Would you rather have a 32 inch 1080p monitor or a 27 inch 1440p monitor for gaming and video? both are 144hz

[David_24]

These two monitors are in the same price range
I was thinking 1440p would be nice so I could watch 4k video in 2k.
Also I was thinking since I'd have a ryzen 1600 id get good 2k with a 1080 or vega.
Also 1440p is great for games with low requirements or older games that I can't push the graphics up on.
I just don't think a store would give me a good representation of 2k vs 1080p. its all 4k tvs and each screen is so different already. And the store lighting is fake.


Do you have a prefference for g sync or freesync? I'd get one of those.

 

[BFG-9000]

It's overkill to get a GTX1080 or Vega for just 1080p. You could save a lot of money with a 1060 or RX580.

Many elements in even Windows 10 still do not scale properly and a smallish 27" 1440p would sometimes show text that's so small it's difficult to read. I've got a 30" but would prefer 80-90ppi which would be 32-36" at 1440p, though it also depends how close to the monitor you sit.

Get the variable refresh to match your GPU brand, both work well as long as you can keep the FPS above a minimum speed. Keep in mind Gsync monitors cost so much more than Freesync that you could use the money to buy the next better AMD GPU.

 

[jaslion]

These two monitors are in the same price range
I was thinking 1440p would be nice so I could watch 4k video in 2k.
Also I was thinking since I'd have a ryzen 1600 id get good 2k with a 1080 or vega.
Also 1440p is great for games with low requirements or older games that I can't push the graphics up on.
I just don't think a store would give me a good representation of 2k vs 1080p. its all 4k tvs and each screen is so different already. And the store lighting is fake.


Do you have a prefference for g sync or freesync? I'd get one of those.

27 inch 1440p monitor all day every day. 32 inch at 1080p is not a pleasant experience as you can see the pixels quite well and text is blurry.

 

[sizzling]

I agree 1080p @ 32" would be horrible for computer work, ok for gaming and video but your desktop and and text/documents will look horrible up close. I don't like 1080p 27" for working on documents or browsing the web and I have one of those monitors, it is getting changed at some point.

Also I don't know of a 32" 1080p monitor, is this actually a TV? If it is a TV you cannot compare TV Hz to monitor Hz, they are very different.

 

[David_24]

I agree 1080p @ 32" would be horrible for computer work, ok for gaming and video but your desktop and and text/documents will look horrible up close. I don't like 1080p 27" for working on documents or browsing the web and I have one of those monitors, it is getting changed at some point.

Also I don't know of a 32" 1080p monitor, is this actually a TV? If it is a TV you cannot compare TV Hz to monitor Hz, they are very different.

allow me to enlighten you
theres tones of them.
https://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&DEPA=0&Order=BESTMATCH&Description=freesync+1080p&N=100160979%20601294990&isNodeId=1
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIAB715WD1578&cm_re=freesync_1080p-_-9SIAB715WD1578-_-Product

 

[cryoburner]

If everything else about the monitors were equal, I would go with the 1440p 27 inch, assuming you're going to be seated at a normal desktop-computer viewing distance most of the time. 1080p would be quite low for a 32 inch screen if you were only sitting a couple feet away, and would likely look a bit blurry from such a short distance. 1440p on a 27 inch screen would appear very sharp, by comparison. If you're planning on getting a high-end video card like a GTX 1080 or RX Vega, it should be able to handle 1440p well, so there probably wouldn't be much of a noticeable performance benefit from dropping down to 1080p in that case.

Of course, there are other things than resolution that will affect the quality of a monitor too, such as what kind of panel it has (TN, IPS or VA), the screen's refresh rate (anywhere from 60Hz to 144Hz+), input lag, and the general build quality and other characteristics of the screen to keep in mind too. If you had a couple specific screens in mind, it might help to know the model numbers to get a better idea of how they might compare.

