Hidden Orange

I understand. Thanks for the help. So, the gist of the heavy stuff in the spoilers is that I bought the monitor a few days after my father had his second stroke that led to his death. As a college student whose parents are both dead, I need to be careful about money. A calibrator would be helpful in general, but I don't think it would be a good idea considering the situation. The monitor itself was about $400 after tax and if I really wanted to calibrate to address an issue I find does bother me, then it would kind of bring the total to $500 to $550. It might be better to return it and get the 32GK650F which has a SRGB gamut and usually is a bit cheaper. Or wait until the miracle 27" version of the 32GK_50 monitors exist.

This would require a color calibrator, right? I don't have one and I know they can be expensive.

I summarized it in the first paragraph: if it was possible to calibrate a wide gamut monitor so things do not appear oversaturated? I am going to guess no. Color management was something I forgot to talk about. I did read a bit on how some things are color managed and it is as you said, applications that are not color managed will appear oversaturated or not as how they should appear. I remember something about this where Windows 10 was not great at this unlike with macOS.

To keep this short: I feel like I know the answer to this question, but would calibration, if I had the right tools to do so, be able to make it so a wide gamut monitor display colors more properly I think the word would be? Or is this not really possible due to the nature of a display's certain gamut or whatever properties? The long story is that I picked up a LG 32GK850F and the one thing that has been bugging me is how reds look off. If I were describe it in a different way than oversaturated, I would say that either reds look like they had a splash of purple, pink, or sometimes blue or colors with red in them are redder than expected. The first case usually happens with skin colors or the reds on Rtings or YouTube logo. The second case would be I guess the orange on LinusTechTips, Dead or Alive 6's title, and fire. When I bought it was a problem as well and is a factor why I have been dilly-dallying with making a post on this, getting more of a feel for the monitor, and figuring out sooner if I wanted to return this monitor or now. Heavy-ish stuff in the spoiler. When I first got the monitor, its default settings made everything look like there was a red or salmon overlay. As panels may have different variances, referencing the settings used by PC Monitors was not as helpful as when I referenced, well, used Rtings settings for the LG 27GL83A. PC Monitors stated that for their factory default settings: "The image is very bright with a cool-green tint." That probably explained why they left their red setting to default, but lowered their green and blue. I did reference the settings for the LG 32GK650F and 32GK850G from Rtings which leads to another thing that I will talk about later. Anyway, I messed around with the RGB settings as well as I could to get something that didn't look as red. Still looks like there's a bit of of purple, pink, or blue in the reds and reds are still vibrant. Also, not things look a bit blue which is not as strange as things looking like there was a reddish overlay. So, the weird thing is that after looking into things more carefully which I should have done in the first place is that the LG 32GK850F seems to be the LG 27GL850 to the LG 32GK650F, 32GK650G, and LG 32GK850G. What I mean by that is that the LG 32GK850F has a wide gamut which the LG 32GK650F or G and the LG 32GK850G do not. They are regular, SRGB. I do remember the written and video reviews of the LG 32GK850F that it was noted reds looked stronger than intended, but I misunderstood and did not think it would be the point of being that strong. I thought reds would be a bit more vibrant, but vibrant itself is a word that should be carefully considered. In other words, this is entirely of my fault. I tunnel visioned on the LG 32GK850F in a stupid summary of "it was newer and better than the LG 32GK650F." Between the two, however, they are like that of the LG 27GL850 and the LG 27GL83A. Like the 27GL850, the 32GK850F has a wide gamut and has USB ports whereas like the 27GL83A, the 32GK650F does not have a wide gamut and does not have USB ports. Also, slight differences of the 32GK850F having slightly a higher brightness at 400 cd/m^2 to the others' 350 cd/m^2. And adding the others, the 32GK650G would be if the LG 27GL83A had a G-Sync version that as far as I know is just it has G-Sync and the 32GK850G would be if the LG 27GL83A had a G-Sync version that was very well-tuned to have very good response times and had USB ports or if there was a LG 27GL850 that was simply not wide gamut, but retained its good response times. The LG 32GK850F does have a SRGB setting which makes reds look more natural, normal, not as intense. That said, it locks out several settings: 1ms Motion Blur Reduction, Black Stabilizer, and Response Time in Game Adjust and Contrast, Sharpness, Gamma, Color Temp, RGB, Black Level, and DFC in Picture Adjust. Not everything needs to be accessed, but it would be nice to have those options available. Response time in particular? I'm not sure if I understood it correctly, but depending on the frame rate of a game, locked or how high a system can reach, would you want to adjust the response time? Something else which is more of a problem of my glasses problem as they are old and the transition lenses remain slightly tinted is that things do appear a bit yellow, especially with whites. I do not notice this as much in real life with white objects, it doesn't seem to be a problem with my old Asus VH238, and I do not recall seeing this with the LG 27GL83A with its default settings and having used the settings from Rtings, however, that has been a while back. Other than that, the LG 32GK850F was a wonderful experience for my first time using VA monitor. So, back to the question, if it is possible, but it did require the use of a calibration tool or maybe if it is just possible at all, I think I might just return this monitor because of the hassle. If it is not possible, then yes, it is going to be returned. Now, the question of whether or not I want to pick up the LG 32GK650F instead, then I don't know. I did want to pick up a new monitor for making homework and such more convenient. At the same time, I am not that thrilled about a 32", 2560x1440 monitor. I think my "dream" monitor would be a 27" version of the 32GK_50 series, so a flat panel VA monitor with as good or better response time as them. From the looks of things, that won't be coming any time soon. Still, with the current situation I am in, perhaps big purchases like these should be avoided or otherwise thought about even more carefully. PC Monitor's written review of the 32GK850F: https://pcmonitors.info/reviews/lg-32gk850f/. Specification comparison of the 32GK850F, 32GK650F, 32GK650G, and the 32GK850G: https://www.displayspecifications.com/en/comparison/52c312fd4f. Edit: Forgot about some links.

