Samsung C27FG70 w/ a GTX 1080?

[Brama]

Samsung C27FG70 is this monitor worth getting with GTX 1080 or will I end up experiencing screen tearing due to not being able to use adaptive sync?

 

I've looked at, compared, and read reviews for just about every gaming monitor worthy of getting Under $500 and even compared to a few $750 G-Sync monitors. This monitor seems to be the better choice. I know you can turn AA to help with screen tearing but that also lowers Frame Rates which weakens the purpose of getting this monitor.

 

144hz refresh rate

VA Panel - Quantum Dot sRGB 125%

1ms response time

Comes in 24in or 27in screen sizes

Good viewing angles

Height adjustment, swivel, pivot, tilt

Curved

 

Ultra-wide would be nice but getting all these features in Ultrawide is significantly more expensive.

 

It's also like the only VA/IPS monitor that's 1ms response time

I know the human eye cannot distinguish response times below 10ms, the Human eye also cannot see faster then 60fps. These features aren't so much about the human eye but about the hardware communicating faster and more quickly, providing a smoother, more fluid and responsive feel

 

 

I know 1440p is suppose to be the "sweet spot" for the GTX 1080. I am considering the AGON AG271QG, or the ASUS MG279Q but from what I've seen from benchmarks the GTX 1080 will hardly if ever hit or maintain anything above 120 FPS and that will only get worst as time goes on. Maybe if I had a 1080ti I'd be 100% on team 1440p but from what I can tell, 1080 will offer the smoothest, more fluid consistent gameplay and really get the most use of these Fast 144hz+ Monitors.

 

 

[JohnnyCorporalTech]

I've got the BenQ XL2730 Which has similar specs to yours, and i am running a GTX 980, Which has been great for me. I have experienced a small amount of tearing due to the monitor supporting Free-sync rather than Gsync, but i have not really noticed it that much. So it should be fine. And especially with the 1080 which has a lot more power than my 980, it should be able to push frames to the monitor quick enough that you shouldn't get much tearing at all. 

[Darkseth]

If you don't use V-Sync, you WILL experience Tearing. But, with 144 Hz it will be so small, you might not see it.

 

It also depends on the game. Some games show you Tearing, in others you don't see it because it's so minimal.

 

With V-Sync, you might see a slight bit of stuttering, also depending on the Game itself.

 

However.. Having G-Sync can make a difference  In Witcher 3 i can see Tearing even with 165 Hz. With G-Sync, very smooth.

Different with Rise of the Tomb Raider. Without G-Sync (or V-Sync or any Sync at all) it feels a slight bit stuttery (runs at around 60 fps). With G-Sync, smooth.

 

 

Still, i would not recommend getting a 27" monitor with only 1080p. Everything looks so big and pixely, if you don't sit far away. Pixel density is pretty low there.

I would go as far, and even say, 1440p is very fine on 24": Acer Predator XB241YU.

I use that one, it's awesome, and <500 bucks.

It is a TN Panel, but a pretty good one. I have an IPS right beside it, and i don't miss anything tbh. But having 1440p, and G-Sync is godsent for gaming.

 

"I know the human eye cannot distinguish response times below 10ms, the Human eye also cannot see faster then 60fps. These features aren't so much about the human eye but about the hardware communicating faster and more quickly, providing a smoother, more fluid and responsive feel"

 

Um.. Both is wrong.

1. Response time has nothing to do with "quickness", but when the Pixels are too slow, you will see ghosting / trailing on moving objects (like you can see on the ufo Testsite).

Which will be an issue with very high fps. less with TN, more with IPS, and especially with VA, which is a very slow Panel (the Pixels can't react fast enough. And even Samsung won't bring them down to TN level, even with their "tricks" to make them 1ms.

The Trick here is Backlight strobing. Between 2 Images they show a black screen, which reduces this (check the Review) 

 

2. Whoever says the Human Eye can't see more than 60 fps, is just plain wrong, and talks bullshit (not possible to say it nicer). Everyone who ever tried more than 60 Hz with his OWN eyes would say, there is a HUGE difference.

To me, even web browsing with 165 Hz feels MUCH smoother than 60 Hz. 

The Human Eye does NOT work with "fps", so such a statement is wrong in the first place...

But we can see even more than 100 "fps", just BECAUSE the Human Eye works entirely different than Monitors, who display static images after another.

 

 

And to your Benchmarks... Well, you know why GPU Benchmarks don't come at 120+ fps with a 1080 and 1440p? Because they all crank the settings blindly to Max.

If you don't know how to use Graphic Settings, then sorry, but you won't even hit 100 fps in 1080p with a titan XP. You can bring EVERY GPU down to it's knees in modern titles.

 

Learn how to use them, and a GTX 1080 is no problem at all in 1440p. If you need more fps for a specific Game (BF1 for example with 140 fps, isntead of 90), then reduce Settings.

 

Remember: 1440p @ High > 1080p @ Ultra.