As for Freesync and Gsync, the first currently only works on AMD GPUs, while Gsync only works on Nvidia GPUs, so it might be worth deciding on a screen and graphics card at the same time if you're interested in making use of variable refresh rate adaptive sync on your screen.

 

[David_24]

If everything else about the monitors were equal, I would go with the 1440p 27 inch, assuming you're going to be seated at a normal desktop-computer viewing distance most of the time. 1080p would be quite low for a 32 inch screen if you were only sitting a couple feet away, and would likely look a bit blurry from such a short distance. 1440p on a 27 inch screen would appear very sharp, by comparison. If you're planning on getting a high-end video card like a GTX 1080 or RX Vega, it should be able to handle 1440p well, so there probably wouldn't be much of a noticeable performance benefit from dropping down to 1080p in that case.

Of course, there are other things than resolution that will affect the quality of a monitor too, such as what kind of panel it has (TN, IPS or VA), the screen's refresh rate (anywhere from 60Hz to 144Hz+), input lag, and the general build quality and other characteristics of the screen to keep in mind too. If you had a couple specific screens in mind, it might help to know the model numbers to get a better idea of how they might compare.

As for Freesync and Gsync, the first currently only works on AMD GPUs, while Gsync only works on Nvidia GPUs, so it might be worth deciding on a screen and graphics card at the same time if you're interested in making use of variable refresh rate adaptive sync on your screen.

Thx. Well I'll be making this purchase in late spring. Buying my graphics card first early spring. so whats out there might be a bit better. I might end up waiting for volta just because of the timeline of my saving.
Can you show me a monitor that is bigger than 27 inchs 1440p and 100+hurtz.
I was browsing newegg canada and all the big models are 100 hrz max. I suppose with my 1600 ryzen thatll be enough. but i wouldnt go lower than 100hz. Would have been nice to play 144hz overwatch though.
my price range is between 1k-1.5k canadian.

 

[jaslion]

If everything else about the monitors were equal, I would go with the 1440p 27 inch, assuming you're going to be seated at a normal desktop-computer viewing distance most of the time. 1080p would be quite low for a 32 inch screen if you were only sitting a couple feet away, and would likely look a bit blurry from such a short distance. 1440p on a 27 inch screen would appear very sharp, by comparison. If you're planning on getting a high-end video card like a GTX 1080 or RX Vega, it should be able to handle 1440p well, so there probably wouldn't be much of a noticeable performance benefit from dropping down to 1080p in that case.

Of course, there are other things than resolution that will affect the quality of a monitor too, such as what kind of panel it has (TN, IPS or VA), the screen's refresh rate (anywhere from 60Hz to 144Hz+), input lag, and the general build quality and other characteristics of the screen to keep in mind too. If you had a couple specific screens in mind, it might help to know the model numbers to get a better idea of how they might compare.

As for Freesync and Gsync, the first currently only works on AMD GPUs, while Gsync only works on Nvidia GPUs, so it might be worth deciding on a screen and graphics card at the same time if you're interested in making use of variable refresh rate adaptive sync on your screen.

Thx. Well I'll be making this purchase in late spring. Buying my graphics card first early spring. so whats out there might be a bit better. I might end up waiting for volta just because of the timeline of my saving.
Can you show me a monitor that is bigger than 27 inchs 1440p and 100+hurtz.
I was browsing newegg canada and all the big models are 100 hrz max. I suppose with my 1600 ryzen thatll be enough. but i wouldnt go lower than 100hz. Would have been nice to play 144hz overwatch though.
my price range is between 1k-1.5k canadian.

If you are sitting in front of the 27 inch monitor from a normal desk distance you'll see it's HUGE. I had a 27 inch 1080p panel for 2 years before someone smashed it and it was nice but to big for my likings when sitting close to it.

 

[J_E_D_70]

27" 1440p indeed. Love mine. Also displays 1080p great when needed (BF1) to drive framerate up.

If you can afford it, gsync is nice (or save some and go freesync).