iGPU is integrated GPU, so onboard graphics on your motherboard. dGPU is discrete GPU, so the GTX 1060.

Are you specifically looking for a VA monitor? The AOC CQ27G2U and the flat version, the Q27G2U are VA monitors. Your other listed alternatives the MSI Optix MAG271CQR and the next versions I guess you could call them, the MAG272CQR (curved) and MAG272QR, are VA as well while the Acer XF270 is TN. You could just wait for a restock or buy the AOC Q27G2U unless you are looking for curved monitor as well.

The MSI MAG272QR the OP mentioned is a flat VA monitor. I figure that with the MAG271CQR and its successor or a refresh, the MAG272CQR, would have a different panel if they are curved monitors to the MAG272QR's flat. That said, the MAG272s could perform similarly with all the quirks and flaws of the MAG271CQR. In that case, if you are looking for a 2560x1440, 144 Hz, 27" IPS monitor, then the LG 27GL83A and Pixio PX7 Prime I mentioned would be good. They can be bought at a lower price if you are willing to go for used/open box. In particular, Amazon Warehouse. The LG 27GL850 is more expensive and the Lenovo Legion Y27q-20 are more expensive at +$400. The Lenovo can be had for a lower price through student, military, and other discounts on Lenovo's site I think. These two monitors use a nano IPS panel by LG, but they -- I think both -- are wide gamut monitors and for some people, things may appear to be over-saturated to them. Thing is we do not know what kind of monitor you are looking for or what exactly your system is. The monitors you brought up, MSI MAG272QR and the AOC AGON AG322QC4 are VA monitors and the LG 27UK650-W is an IPS. VA monitors generally have better contrast than IPS and TN monitors, but suffer from poorer dark transitions times. That is to say, smearing or ghosting in dark scenes where ironically, VA monitors' advantage is generally better blacks than IPS and TN. There is also the issue of VA glow and most recent VA monitors are curved which some people may not like. IPS monitors generally have more accurate colors than TN and some VA monitors, but their response time, for all transitions and not dark transitions being noticeably worse like VA, until recently has been slightly worse than TN monitors and they suffer from IPS glow, an inherent trait due to how IPS panels are made. TN monitors have the best response time, but generally poorer contrast and color than IPS and VA. Although, a good TN monitor that is calibrated can have good colors. Regardless, TN's response time is the reason why professional competitive player opt for TN because performance trumps picture quality. A 2560x1440, 144 Hz, 27" TN monitor that could work for you is the Dell S2719DGF: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00N2L5CXO/ref=ox_sc_act_title_1?smid=A2L77EE7U53NWQ&psc=1. I remember reading the older models have issues with color banding or burn-in. Not sure about this recent one or if Dell will do another revision. Another thing is the MSI and AOC are both 2560x1440, 144 Hz monitors while the LG 27UK650-W is a 3840x2160, 60 Hz monitor. We do not know what your use case is. That is to say, are you primarily gaming, coding, doing graphics work, etc.? This is a very generalized statement, but you can drive any resolution with any kind of hardware really. To be specific, though, gaming at 4K is going to be more demanding than 1440p or 1080p. You can have at least 60 FPS on any of the resolutions depending on what GPU you have, what game, and what settings. With regards to settings, ultra settings is said to be not as optimized and not that noticeable, but are much more demanding than high. For other stuff, well, it is up to you what resolution and size you want for you use cases. For example, 3840x2160 at 27" for some might be difficult to see text without scaling and sometimes scaling is not implemented well.

