Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

27" Catleap IPS vs 24-27" 1080p monitor (urgent help needed)

Last response: in Computer Peripherals
Share

Which is the wiser choice?

Total: 13 votes (8 blank votes)

  • Catleap 27" IPS monitor 2560x1440
  • 84 %
  • 25-27" 1080p monitor (Recommend in comments)
  • 17 %
July 10, 2012 3:41:23 PM

Hi guys, I'm having trouble making up my mind on a monitor, I already got my build but no monitor...


Here are my specs
Intel i5-3570k
8 gig ram
SINGLE EVGA GTX 670 FTW 2GB


I need some help deciding whether to go with either a:

IPS 27" monitor (Catleap) resolution of 2560x1440 which would give lower FPS (~40). Also might arrive with potential problems such as DOA or Dead Pixels

OR

A 1080p monitor between 24-27" (Haven't decided but I'm looking at Samsung or Asus) which would give much higher FPS (~60-100). Reduced chance of having DOA or Dead Pixels

Basically it's the classic case of performance vs quality. If I wasn't completely strapped for cash, I'd just SLI and have the best of both worlds.

Some say the display on the Catleap is phenomenal even at lower resolution. I was thinking I could run some games on max everything and those that I couldn't I'd just lower the resolution to 1080p but it doesn't have an inbuilt scaler and things might look "ugly"

Some what I'm asking is that in my situation, which do you think would be the wisest choice and how can I get the best out of my new setup for this build.

Please either say Catleap or recommend me and alternative monitor in the 24-27" inch range that's 1080p.

I've done my research but I can't make my mind up.
a b C Monitor
July 10, 2012 4:16:11 PM

If you're not afraid of the potential issues like those you mentioned, the fact that Yamakasi isn't a well-established manufacturer like Asus or Samsung (which could affect the warranty), and the import taxes (which I think you'd have to pay separately), I'd say go for the Catleap (or one of the other similar models, like the Achieva Shimian; not sure if there's a significant difference). There aren't many games that could make a GTX 670 struggle even at 2560x1440, and if GPU scaling from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440 looks bad to you, you can change it to "no scaling", which will put a black border around the game area, but eliminate issues with interpolated pixels. Also, you might try lowering the AA level in the more demanding games, because the smaller pixels make the aliasing less noticeable (although from personal experience using a 30 inch 2560x1600 monitor, I wouldn't advise turning AA off completely)
July 10, 2012 5:43:08 PM

Okay thanks. Looks like I'll order the catleap tonight. If the performance isn't how I would like it, I would save some $ and order an additional 670 FTW for SLI. What are your thoughts on this?
Related resources
July 10, 2012 8:40:25 PM

MauveCloud said:
Look around at some reviews of the gtx 670, I'd be surprised if you need a second one, but I found a review that compares the performance when put in 2-way and 3-way SLI:
http://www.guru3d.com/article/geforce-gtx-670-2-and-3wa...



Thanks. I looked at it, as you can see from the benchmarks at lower res, there is little difference between the single and 2-way SLI, but at higher res like for catleap around 2560x1440, the difference is a lot more apparent.


I'm also having second thoughts about SLI, first I cant really afford it. Secondly, I think it would mean I would have to upgrade my PSU, I currently have a 620W PSU.

This would mean, new psu? new card?

At this juncture, I don't even know what to do anymore. Maybe I'll just get a 1080p monitor
a b C Monitor
July 10, 2012 8:54:31 PM

What kind of framerates are you looking for, and have you looked at benchmarks for the games you'd actually be playing? 30 fps is often considered playable (and a gtx 670 can achieve that for most games at 2560x1600), and anything over 60 fps would look about the same as 60 unless you get a 120hz monitor.
July 10, 2012 9:38:57 PM

I'm severely confused now. Thanks for clearing up the 60fps issue. So if I don't have a 120Hz monitor I cant notice 60fps and up? So why do people strive for higher than 60fps on 60Hz monitors

Check out these benchmarks http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/598?vs=555

Thats a regular GTX 670, can I expect slightly higher FPS on GTX 670 FTW?

Seems like I can get 60fps on battlefield 3?

I would play games like battlefiled 3, max payne 3, skyrim, etc. What do you think. All these benchmarks tell me something different.
a b C Monitor
July 10, 2012 10:02:03 PM

I can see striving for higher than 60 fps average, to make sure the minimum is at least 60 fps, but beyond that, I don't see the point myself. The monitor only refreshes the screen 60 times per second (unless it's a 120hz monitor), so extra frames would be dropped. The GTX 670 FTW is a factory-overclocked model, right? Then yes, the FPS would be slightly higher. Also, the nearest resolution benchmarked is 2560x1600; FPS for 2560x1440 would be a bit higher.
At 2560x1600 on a reference gtx 670, Battlefield 3 runs at 60.9 fps on that chart, Skyrim gives 84.8 fps (58.28 with FXAA according to the review here at Tom's Hardware), and Max Payne gives 51 fps here:
http://www.legionhardware.com/articles_pages/gigabyte_g...
July 11, 2012 2:24:31 AM

Asus has a new budget IPS line out with the VS series, it looks good, but I heard some complaints about some serious light bleeding on some models, and the blacks not being very black:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

they also have a new 23" IPS with the VG series:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...


if you don't mind going down from the 24" mark.

Also, the VG23AH is $100 more, but I recently ordered one because it's been verified that it has a semi-glossy finish which is awesome. Also, the dotpitch is slightly lower on the VG23AH so the picture quality may be a slight bit better. It also does passive 3D which seems to do just fine if you use HDMI, but I don't really care for the 3D.
July 11, 2012 2:29:35 AM

Also, if you really want a catleap, you can buy "perfect pixel" variants that have been tested for dead pixels, but you would have to pay at least $60+ more for those and at that point you really have to take into consideration your budget. I almost got one but I didn't want to risk getting one with dead pixels, and didn't want to pay $400 for one that didn't. Also, the dead pixel policy is ridiculous, I would cry if I got one with 9 dead pixels, because at that point I'd be screwed.
a b C Monitor
July 11, 2012 3:00:54 AM

exhibitO said:
Thanks, man. It's a close call. If you were in my shoes would you still go for the Catleap?

PS, have you seen this?
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Perfect-Pixel-New-YAMAKASI-CATL...

Catleap 23" 1080p!


At that resolution, the $190 price isn't much of a bargain, because you can get a Dell U2312HM for about $215 on Provantage (I'd supply a link, but they seem to be having a problem with that product detail page link at the moment), and if you're not using it for professional graphics work, you could get a VA or TN panel with that resolution for cheaper. The 27 inch model, however, offers 2560x1440 for $300-$400, whereas monitors with that resolution from major brands like Dell and HP are around $625 or more.
!