Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Hidden Orange

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


This user doesn't have any awards


About Hidden Orange

  • Title

Profile Information

  • Gender


  • CPU
    An abacus
  • Motherboard
    Tin foil
  • RAM
    2 Popsicle sticks
  • GPU
    Virtual Boy
  • Case
    Cardboard box
  • Storage
  • PSU
    3... Er... Make that 2 hamsters
  • Display(s)
    Broken glass
  • Cooling
  • Keyboard
    More cardboard
  • Mouse
  • Sound
    2 SpaghettiOs cans

Recent Profile Visitors

944 profile views
  1. As the title says, does anyone want either game? Earlier in November, I subscribed to Humble Monthly since it had SoulCalibur VI and Yakuza Kiwami as early unlocks. First time I subscribed. Wished I didn't miss November's since the Crash Bandicoot and Spyro trilogy remasters would have been awesome to have. Wished I had known more about the thing before, but I digress. So, I don't think I want Regular Human Basketball or Fluffy Horde with the former being a multiplayer game that I would probably never play. Still on the fence about My Time At Portia. Anyway, send me a message for which game you want.
  2. Do you live in the US? Maybe this applies in other countries as well. That particular model drops down to $99.99 on Black Friday, Cyber Monday, and probably other holiday sales. Good luck trying to nab one, though. Considering it's usually $150 when not on sale and there are other 1920x1080, 144 Hz monitors that are TN, VA, and even IPS panel when they are available like the AOC 24G2, maybe consider looking around for other models. Here's a review of the Dell 2419HGF: https://www.rtings.com/monitor/reviews/dell/s2419hgf.
  3. I just checked the Asus VH238 and viewing it at different angles doesn't affect the image much unlike with my laptop. That's kind of strange when I think about it. I remember this monitor being around $200 and it's around 9-years-old. When I bought it, I don't remember exactly, but I do remember being in high school, so that's probably at most 9 years ago and probably at least 7 years since 5 years ago I graduated high school and I had this monitor by then. IPS panels are usually more expensive and I don't think a monitor like this would have sold at $200 at that time -- I did not buy it on sale. Looked around more and people are saying it's a TN panel monitor. Looking around for monitors makes me feel like maybe it's just a bad time to buy monitors. The compromises you have to take when choosing IPS, TN, and VA, dead pixels, backlight bleed, and other issues where people are saying quality control standards have slackened or continues to slack as time passes, and the LCD lottery which sounds worse than the silicon lottery because at least you know with a CPU or GPU that it will work, but you might not be able to OC it as well as other people. Probably other stuff that I don't know about or can't remember. It reminds me of the situation with boxing gloves. Part of is probably the whole ignorance is bliss thing. Had I not known these things, I probably wouldn't be that worried or even more indecisive about what monitor to pick. Speaking of which, a trivial issue I had was finding 2560x1440 wallpapers. Specifically, Supergiant Games' Transistor wallpapers since I remember downloading a file pack from them. Found out that since Transistor's assets were hand-painted and made for 1080p, probably specifically 1920x1080, the game doesn't natively support resolutions higher than that. The realization about games not supporting certain resolutions natively sunk in after that. Not even going to talk about ultra-wide support. Sure, there are workarounds, but they're not all perfect. That got me thinking about 3840x2160 which can be evenly divided into 1920x1080. Similarly, 2560x1440 can be divided evenly into 1280x720. Touched upon that as a concern I had about 1080p content on a 1440p monitor. When a new standard would be adopted, it's probably going to be 2160p considering its relation to 1080p. Made me feel unsure about 1440p despite knowing that nobody can predicate the future. It could take years or even decades before this happens. Long story short, 1080p content on a 2160p monitor would scale better than 1080p on 1440p. Problem: I could afford a 2160p monitor, but it would be a 60 Hz monitor as the cheapest 2160p, 120 Hz monitor is $750. That's over half how much my PC costs and a GTX 1080 alone is probably not going to even touch +80 FPS on medium settings for recent and new games. I could play games at 1080p on a 2160p, 60 Hz monitor, but that defeats the purpose of me wanting to get a new monitor with a higher refresh rate. 2160p at 60 FPS might be doable, but I think I value high framerate more than high resolution. This is considering that I have played games at under 30 FPS -- Fable on a PC below minimum requirements was magical in both a good and bad way -- and I'm still okay with stable 30 FPS considering whatever system I'm using, but stable 60 FPS is stable 60 FPS and +60 FPS seems even better. Regardless, I thought about my use cases outside of gaming more. Learning programming and there were times where I felt like I wished I had more space when I had two windows up. One for programming and the other to keep track of what the assignment's page or whatnot. Or just in general with having multiple windows up. A 1440p or 2160p monitor would help in that. So would a larger sized 1080p monitor, but I don't think I'd want to do that with what I've read on that.