Can you raise your budget to $380 plus tax and shipping? The LG 27GL83A and Pixio PX7 Prime are around that price. The LG is not in stock from what I checked and it's only sold on Amazon while the Pixio may or may not ship to your location for whatever weird reason. There's also a Lenovo that uses the same panel as the LG 27GL850. On mobile, will check later. Edit: The Lenovo Legion Y27q-20.

I've looked around on pcmonitors.info, rtings, TFTCentral, and here for reviews or opinions on monitors before I had a feeling of what monitors I would want and were in my budget. There's a lot and there are a lot of monitors that have not been properly reviewed or maybe even owned by a lot of people who said much about them. The last two sentences remind me of when I was looking for replacement phone when my Nexus 5 was dying. The idea of glass backs was not something I liked before even experiencing it considering I do not use and refuse to use phone cases and flagships are so expensive despite knowing that the Nexus 5 did cut corners to deliver a flagship phone during its time. I bought a OnePlus 6 that was reasonably priced, but I felt like I could not use it without damaging it because of its glass back and overall size. It felt too cumbersome to use. The issues with OnePlus as a company was something that also led to me not wanting to keep it. As a phone, it was incredible, It was fast and the quick charge was awesome, but yeah, it didn't fit me and it felt wasted on me. Sold it at lost and ended up having to buy a Sony Xperia XA2 because the Nexus 5 was on its last legs before the Google Pixel 3a was available. The XA2 was similar in size to the Nexus 5, it had a headphone jack, a plastic back, and it works fine. Pretty much everything I wanted in a phone. It's much heavier and the square corners are annoying, but they're issues I can live with. What both the OnePlus 6 and the XA2 had and I want to say is just what new phones all have was that they had an actual battery life. That was huge coming from the Nexus 5 where before it started dying, the idea of a phone lasting for a day much less several hours without needing to be charged was a marvel to me. I guess you could say was that I wanted and continue to want for a new phone whenever I have to replace the XA2 is a Nexus 5(-sized) phone with a modern battery life. That, I think, is what might be similar to my situation with getting a new monitor. In this case, it's +144 Hz and FreeSync or G-Sync are the main things I want, though I would prefer FreeSync for a more flexible GPU upgrade in the future. Size I think I want to keep to around 24" and considering what is on the market that has been well-reviewed, 1080p is what I should stick to. In addition to good colors and good motion response, good contrast would be really, but I think that ends up making VA my only real option. I did say that the increased refresh rate and having FreeSync were notable improvements and after looking into another game that I also own on the PS3, (unstable) 30 FPS, 60 FPS, and +120 FPS to 144 FPS were noticeable. 30 FPS and 60 FPS were night and day, but 30 FPS and 144 FPS was "Damn, that looks so weird." I remember years ago playing Fable: TLC at sub-15 FPS -- shit was a slideshow -- and I managed, but that was a peculiar feeling looking at 30 FPS, 60 FPS, and 144 FPS. Going from the Asus VH238's TN panel to the LG 27GL83A's IPS panel does not feel that different. I think I'm just unlucky with the characteristics of the two monitors which I highlighted before; the Asus having apparently good viewing angles and the LG having similar motion response to good TN monitors, but poor contrast. For gaming, the jump from a 23", 1920x1080 monitor to a 27", 2560x1440 monitor still does not feel that worth it. As I said before, but for other stuff like web browsing, productivity, etc., yes, the increased space size of a 27", 2560x1440 monitor is appreciated. It is like you said, though, that it feels like a bigger screen and I'm not that thrilled about it. Moving my eyes or my head to look at thing is