 

[Gaidax]

32 inch 1080p? No thanks... It's not even the case of vs 1440p, like others pointed out at that size 1080p is just looking bad.

As for second part - only GSYNC works with Nvidia GPU, so don't buy Freesync, it's pointless, unless you want to save money, but then you just have to give up hardware sync altogether.

 

[cryoburner]

Another option worth pointing out are ultra-wide 21:9 screens, like 2560x1080, which have the horizontal resolution of a 1440p screen, but the vertical resolution of a 1080p screen, placing them in between the two in terms of total pixels. Just keep in mind that not all games natively support a 21:9 aspect ratio, in which case you will be playing at regular 1080p with black bars to the sides. Also, note that due to the more elongated aspect ratio, the screen will cover less area for a given diagonal measurement, and will be shorter. So, for example, a 27 inch 16:9 monitor is actually about the same size as a 29.5 inch 21:9 monitor in terms of total screen area, and will be nearly two inches taller, even if the 21:9 screen is over 3 inches wider. To match the same height as a 27 inch 16:9 monitor, an ultra-wide would have to be about 34 inches diagonal.

I'm not sure I'd particularly like an ultra-wide for desktop use either, since having an increase in vertical pixels would probably be more useful in more cases than more horizontal pixels.

As for second part - only GSYNC works with Nvidia GPU, so don't buy Freesync, it's pointless, unless you want to save money, but then you just have to give up hardware sync altogether.

Unless he went with RX Vega, which we should have a lot more details about once the cards are released in another week or so. It's likely that they could be a very compelling option, aside from perhaps the relatively high power draw.

Really, it would be nice if Nvidia supported Freesync though, what with it being an open standard and all. They, of course, are more interested in selling their proprietary chipsets to monitor manufacturers though.

 

[David_24]

Another option worth pointing out are ultra-wide 21:9 screens, like 2560x1080, which have the horizontal resolution of a 1440p screen, but the vertical resolution of a 1080p screen, placing them in between the two in terms of total pixels. Just keep in mind that not all games natively support a 21:9 aspect ratio, in which case you will be playing at regular 1080p with black bars to the sides. Also, note that due to the more elongated aspect ratio, the screen will cover less area for a given diagonal measurement, and will be shorter. So, for example, a 27 inch 16:9 monitor is actually about the same size as a 29.5 inch 21:9 monitor in terms of total screen area, and will be nearly two inches taller, even if the 21:9 screen is over 3 inches wider. To match the same height as a 27 inch 16:9 monitor, an ultra-wide would have to be about 34 inches diagonal.

I'm not sure I'd particularly like an ultra-wide for desktop use either, since having an increase in vertical pixels would probably be more useful in more cases than more horizontal pixels.

As for second part - only GSYNC works with Nvidia GPU, so don't buy Freesync, it's pointless, unless you want to save money, but then you just have to give up hardware sync altogether.

Unless he went with RX Vega, which we should have a lot more details about once the cards are released in another week or so. It's likely that they could be a very compelling option, aside from perhaps the relatively high power draw.

Really, it would be nice if Nvidia supported Freesync though, what with it being an open standard and all. They, of course, are more interested in selling their proprietary chipsets to monitor manufacturers though.

What about this monitor? It's 21:9 but its 1440p. Would games play at 1440p 100 hz if I had this with bars on the side? Or would it revert to 1080p like you said. Is that 4ms response time too slow?
https://www.amazon.ca/AOC-AG352UCG-Curved-Gaming-Monitor/dp/B06X9CBRTP/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1502027339&sr=8-3-fkmr0&keywords=1440p+100hz+monitor

 

[cryoburner]

Oh yeah, a 3440x1440 screen like that would be another option, though it will of course require more graphics card performance to push the full ultrawide resolution at a given framerate than regular 1440p. And even if you played some games with black bars at 2560x1440, that one is large enough that the active area would still be slightly larger than a 27 inch 16:9 screen.