  4. I think the idea is that because VA panels generally have good black colors they would do well in darker rooms. IPS and TN panels generally have poorer black uniformity and contrast compared to VA panels and IPS has what people call IPS glow, so in darker rooms and with brightness set to high, they might not look as great as a VA panel in a dark room. Backllght bleed will also add to this which I think IPS, TN, and VA can all have. If the monitor has low brightness, though, then it would not do as well in brightly lit rooms as the image would look dim. The AOC 27CQG1 is a VA monitor with low brightness and Linus has a video on it where he points it out. I would not doubt that an IPS or TN panel with low brightness could look dim to people in brightly lit rooms.
  5. Speaking of vodka, I wonder if Russia has their own version of Kobe beef.
  6. That are sold out within seconds. The LG 32GK850F-B was sold out within seconds and like what happened to the Steam Controller, but a bit sooner, Costco started canceling orders for people. $250 for a 32", 2560x1440, 144 Hz monitor is a wicked deal. Same thing with the Dell S2419HGF, a 24", 1920x1080, 120 Hz that can be set to 144 Hz monitor. On Black Friday and on Cyber Monday, it was sold out in seconds. It doesn't seem like a great monitor, but for $99.99, it's a steal for people on a budget. I was looking into that last night. I think the internals are the same, but the F-B does differ from the G-B in some cases. Also, the 32GK850 seems to have a OSD glitch according to some users: https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/threads/lg-32gk850f-anygood.18867555/. I'm curious about IPS, TN, and VA. I don't know exactly what panel the Asus VH238 uses and I can only guess that the Lenovo Y40-80 uses a TN panel since images do look worse when viewed at an angle. I don't think the Asus VH238 has poor viewing angles, but I didn't check which I should have. Can't now as I'm not at home. TN panels are probably what I'm used to, though. IPS glow and backlight bleed concern me as I do use my PC at night a lot. Good black uniformity would be nice. This is considering that the LG 27GL83A-B looks like a damn good monitor. TN generally has poorer colors among other things, but the performance might outweigh that. Sucks that for 2560x1440, the Dell S2719DGF went up in price by $10 on Cyber Monday because of course it would. Aside from the higher response time and issues with faster-paced games, VA would be great considering the generally better contrast and more accurate black color. The AOC CQ27G1 is $212.49 for Cyber Monday on Amazon. Talked about it before, but the brightness isn't good from Linus's video and AOC has a G2 set to be released or has released in Asia already.
  7. You're right. I was looking at the LG 32GK850F-B, the model with FreeSync and FreeSync 2 at that, instead of the LG 32GK850G-B, the model with G-Sync. They both have a very high MSRP at over $800, but they're generally selling for half that at around $400. This is Costco page on it. Same item number 1276797 that is listed on the Cyber Monday flyer: https://www.costco.com/lg-32gk850f-b-32"-class-qhd-hdr-freesync-gaming-monitor.product.100454130.html. They look similar enough when I compared them on LG's website.
  8. The C24G1 is $144.99 on Amazon, but it's being backordered with the recent sale that dropped it to $115.99 if I recall correctly. For those who live nearby Office Depot, then they can get it for $114.99: https://www.officedepot.com/a/products/9511933/AOC-236-LED-Curved-Gaming-Monitor/. You are going to have give us more information. What's your budget, where do you live, what's your lighting conditions like, what's your system, what games do you play, and are you doing anything else with your PC among other things.
  9. At what resolution? A budget 1080p, 144 Hz monitor is going to be different than a budget 1440p, 144 Hz monitor.