fine, but I do like having most of the screen within my sight like I could with the Asus's 23" screen. I think part of the reason is that I grew up playing games on consoles where I would usually sit further away and never having really used a computer with a large screen, so seeing things like that on a display is what I'm used to. The other part is as I mentioned before, probably this particular monitor sitting a bit taller than I would have liked. Looking left or right is fine, but looking up annoys me for some reason. Not sure how different going from a PPI of 95.78 for a 23", 1920x1080 monitor to a PPI of 108.79 for a 27", 2560x1440 monitor, going up 13.01, should be. The Asus is a 23" monitor not 24". The model number having an 8 makes me think 23.8". I guess the gist of it is that I think I'm the type of person who values refresh rate over resolution. I had that feeling too when I looked more into the importance of contrast and seeing the reported contrast ratio of TN and IPS monitors. It's the screen size that held me back when I considered buying the LG 32GK850F which PC Monitors reviewed it as having poorer response time than the LG 32GK850G, but I think I could live with that. PC Monitors stated that at its lowest height that it sits at around 75 mm (2.95 inches) above a desk which apparently makes it sit lower than the LG 27GL83A as it's sitting at around 100 mm if I'm measuring it correctly. At the same, the screen size is larger, so the 32GK850 might feel as tall as the 27GL83A. After thinking about it and experiencing it, I do think that I would not like 32" screen size for a monitor. I wonder if I'd be one of those people who would want a 24" 1440p or even 4K monitor. PC Monitors' review of the LG 32GK850F if anyone is interested: https://pcmonitors.info/reviews/lg-32gk850f/. So, I tried to compare things side-by-side with the LG 27GL83A and the Asus VH238. The setup is very stupid since the Asus is sitting on the ground, but hey, whatever works. I did adjust the Asus using http://www.lagom.nl/lcd-test/ as a guide. It's blue with the default color temp setting of 100-100-100 for RGB and somewhat closer to the LG with the warm preset. The nipple control is so much more intuitive than pressing different buttons, especially when it's not in a lit room. That's a definite quality of life plus the LG has. To sum, I do like the better, more accurate colors the LG 27GL83A's IPS panel offers, but it doesn't feel enough to wow me. Similarly, 1440p gaming still doesn't feel like that much of leap. Higher refresh rate and FreeSync I could get with any other monitor. The contrast and the better black colors on the other hand I suspect is going to make me look for a very specific monitor. It's late in the night as I'm typing this, but there were a few more games I wanted to check and note down. Probably some other thoughts I have, but I can't think of right now. Edit: Remembered some things. One thing was the proportion of things. That is to say that running the games at their native resolutions on both monitors, the games looked in proportion. Dragon's Dogma was the most notable where when I booted it the PS3 version, things took up more of the screen despite the TV being larger than both monitors because the resolution was 1080p in contrast to being on a 23" screen at the same resolution or at 1440p and on a 27" screen. Edit 2: Moved the Asus back onto my desk. Immediately noticed that text is not as sharp as it is on the LG. Colors are definitely not as accurate, but as I said before, the Asus is not professionally calibrated whereas the LG at least had a reference to go off of. Going back to having more of the screen in my field of vision feels easier on me, but I think because of the LG, I look higher up than I did and it's throwing me off a bit and making it seem like the screen is bigger when I'm actually looking at the bezels. Not having IPS glow is nice. It's weird since it was mainly the lower left which apparently almost all LG 27GL83A and 27GL850 have, but it kept drawing me to its location. Eyes are tired.

