it has quite a bit of visual improvements and you get the full HD experience.
Your games are going to run just a little worse, though.
>mfw upgrading to 1440p
>>337595956
>they used to be the standard dude
>I FUCKING HATE CHANGE
Get with the times, gramps.
>>337596131
its not a 'weird' resoluton kiddo, it's an 'old' one
call it outdated and you'd be correct, call it weird and now you're trying to save face
If you play high motion multiplayer games, especially shooters, go 144hz. If not, go 1440p.
I run 2560x1440p at 144hz.
3x1440 at 60.
Is the obvious choice if you dont want to spend over 3 grand and keep your multi setup equal
>>337587649
Ask yourself this OP, gameplay or graphics.
Keep in mind that 144hz addresses both.
>144/120hz is only for shooters
I don't see why you would use 120hz only for shooters. It literally makes everything smoother than just 60 fps, why would you choose not to play all your vidya with at least 120hz?
>>337587649
THERE IS NO REASON TO HAVE MORE THAN 1440
THERE IS NO REASON TO HAVE MORE THAN 1440
THERE IS NO REASON TO HAVE MORE THAN 1440
THERE IS NO REASON TO HAVE MORE THAN 1440
THERE IS NO REASON TO HAVE MORE THAN 1440
>>337596519
I agree
>>337596431
they haven't experienced it yet
Asus PG279Q, 144 Hz and 1440p. And G-sync.
I got lucky with mine though, first models had issues with backlight bleeding and bad QC
>>337596431
After I bought my 144hz monitor, my gameplay improved a fucktonne. My KD average went from 1.68 to 1.8. Considering the lifetime hours with the game, that was a huge average shift.
1366x768
>got a 4k ips
>can't even run most games at that res
>not much movie content
>open 4chang
>text is so sharp it's giving me a boner erry time
seriously, fuck games and movies. the crisp text alone is worth the high dpi.
I spent 400€ on a shitposting monitor and I love it.
- 21inch 1080p 60hz pc monitor(upscale games to 1440p with my GPU for better looking images/games)
-42inch 720p 75hz HD TV monitor for my old gen games i got in 07
>tfw poorfag
i want g-sync so much.
got extreme and i mean fucking extreme screen tearing without vsync turned on.
but with vsync turned on some games work really crappy ontop of the response lag.
>>337596431
this tbqh
>>337588369
>55ms delay
i know you're memeing but can you even imagine
that would be awful
>>337587649
4K 60Hz FreeSync IPS monitor
been rolling with 1600p for 3 years now.
waiting for the 1080ti before upgrading to something more practical like 1440p 120hz.
>>337597070
Before getting g-sync I always picked tearing. Yes, it looks bad, but at least it doesn't lag.
Not having to pick now feels great, so I can only recommend you to save up. And good monitor will stay relevant for 2-3 PC upgrades serving you well.
144hz is a meme, and an expensive one at that
>>337597476
>is a meme
No its not
>expensive
BenQ XL2411Z regularly goes on sale for 250 or cheaper.
>>337587649
1080^144hz if you have the video card for it.
>>337597569
maintaining the framerate is the expensive part, not the monitor itself
with the new polaris chips it's looking more viable now, at least
>>337597654
>polaris
i'm retarded. meant pascal
>>337597654
You mean with the new pascal cards
>>337587649
1080p 60Hz, it's probably the biggest bottleneck in my system
>>337597654
Depends on the game then I guess. I've yet to play an FPS that doesn't run at 144FPS for me and I'm on a mid-range AMD build. Even BO3 runs around there with some tweaks.
>>337597654
>maintaining the framerate is the expensive part
Bingo. It's really not worth it if you're not willing to spend the money.
>>337587649
1440p is really good for gaming, I got an 27inch IPS one in 2013 when I picked up a GTX 780 and it was incredible
I've since got 4k for muh gay man but I run an arch terminal with the 1440p and its the best workspace i've ever owned
1200p, 59hz
I don't know shit about monitors, should I upgrade?
>>337587649
I use 1080p 144hz for FPS and games that might not run well at 4k.
>That feel when Freesync and G-Sync will never stop being memes.
I'll stick with 1080p until the hardware to properly use it is affordable.
>>337588489
This, lol
>>337588613
No, it's not.
>>337592392
>1080p is too low.
>The sweetspot is 1440p
this(for the next 2 years at least)
>>337598845
>nobody responded to my shitty bait
>i will just respond myself
(You)Now go fuck yourself with a cactus
>2560x1080
>every single game runes fine except for Fallout 4
I can hear his laughter in the distance.
>>337587649
>call it 4K
>it doensn't actually go up to 4K
ayyy?
Frame rate > resolution
>>337588834
THIS
>>337592392
Except that 1080p is the standard.
That feeling when your framerate drops during a game.
1360 x 768 poorfag reporting in
>>337591545
>the fastest GPU on the market. And guess who provides those?
if its not a gaemwurx game AMD wins.
1440 144hz for me.
Also G-SYNC but that isn't really needed.
>>337598571
What's wrong with them?
>>337592219
>bought a 144hz screen five months before gsync came out.
dont sweat it man. new shit cimes out every siv months. you can save so much money getting perfectly good ''dated'' tech cause the new shits almost out then pick up the better shit when the even newer shits out. you will be getting the cream on top by not being an early adopter. these days you can make a PC for $700 that would have cost $2000 two years ago, but it still preforms plenty good.
>>337594401
>It ruined me eyes.
that's a mom meme
>He fell for the 4K meme
>>337594401
I bet you retard don't even know how get far or near sighted.
Shit you made a fool out of yourself with that post. You're lucky it's an anonymous imageboard.
>>337596894
go to bed jordan
Depens on your hardware really...
What good is a 144hz monitor if you cant get past 100fps in games.
>>337600052
Placebo. Unless you play games at 40fps there is almost no visual difference.
>>337587649
I got that 24 inch Sony 3D monitor. I love it, but I miss playing on 4:3 CRT's. Games on wide-screen have too strong horizontal movement and minimalist vertical movement and even after 5 or so years I can't get used to it. I play GPS much better on the old resolutions.
Hell, even when I browse the Web I use the right half of my screen only.
Why are there no good 16:10 120+hz monitors out there?
Looking to upgrade soon and 16:10 is all but dead now.
>>337600950
>being poor
Is there a 4K/IPS/144hz/1ms/0-1 inpulag monitor?