  10. It was discourteous of me to forget this, but thank you @Juular and @SolarNova for your advice. Also, nice Raziel avatar, SolarNova. The LG 27GL650F-B? Yeah, it looks good considering the review on rtings. The screen size, however, I've read that 27" is when 1080p starts feeling weird or too much. The reasons I'm okay with 27" for 1440p is because it seems all right considering the resolution and that there aren't a lot of 24" or so 1440p monitors. On PCPartPicker, there's only three listed: the Acer XF240YU bmiidprzx, the AOC AG241QX, and the Dell S2417DG. All TN panels and all currently as expensive as the LG 27GL83A-B before the sale yesterday morning and now where it's back up to its usual price of $379.99. If I wanted a 1440p, TN monitor, I could pick the Dell S2719DGF for $30 to $100 less than the 24" ones. I forgot to respond to this recommendation. That monitor is supposed to go sale for $250 on Cyber Monday at Costco: https://www.costco.com/cyber-monday-offers.html. Pulled from here: https://www.reddit.com/r/buildapcsales/comments/e144o4/monitor_lg_32gk650fb_32_1440p_va_144hz_freesync/ It's 32" which seems huge to me. Should have I mentioned that I would like to stay with a 27" for a 2560x1440p monitor in my post. The other thing is that it's a G-Sync and because I want have a more flexible upgrade path, I'd like a Freesync monitor. Read this again and when you said 1080 GPU, did you mean the GTX 1080 or 1080 as in a GPU for 1920x1080? If it's the former, then for recent and future games that are demanding or poorly optimized, the GTX 1080 probably wouldn't be able to get +100 FPS much less 144 FPS on ultra settings, but stable 60 FPS should be doable at least on high to high-ultra settings. I'd be fine with that, but that's me and not someone else. For less demanding or optimized games like Devil May Cry 5 and Resident Evil 7, +100 FPS on ultra settings should be probable. Checking DMC5 gameplay and benchmarks at 1440p with a GTX 1080 is what made me consider getting a 2560x1440 monitor more seriously. I think that's just me being a DMC fan. I know it's one game and not all games are going to be like it, but seeing that it ran at 90-110 FPS on ultra settings at 1440p made me want to experience a DMC game at 1440p. Then I looked at Monster Hunter World and Shadows of the Tomb Raider and they were getting 60 FPS or almost 60 FPS on ultra settings where a few settings turned down would probably result in stable 60 FPS. They made me felt like this is doable. And then there's the backlog of old games... The other thing which I did touch upon was that you don't need to run every game at ultra settings. I've seen several posts where @Princess Luna posted the "Ultra Settings Suck" video in addition to talking about why. Or every setting. For one, I hate (poorly implemented) bloom, depth of field, and motion blur. Those get turned off immediately or I'd find a way to disable them. Those don't impact framerate as much, but it still helps. So, still miffed about missing the LG 27G83A-B. From what I gathered, if I had stayed up an hour or two longer, I think I could have been able to purchase it. Moving on from that, another thread here where someone wondered if they should get a 1920x1080, 144 Hz monitor and then get a 2560x1440, 144 Hz monitor when they are already planning to upgrade the PC to handle 1440p and reading a comment elsewhere about how you generally keep a monitor longer than upgrading a GPU made me think more about my question. The rundown is that for me, regardless of which resolution I choose, going from 60 Hz to 144 Hz and a monitor without FreeSync/G-Sync to one with FreeSync/G-Sync is huge. I thought about how long I had this monitor, the Asus VH238, where it still works and 1920x1080 has been and will probably continue to look good at worst. I didn't use it all the time for nine years, but that's still a long time. Perhaps this isn't a great way to think about it, but I think when I bought the Asus years ago, it was around $200. Say that is the worst case, then that's around $22.23 per year out of the monitor. A 1920x1080, 144 Hz monitor is going to be a great upgrade, but eventually, I'm going to upgrade my GPU where the GTX 1080 can handle 2560x1440 pretty well. However long it will be, that GPU upgrade is likely going to handle 2560x1440 even better. It made me think that in the long run, getting a 2560x1440 monitor might be better than getting a 1920x1080 monitor. Not just for gaming, but just in general. I'm going to wait to see if something miraculous happens for Cyber Monday, but by then, I might decide what I want to do. With 2560x1440, I have a clearer idea of what monitor I'd want even though they're expensive. With 1920x1080, I kind of know what I would like, but some things aren't in stock or even available.
  11. That's a VA panel. You'll get better contrast, overall picture quality, I think viewing angles compared to TN, but not as good as IPS. For your wants, though, as a competitive player, you might not want a VA panel as they generally have a higher response time compared to TN and on fast-paced games, you might experience blurring. Something else is that VA panels are good in low light environments, but not so great in brightly lit rooms like IPS. I'm not an expert on this, so someone else would be more knowledgeable on this. Just going off articles and such I searched for.
  12. It's back-ordered on Amazon, but Office Depot has it in stock: https://www.officedepot.com/a/products/9511933/AOC-236-LED-Curved-Gaming-Monitor/. Same model as people who picked it up said that the box says C24G1. And do note that Office Depot's return policy is different. They are running a holiday return policy, though.