VA panel screens like that can potentially show some ghosting issues, although they tend to have better contrast ratios than TN or IPS panels. I haven't looked into that particular monitor though, so it would probably be worth looking up professional reviews if any can be found. As far as VA panels go, I think Samsung tends to do better than most other companies with their 144Hz quantum dot VA screens, but I believe their newest ones only offer support for Freesync for now, although it sounds like they may also offer G-sync versions of the screens at some point in the future.

 

[David_24]

Oh yeah, a 3440x1440 screen like that would be another option, though it will of course require more graphics card performance to push the full ultrawide resolution at a given framerate than regular 1440p. And even if you played some games with black bars at 2560x1440, that one is large enough that the active area would still be slightly larger than a 27 inch 16:9 screen.

VA panel screens like that can potentially show some ghosting issues, although they tend to have better contrast ratios than TN or IPS panels. I haven't looked into that particular monitor though, so it would probably be worth looking up professional reviews if any can be found. As far as VA panels go, I think Samsung tends to do better than most other companies with their 144Hz quantum dot VA screens, but I believe their newest ones only offer support for Freesync for now, although it sounds like they may also offer G-sync versions of the screens at some point in the future.

The ips version of that costs another 850 canadian more. Would you pay that much if you could have ips?

 

[BFG-9000]

It's minimum refresh rate that counts, not the average and with variable refresh you are unlikely to notice even if the minimum FPS briefly falls to 60Hz occasionally. So a 100Hz panel would be fine. 144Hz IPS is new and expensive so most 144Hz monitors are going to be TN. Personally I am annoyed by the corners being darker on a large monitor (from the more limited viewing angle of TN) but other people are more annoyed by IPS glow at the edges.

If your games can be set to 21:9 the extra horizontal FOV is very nice, although most games are made for 16:9. The most epic movies filmed in Super Panavision or Ultra Panavision are also suited for 21:9 but most DVDs and Blu-Ray movies fit 16:9 better. Thanks to TV making 1366x768 the world's most common resolution, it's not surprising that most panels, movies and games made are now 16:9.

For productivity, more vertical resolution is better so 4:3 or 16:10 are best--they can display two letter sized pages side-by-side with minimal borders. 4:3 is the shape of most digital camera images while film 3:2 fits better onto a 16:10 screen for photo editing. And you'd value image quality over refresh rate for sure if you viewed static text and images all day.

 

[David_24]

I did some research. in Canadian dollars.
I donèt know if I want to get a 24inch 1080p and save for an expensive ips display or put a little more in and get a 27 inch 1440p. Theres a nice 21:9 for 2k cad


800 for 1440p 27" freesync
https://www.amazon.ca/27-inch-FreeSync-MG279Q-Response-DisplayPort/dp/B014X4U076/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1502070821&sr=8-2&keywords=1440p%2B144hz%2Bmonitor%2Bfreesync&th=1
350 for 1080p 24" freesync
https://www.amazon.ca/ViewSonic-XG2401-FreeSync-Monitor-DisplayPort/dp/B01A0ZRR50/ref=sr_1_1?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1502071237&sr=1-1&keywords=24+inch+144hz+monitor+freesync
550 for gsync 1080p 24"
https://www.amazon.ca/Acer-NVIDIA-G-Sync-Display-1920x1080/dp/B01C05C1OK/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1502071507&sr=8-2&keywords=1080p+144hz+monitor+g-sync
900 for 1440p gsync 27"
https://www.amazon.ca/ViewSonic-XG2703-GS-G-Sync-Monitor-DisplayPort/dp/B01LWJMM1S/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_1?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1502071688&sr=1-1-fkmr0&keywords=1440p+100+monitor+g-sync

 

[J_E_D_70]

$700 CAD for 27", 1440p, 144hz, gsync but TN not IPS. Still looks amazing - love it!
https://www.amazon.ca/Dell-S2716DG-27-Inch-Screen-14700510/dp/B0149QBOF0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1502072632&sr=8-1&keywords=S2716DG