If you do have G-Sync, you can find the perfec compromise between fps and Graphic settings. For every game

 

I personally use a GTX 1060 right now (just ordered a GTX 1080 last night, since i got a 1440p / 165 Hz g-Sync monitor a few Months ago, which wasn't planned when i bought the GTX 1060 for my 1080p / 60 Hz Monitor). And even with the GTX 1060 it works fine, with reduced Settings, so i get at least 60 fps G-Synced for heavy games, and 100+ for lighter games.

And despite the GTX 1060 struggling here, i didn't thought for a splitsecond, to trade it back for a 1080p Screen. In Fact, now i even think, 1080p is not enough for 23,8" My 2nd Screen is IPS, 1080p, 23,8", and i wish it was 1440p so i can use more Windows on it

 

 

[Brama]

4 hours ago, Darkseth said:

If you don't use V-Sync, you WILL experience Tearing. But, with 144 Hz it will be so small, you might not see it.

 

It also depends on the game. Some games show you Tearing, in others you don't see it because it's so minimal.

 

With V-Sync, you might see a slight bit of stuttering, also depending on the Game itself.

 

However.. Having G-Sync can make a difference  In Witcher 3 i can see Tearing even with 165 Hz. With G-Sync, very smooth.

Different with Rise of the Tomb Raider. Without G-Sync (or V-Sync or any Sync at all) it feels a slight bit stuttery (runs at around 60 fps). With G-Sync, smooth.

 

 

Still, i would not recommend getting a 27" monitor with only 1080p. Everything looks so big and pixely, if you don't sit far away. Pixel density is pretty low there.

I would go as far, and even say, 1440p is very fine on 24": Acer Predator XB241YU.

I use that one, it's awesome, and <500 bucks.

It is a TN Panel, but a pretty good one. I have an IPS right beside it, and i don't miss anything tbh. But having 1440p, and G-Sync is godsent for gaming.

 

"I know the human eye cannot distinguish response times below 10ms, the Human eye also cannot see faster then 60fps. These features aren't so much about the human eye but about the hardware communicating faster and more quickly, providing a smoother, more fluid and responsive feel"

 

Um.. Both is wrong.

1. Response time has nothing to do with "quickness", but when the Pixels are too slow, you will see ghosting / trailing on moving objects (like you can see on the ufo Testsite).

Which will be an issue with very high fps. less with TN, more with IPS, and especially with VA, which is a very slow Panel (the Pixels can't react fast enough. And even Samsung won't bring them down to TN level, even with their "tricks" to make them 1ms.

The Trick here is Backlight strobing. Between 2 Images they show a black screen, which reduces this (check the Review) 

 

2. Whoever says the Human Eye can't see more than 60 fps, is just plain wrong, and talks bullshit (not possible to say it nicer). Everyone who ever tried more than 60 Hz with his OWN eyes would say, there is a HUGE difference.

To me, even web browsing with 165 Hz feels MUCH smoother than 60 Hz. 

The Human Eye does NOT work with "fps", so such a statement is wrong in the first place...

But we can see even more than 100 "fps", just BECAUSE the Human Eye works entirely different than Monitors, who display static images after another.

 

 

And to your Benchmarks... Well, you know why GPU Benchmarks don't come at 120+ fps with a 1080 and 1440p? Because they all crank the settings blindly to Max.

If you don't know how to use Graphic Settings, then sorry, but you won't even hit 100 fps in 1080p with a titan XP. You can bring EVERY GPU down to it's knees in modern titles.

 

Learn how to use them, and a GTX 1080 is no problem at all in 1440p. If you need more fps for a specific Game (BF1 for example with 140 fps, isntead of 90), then reduce Settings.

 

Remember: 1440p @ High > 1080p @ Ultra.

If you do have G-Sync, you can find the perfec compromise between fps and Graphic settings. For every game

 

I personally use a GTX 1060 right now (just ordered a GTX 1080 last night, since i got a 1440p / 165 Hz g-Sync monitor a few Months ago, which wasn't planned when i bought the GTX 1060 for my 1080p / 60 Hz Monitor). And even with the GTX 1060 it works fine, with reduced Settings, so i get at least 60 fps G-Synced for heavy games, and 100+ for lighter games.

And despite the GTX 1060 struggling here, i didn't thought for a splitsecond, to trade it back for a 1080p Screen. In Fact, now i even think, 1080p is not enough for 23,8" My 2nd Screen is IPS, 1080p, 23,8", and i wish it was 1440p so i can use more Windows on it

 

 

Thank you for taking the time to write all of this. It was very insightful and helpful. I was already looking very hard at a couple other Acer Predator monitors, I definitely like there look aesthetically. I think the one you recommended will be good for me. I was definitely struggling with the idea of not opting for 1440p and/or G Sync and trying to validate 1080/Freesync myself. But you crushed that for me. Guess the simple fact is, you choose green because it was best. You gotta spend the green to enjoy it the best. After doing some measurements I think 24 inch will be the ideal screen size for me as my desk is only 21 inches in depth so I'll be sitting pretty close. Which I already knew. I was considering 27in because I just want to make sure I can see really long distance and make really long range shots in games like Arma III and Ark.