I know, but I think it's this particular IPS monitor that makes me wonder if VA would be more noticeably different if not a different IPS or even TN monitor. The LG 27GL83A has comparable response time to recent, good TN monitors, but it also has not so great contrast ratio that makes it probably similar to an average TN monitor. At the very least to me the colors look similar to the Asus VH238. The Asus VH238 on the other hand, I don't know why a nine year old TN monitor has good viewing angles. Perhaps that model was an outlier, but it and other things I've looked into while looking for a new monitor makes me concerned about the monitor industry. Regardless, I think it's this IPS monitor and the old TN monitor that makes me want the colors and contrast of a VA. Problem is I don't think I have never seen a VA panel in person and from what I checked, it might make me want the response time of a TN or an IPS. This is something I was curious about where if newer VA panels might offer what I want. The 32GK850 and 32GK650 were promising, but if only they made 27" versions of the panel or even 24". I am feeling like I will probably end up returning the LG 27GL83A. Still going to try to use it a few more days until I give a final verdict, but I think my eyesight is what's holding me back not just for general use, but probably for gaming. The higher refresh rate and FreeSync are definitely going to be missed and were the big reasons I wanted to get a new monitor. The increased screen space is useful, but it's not -- I don't know -- as substantial of a change? It would increase productivity by allowing me to have more windows open at a reasonable size, but I don't do as much work yet at this point in my life. I think I might have preferred to have two monitors, but my desk doesn't have room for that and I don't I want to do a wall mount. Maybe a dual monitor stand could work. A screen size of 27" is meh; it's not too large, but I'm not that thrilled about its larger size. And I noted it before where the jump from a 24", 1920x1080 to a 27", 2560x1440 I am not so sure on. It is a larger resolution, but, not sure how I feel about it. Man, it's going to feel like a waste of a monitor. There is nothing wrong with it, so returning it is a waste, but it's also a waste on me. And part of me feels like it's kind of a waste to get a higher refresh rate 1080p monitor. If I had room for the Asus, it wouldn't be as bad since I could keep it for when I need a second screen while the higher refresh rate one is the main monitor.

If anyone cares at this point, I ended up purchasing an open box LG 27GL83A off of Amazon -- used, good condition from Amazon Warehouse -- and it arrived earlier today. I got fed up with looking into monitors and seeing things go out of stock, so I just bit the bullet to see what would happen. @SolarNova, the flexibility of using different resolutions is something I remember some of your posts talking about. It's one reason why I feel like a 27", 4K, +144 Hz monitor would be pretty nice. To sum up the initial impressions, so far so good. Part of me wonders if I'd end up liking a VA monitor more considering how this IPS monitor kind of feels similar to the old TN one. Emphasis on the LG 27GL83A because of its characteristics. A different IPS monitor probably would be a different experience than I with this one. A future 27", 4K or 1440p, +144 Hz VA monitor could be nice with newer, refined technology. Or they could just make and use a 27" inch version of the panel that's used in the LG 32GK650 and 32GK850 monitors. Edit: Forgot about a few things. Not having color banding which was not noticeable on the TN Asus and the big power brick plug of the LG.

The PS Vita? If I recall, it didn't help that Sony didn't really advertise or support the thing much overseas and I think there were a lot of ports or multiplatform dumps on the thing which did not help it stand out on its own. It had good games, but I think it was mainly Japan that got them. The PSP on the other hand was decently successful?

The AOC 24G2 is a 1920x1080, 144 Hz, IPS monitor that left good impressions for those who were able to get it. It just came back in stock on Amazon and on Overclockers UK. In the US, it's currently the same price as the Acer XFA240 bmjdpr you linked. Hopefully the 24G2 doesn't go out of stock by the time either of you read this. Never mind on Overclockers UK. As I was typing this, I checked and it's out of stock. US Amazon link: https://www.amazon.com/AOC-24G2-Frameless-Adjustable-Guarantee/dp/B07WVN6CWT/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_product_top?ie=UTF8. Problem is that I don't know if OP, @JoeyThePixelGuy, plays a lot of shooters or is really into competitive games. Rainbow Six Siege and The Outer Worlds were mentioned where both are FPS games and Siege is a competitive game and it makes me wonder if maybe you'd want a TN monitor for the lowest possible responsible time. Edit: The AOC 24G2 is out of stock on Amazon. It was in stock for a day or two.

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.

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.

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.

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.

I was thinking about vodka or beer fed cows in Russia.

Speaking of vodka, I wonder if Russia has their own version of Kobe beef.

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.

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.

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.

At what resolution? A budget 1080p, 144 Hz monitor is going to be different than a budget 1440p, 144 Hz monitor.

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.

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.