New Monitor,upgrade or not

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
andy_93

andy_93

Distinguished
Dec 11, 2009
593
0
19,010
Hi,iam just looking for a bit of advice,ive been thinking of buying a new monitor. About a year ago I upgraded my pc,gpu,cpu,ram,motherboard. My gpu is not top of the range but a decent Sapphire 7950 OC edition. At the moment I have a Acer G24,i have been looking at getting a Samsung T27A750D. Now while my Acer has a resolution of 1920x1200 and the Samsung in 1920x1080p,the Samsung is 120Hz and 3D,while the Acer is 60hz and suffers from bad screen tearing without vsync on. So,i would just like to know,would this be classed as a upgrade or not,some forums I have read say not because I would be loosing 120 pixles. would I really notice that on a 120Hz monitor.
Many thanks.
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
jakedavies8

jakedavies8

Distinguished
Jan 25, 2012
35
0
18,530


I would go for it, you will appreciate the extra few inches and will not notice the difference in pixels. Also having 3D and 120Hz is a welcome bonus in my opinion.

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
bryonhowley

bryonhowley

Splendid
Oct 24, 2011
3,742
0
23,960

Agree and no you will not notice the few missing pixels. I just replaced my middle monitor with a ASUS VG278HE Black 27" 144Hz and I must say it is nice. Now I just need to get the money to replace my side monitors with these!
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
ubercake

ubercake

Splendid
Oct 28, 2009
7,270
5
29,815
120Hz in 2D is great. I tried to go back to 60Hz monitors a couple of months ago. That lasted a week. Once you go to 120Hz in 2D it's hard to accept the perceivable tearing of a 60Hz monitor.

You'll notice a little losing the 120px of height, but the 120Hz monitor is a great upgrade. If you're looking to get a 27" monitor, you could also consider the Acer HN274H which runs around $400. I've been using one for a little over a year now. It has great contrast, no blur, and 120Hz refresh. The 3D is great for most single player games as well.

I tried going back to 60Hz monitors for a surround setup. While I loved the extra width, I even had tearing issues with these that I could not stand. V-sync smoothed it out, but the input lag was unacceptable. I also tried a 2560x1440 27" Auria monitor a couple of months before that. I returned it after a day because of the tearing, contrast, input lag and blur.

Once you use one of these 120Hz monitors - which to me exhibit no perceivable tearing - it's hard to go back to 60Hz monitors. I always keep coming back to my 120Hz monitor.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
JackNaylorPE

JackNaylorPE

Titan
BANNED
Oct 30, 2004
32,255
14
99,960
24" is the ideal monitor size "at normal monitor viewing distances". Once the pixels per inch gets less than 96 ppi, the human eye can start to distinguish individual pixels. As you can see here, 23" @ 1920 x 1080 = 95.8 ppi ..... 23.6" isn't bad at 93.3 and 24 is still OK at 91.8 ppi

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dot_pitch

Ya will notice that 27" OTOH is down to 81.6 ppi. Now I'm getting on in years but I can see individual pixels on a 27" desktop.

The biggest thing about dropping from x 1200 to 1080 is that ya lose that little band of screen real estate at the bottom of the screen. I love playing or watching movies in window mode at 1920 x 1080 and having that 120 pixel high band along the bottom for utilities, media controls etc.

My son has an SLI box w/ 120 hz monitor.....loved it w/ the nVidia 3D glasses on the Batmans. W/o the 3D I dont know that those on a budget would go the extra $100 for 120 / 144 Hz tho, tho the smoothness is certainly noticeable. I'm starting a pure gaming build next week for a colleague w/ 3 of these 144 Hz units.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824236313

The Light Boost technology is pretty impressive .... well was better than I expected from the description.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
B

bluejayek

Honorable
Apr 3, 2013
281
0
10,860
1920 x 1080 is 230,400 pixels less then 1920 x 1200, not 120.

I personally much perfer the 16:10 1920 x 1200 resolution to the 1920 x 1080 resolution, although I have not experienced 120Hz to be able to give an informed opinion one way or the other.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
ubercake

ubercake

Splendid
Oct 28, 2009
7,270
5
29,815


I was referring to the pixel height, not the total pixels, but thanks for the clarification.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
andy_93

andy_93

Distinguished
Dec 11, 2009
593
0
19,010
Thank you all very much for your input, I think that I may be going for the new monitor, I will also look at the ones that you have mentioned. For me, having a gpu card that's capable of more than your monitor can display seems a bit of a waste, like having a big v8 but limited to a v4. All your advice has been very much appreciated and has given me food for thought. Just to add, I am slightly limited in the 3D area, as AMD compatibale monitors seem very few and far between
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
andy_93

andy_93

Distinguished
Dec 11, 2009
593
0
19,010
Hi,i would like to just add a secondary question to my first. Now I sit quite close to my monitor, say about two foot or so when playing FPS and a but more when playing racing games. Now after deciding on going for the 1920X1080p 120hz monitor, someone said that a 2560X1440 is a better choice for 27" monitors and upwards, now I am back to the beginning again lol. The higher res does not support 120hz as far as I am aware, just wondered if any of you have experienced both and which would you personally go for.
Many thanks.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
ubercake

ubercake

Splendid
Oct 28, 2009
7,270
5
29,815


It's all personal preference. For me, the default font size for a 27" 2560x1440 is too small. The 30" monitors that are 2560x1600 make more sense to me. Again, this is all personal preference.