  13. Of the five monitors, the LG 24GL600F is the cheapest at $129.00 at BHPhotoVideo: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1457453-REG/lg_24gl600f_b_24_class_full_hd.html. The Asus VG258Q is the most expensive one at $275.32 new on Amazon. There is a very good used offer, but it's missing a power cord. Of those five, rtings has reviewed three of them, the BenQ, LG, and the ViewSonic XG2402 where the BenQ and ViewSonic XG2402 are selling at a higher price. The BenQ is $199.99 on Amazon while the XG2402 is $239.99 new from Amazon, but you can get a like new, so probably open box, from ViewSonic through Amazon for $179.99. It looks like the BenQ doesn't support Freesync or G-Sync and it seems to be older than the other two here. Amazon said it was first available on June 28, 2016 whereas the LG was available on February 1, 2019 and the ViewSonic XG2402 was available on September 1, 2017. Relatively, a new monitor is not always going to be better than an older one, but it seems like the BenQ is old enough that it's missing some things that monitors newer than it or have higher specs than it have. Here's a comparison of the BenQ and the ViewSonic XG2402, though: https://www.rtings.com/monitor/tools/compare/viewsonic-xg2402-vs-benq-xl2411p/692/1580. Kind of similar, particularly with input lag, but the BenQ doesn't seem to be as good. Between the LG and the ViewSonic XG2402, the XG2402 has better input lag: https://www.rtings.com/monitor/tools/compare/viewsonic-xg2402-vs-lg-24gl600f/692/909. The ViewSonic XG240R seems similar to the XG2402, but it looks like it's aimed at gamers at least aesthetically and with some features like a blue light filter: https://www.reddit.com/r/buildapcsales/comments/ce3zbn/monitor_viewsonic_elite_xg240r_24_inch_1080p_1ms/. The more interesting thing is that it's cheaper than the XG2402 at $233.99 new and there's a like new offer from Amazon Warehouse for $176.89 with a 20% discount at checkout, so it's like $141.51 before taxes and shipping. That seems pretty good in my opinion as if it's like the XG2402, then it's better than the LG and priced at $12.51 more if you're okay with a buying a used like new, an open box. Here's the response time, input lag, and motion blur section of its review on TechPowerUp: https://www.techpowerup.com/review/viewsonic-elite-xg240r/7.html. Different sites have different methodologies, so do take that in consideration when you see the numbers. Looks similar to the XG2402, though. Anyway, they're all TN panels which I have heard is good for gamers who want as low of a response time. What is your budget, what's your system specifications, and have you considered 165 Hz to 240 Hz? For 165 Hz to 240 Hz, if you can drive it with your system, for whatever games you're playing, and have the budget for it, maybe it would be okay. I say this since stuff on 144 Hz and 240 Hz I'm not really knowledgeable on. The ViewSonic XG2530 is a 1920x1080 240 Hz monitor that is priced at $279.99 new on Amazon, but through Amazon, ViewSonic is selling a used, like new for $209.99. Amazon has the Acer XF250Q Cbmiiprx for $219.99, but I think it might have been on sale for less the past day or two. If you live near a Microcenter, then you can pick up the 240 Hz model of the KG251Q for $209.99: https://www.microcenter.com/product/510224/acer-kg251q-245-full-hd-240hz-hdmi-dp-freesync-led-gaming-monitor. @Mick Naughty has a similar monitor. I'm not sure if it's the exact model, but it is a 1920x1080, 240 Hz monitor. Here's some other monitors you could check out: https://pcpartpicker.com/products/monitor/#F=381000000,736600000&D=165000,240000&G=400000000000,8000000000000&i=50&A=3,2&sort=price&X=0,41249&r=192001080&P=1.
  14. If you plan on upgrading your PC so that it can handle 1440p, 144 Hz well, then I don't think you should get a 1080p, 144 Hz monitor only to not really use it. It's like adding something in the middle of your plan that does not benefit you as much. What I mean is something like: (plan to) upgrade to 1440p, 144 Hz hardware, then get a 1080p, 144 Hz monitor, and then get a 1440p, 144Hz monitor. Maybe not in that order, but you could be spending more money that you would need to. If you want to keep it as a secondary monitor, then sure, but I don't know if you want to do that. Do you have a Costco membership or know someone in your family or is friends with you? Costco is going to be selling the LG 32GK850F-B for $250 for Cyber Monday. Do note that it's a 32" monitor and uses a VA panel, so if those aren't things you would want, then consider something else. Here's the flyer: https://www.costco.com/cyber-monday-offers.html. Here's Costco's page on the monitor: https://www.costco.com/LG-32GK850F-B-32"-Class-QHD-HDR-FreeSync-Monitor.product.100454130.html. Here's a review: https://www.rtings.com/monitor/reviews/lg/32gk850g-b.