Because I play a lot of multi-player FPS, for me, minimizing tearing, keeping input lag to a minimum, and high contrast are primary concerns. If I were into photography, color accuracy and viewing angles would be more of a concern.

If I could have my wish, some company would release a 3840x1080 (or 3840x1200) TN 120Hz 3D TN monitor with 1-2ms response. If it cost $1K or less, I'd be on it.

Unfortunately, at this point in time in monitor tech, it seems like we have "either-or" decisions to make. Whether you think going to the 120Hz monitor is an upgrade would ultimately depend on how you perceive the performance after the fact. To me, constant tearing at any resolution is annoying to me. I won't even deal with it after using the 120Hz.

At any rate, you have a decision to make. All we can do is give you our opinions based on our experiences.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
andy_93

andy_93

Distinguished
Dec 11, 2009
593
0
19,010
That makes a lot of sense, tearing is one of my biggest gripes also. I did think tearing would not be as much of a issue tho with the higher res but I guess, still being a 60hz monitor, it will happen.
Thank you for your reply.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
andy_93

andy_93

Distinguished
Dec 11, 2009
593
0
19,010
Ok, so I have a third question, sorry, if I were to get a monitor with a display of 2560x1440 could I run games, like F1 2012,Dirt 3, Crysis 2&3 BF3 and Bioshock Infinite on max settings using a Sapphire 7950 OC edition or would I have to get a second card. Also (4th question :??: ) would is till get screen tear at those resolutions.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
andy_93

andy_93

Distinguished
Dec 11, 2009
593
0
19,010
After looking and looking I cannot source a Samsung S27A750D any were, so I looked for the 950 version (which I did not really want because of the large stand and cannot source that one either. So it looks like Samsung have either ceased production due to the 750 DP problems or they are very popular. I cannot find another monitor that does 3D for a AMD card. So I might sell my Sapphire 7950 OC Edition and get a Nvidia card as Nvidia has a much much larger market in 3D monitors. So I was wondering, what Nvidia card would be at least on par with my AMD card as I have no idea about Nvida GPU`s, not had one for many years.
Many thanks.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
ubercake

ubercake

Splendid
Oct 28, 2009
7,270
5
29,815
A GTX 660 ti is in the price range with equal or better performance:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6159/the-geforce-gtx-660-ti-review/13
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_660_Ti_Power_Edition/8.html

This is a 660 Ti I would recommend:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814130816

The 660ti is comparable to the Radeon 7950. The EVGA above is made by a solid company that is famous for their customer service. The EVGA is clocked faster than the 680, but has a couple hundred fewer Cuda cores.

But for only $40 more, a GTX 670 can be had:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814133452

I had two PNY 580s. They were solid. Great company and warranty (lifetime warranty upon registration) from PNY. The 670 would be worth the cash if you're going the Nvidia route.

If you can get a 670, do it. Otherwise, the 660 ti is the way to go.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
ubercake

ubercake

Splendid
Oct 28, 2009
7,270
5
29,815


The way the data are processed and delivered to the screen also plays a big part.

I think we'll require more RAM on our video cards once 4K or 8K screens become the standard. By that time, we'll all be shopping for the next gen of video cards anyhow. You'll at least get a couple of years out of it 660 ti or 670. Add another one when you feel the need.

On the other hand, I wouldn't let the 3D component drive me away from 120Hz monitors. 95% of my time is spent in 2D at 120Hz. For shooters, the fast performance is key. To me, that's where the real value is.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
andy_93

andy_93

Distinguished
Dec 11, 2009
593
0
19,010
Well, not being au fait with Nvidia cards, thought I would show you the site I use to purchase my goods. I am from the UK and do not think the card that you recommend is available. It might be under a slightly different name. Here is the link to the store I use http://www.overclockers.co.uk/productlist.php?groupid=701&catid=1914&subid=2379 Could you suggest one of those, I see one that does have 3GB but less Stream Processors, not sure which one would have the greater impact in performance .I still want a 120hz monitor, that's for sure but as the monitor I purchase will have to last me a few years, the idea of having the option to go 3D or 2D gives some longevity I feel.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
andy_93

andy_93

Distinguished
Dec 11, 2009
593
0
19,010
Its amazing that the cheaper card is clocked faster than the 670 but I guess the 670 could be clocked higher and be more stable. Just like to say, thanks for taking the time to answer my questions, your feedback and recommedations have given me more of an idea what to look when looking to buy a monitor and now a GPU it would appear lol, its been very much appreciated.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom