"Futureproof" Monitor now

[Domsch]

Hello everyone,

 

long time viewer of the channel but never registered here. This changed now as i'm unable to make up my mind about Displays.

The Obvious: Around or just after Christmas i'll be getting a new Display.

What i currently have:

- 24" 1080p 60Hz Monitor (old Samsung)

- 24" 1440p 60Hz Dell

Core i5 6500

GTX1050ti

 

My playtime is 70% Overwatch, 20% Rocksmith 2014 and 10% everything else (MOBA, RPG's, FPS and Strategy). While my PC is used for Music Production and some "light" productivity those don't put any specific recommendation towards a display.

 

What i want:

Well it's complicated. I was rather set on a 34" 1440p Ultrawide. I know my GPU won't push it, so i'd game in 2560x1080. I just have no clue how good/bad interpolation looks when going with a non native resolution (any experience with that?). Problem here is that Overwatch doesn't support 21:9 (it cuts the picture top and bottom because of "unfair competitive advantage"). I'm not 100% on Rocksmith supporting it. So truth be told, the only two games i care for don't support/don't benefit from an Ultrawide. This doesn't change the fact they look just great and would be somewhat nice for my Music Production.

So after digging some more, turns out i could get a nice 27" 1440p 144hz monitor with G-Sync for the same money. This feels like a better deal plus G-Sync would help with my GPU not quite reaching 144fps (I know i can push over 120fps in Overwatch with low details, which is what i use anyways). 

Third option in the same price range would be to get one of the "big" (32-43 inch) 4k Displays, use 4k for Desktop and productivity and Use 1080p for Gaming. Interpolation wouldn't be a Problem in that case. Only downside is that i'm limited to 60Hz i think. Since i don't have experience with anything over 60hz, i have no clue how big of a deal it is. To date i haven't had any Problems with my 60Hz panels.

 

So, i know all three options won't be utilized to their full potential by my GPU. Thats clear. I just don't want to buy something now that i'll have to upgrade with my next PC again. I have several options unitl my GPU gets upgraded (non native resolution and the secondary 1080p screen for more demanding games).

 

What should i buy now? Ultrawide 100Hz in hopes that future games i'll play take advantage of the width?

1440p 144Hz as a "works with everything NOW plus a better GPU will further improve the experience" solution?

Or 4k for maximum screen real estate in Desktop mode, but lower refresh rate and more pixelated Gaming?

 

With every option my Current Rig won't change within about a year and i'll keep my other two screens as a tripple Setup. Plus i have no Problem sacrificing "detail quality" in Games where i need performance. Playing Overwatch on lowest settings is what i'm used to for less clutter on the screen.

 

Any input is highly Appreciated!

[Vroooom]

Set your 1440p monitor to 1080p to get an idea of what interpolation looks like. Set your 1440p monitor to 720p to get an idea of what 1080p on a 4K display would be like.

[Brett_Bst]

I have the acer 3440x1440 and do play some games in 2560x1440 and even 1920x1080, I will run it in game now @2560x1080 and see what its like

[Domsch]

Yeah, already did that.

Though the relatively high ppi of the 24" 1440p display might not translate well to the same effect on 34" UW or 40" 4k.

In both cases the interpolation is noticeable but not deal braking. I certainly prefer the 1080p native over 1080p interpolated on the same screensize. I'd be fine only using 1080p on my 1440p panel. But that's at a high ppi. No clue how much worse this feels on lower density screens.

 

I think it boils down to: will 21:9 be the new standard or not? For some time it felt like it, but at the moment i'm sensing most stuff will rather move 4k. Just like 3D and 16:10 had their time but ultimately didn't catch on.

It's just hard to justify spending around 600€ on a 27" monitor which is objectively worth it but just doesn't feel "new" or "Special". The Curved Ultrawides just feel more "different" to my current displays and make it easier to spend the money.

 

And that's not even considering one can get a HTC Vive at the price of those monitors 

[Domsch]

3 minutes ago, Brett_Bst said:

I have the acer 3440x1440 and do play some games in 2560x1440 and even 1920x1080, I will run it in game now @2560x1080 and see what its like

Thanks, it's much appreciated!

[Brett_Bst]

ok so windows set to 2560x1080 seems ok to me, games seem ok, I brought the UW just because its the one I wanted and love the feel in games that support UW, most games support 2560x1440p so that wouldn't be an issue, I use a 1070 on mine and it runs ok set @100hz in 99% of games, may need a setting moved down from Ultra to High if cant keep 100fps but that's only the really gpu heavy games other than that there is no issues at all.

If I was you I would get the UW if your ok spending that much money seeing as you may need a GPU upgrade at a later date all depends on your wallet ands your GPU

[Domsch]

10 minutes ago, Brett_Bst said:

ok so windows set to 2560x1080 seems ok to me, games seem ok, I brought the UW just because its the one I wanted and love the feel in games that support UW, most games support 2560x1440p so that wouldn't be an issue, I use a 1070 on mine and it runs ok set @100hz in 99% of games, may need a setting moved down from Ultra to High if cant keep 100fps but that's only the really gpu heavy games other than that there is no issues at all.

If I was you I would get the UW if your ok spending that much money seeing as you may need a GPU upgrade at a later date all depends on your wallet ands your GPU

Thanks, this is helpful (somewhat) 

As i currently don't play any games the require GPU Power i should be fine. I'm basically planning to wait for the next generation Nvidia and Upgrade to a 1070 or 1080 then. Currently the prices are ridiculous.

UW just isn't easy. I feel 2560x1080 is to low on a 34". 3440x1440 is limited to 100Hz (which is fine) but all GSync Options are above 1000€, which is more than i'd like to spend really. Without GSync i'll be "forced" to hit 100fps or be limited to 50 which isn't great. I've got no illusions. I won't hit 100fps on 3440x1440 in any Game with any Setting with my 1050ti (well commander keen might work ).

 

I know talking refresh rate is somewhat complicated. Could someone with first hand experience comment on wether 144Hz is worth the added price?

[Leonard]

@Domsch

 

You can not futureproof anything when it comes to electronics. If i were you i would get the  27" 1440p 144hz monitor with G-Sync once it is from a reliable vendor. Remember to look for dead pixels and light bleed if you go to buy it in person.

 

[Jrasero]

1 hour ago, Domsch said:

Hello everyone,

 

long time viewer of the channel but never registered here. This changed now as i'm unable to make up my mind about Displays.

The Obvious: Around or just after Christmas i'll be getting a new Display.

What i currently have:

- 24" 1080p 60Hz Monitor (old Samsung)

- 24" 1440p 60Hz Dell

Core i5 6500

GTX1050ti

 

My playtime is 70% Overwatch, 20% Rocksmith 2014 and 10% everything else (MOBA, RPG's, FPS and Strategy). While my PC is used for Music Production and some "light" productivity those don't put any specific recommendation towards a display.

 

What i want:

Well it's complicated. I was rather set on a 34" 1440p Ultrawide. I know my GPU won't push it, so i'd game in 2560x1080. I just have no clue how good/bad interpolation looks when going with a non native resolution (any experience with that?). Problem here is that Overwatch doesn't support 21:9 (it cuts the picture top and bottom because of "unfair competitive advantage"). I'm not 100% on Rocksmith supporting it. So truth be told, the only two games i care for don't support/don't benefit from an Ultrawide. This doesn't change the fact they look just great and would be somewhat nice for my Music Production.

So after digging some more, turns out i could get a nice 27" 1440p 144hz monitor with G-Sync for the same money. This feels like a better deal plus G-Sync would help with my GPU not quite reaching 144fps (I know i can push over 120fps in Overwatch with low details, which is what i use anyways). 

Third option in the same price range would be to get one of the "big" (32-43 inch) 4k Displays, use 4k for Desktop and productivity and Use 1080p for Gaming. Interpolation wouldn't be a Problem in that case. Only downside is that i'm limited to 60Hz i think. Since i don't have experience with anything over 60hz, i have no clue how big of a deal it is. To date i haven't had any Problems with my 60Hz panels.

 

So, i know all three options won't be utilized to their full potential by my GPU. Thats clear. I just don't want to buy something now that i'll have to upgrade with my next PC again. I have several options unitl my GPU gets upgraded (non native resolution and the secondary 1080p screen for more demanding games).

 

What should i buy now? Ultrawide 100Hz in hopes that future games i'll play take advantage of the width?

1440p 144Hz as a "works with everything NOW plus a better GPU will further improve the experience" solution?

Or 4k for maximum screen real estate in Desktop mode, but lower refresh rate and more pixelated Gaming?

 

With every option my Current Rig won't change within about a year and i'll keep my other two screens as a tripple Setup. Plus i have no Problem sacrificing "detail quality" in Games where i need performance. Playing Overwatch on lowest settings is what i'm used to for less clutter on the screen.

 

Any input is highly Appreciated!

 So for me I think there are diminishing returns for any refresh rate above 100Hz, but resolution wise there are huge visible improvements going 1440P over 1080P.  If you don't need GSync, don't find anything above 100Hz refresh to be worth it, and don't mind going off brand getting a Microboard, Viotek, or Pixio are really great deals.  They all have the same Samsung VA panel at 100Hz and 3440x1440 resolution and are 34" curved ultra wides.  There are some difference in Vesa mount support, slight styling differences, and FreeSync ranges between these three monitors, but besides that they are basically the same.  I went with a Pixio Prime since it was the cheapest at $490 on newegg recently and because it seems that Pixio had very good customer service and their warehouse is based in CA.  

 

For me the Pixio Prime gives me the resolution I need now for productivity and for gaming on a GTX 1070 on PUBG I keep the graphics on High at 3440x1440 and get 60FPS or play at 1920x1200 on Ultra I am getting 90FPS.  PUBG is wildly fluctuates in FPS so maybe that is the best example of performance, but that is one the games I play most.  

 

But if you don't want to go off brand a course Acer and Asus make some great gaming monitors but run $250-$500 more, but you never mentioned your budget  

[Domsch]

5 minutes ago, Jrasero said:

 So for me I think there are diminishing returns for any refresh rate above 100Hz, but resolution wise there are huge visible improvements going 1440P over 1080P.  If you don't need GSync, don't find anything above 100Hz refresh to be worth it, and don't mind going off brand getting a Microboard, Viotek, or Pixio are really great deals.  They all have the same Samsung VA panel at 100Hz and 3440x1440 resolution and are 34" curved ultra wides.  There are some difference in Vesa mount support, slight styling differences, and FreeSync ranges between these three monitors, but besides that they are basically the same.  I went with a Pixio Prime since it was the cheapest at $490 on newegg recently and because it seems that Pixio had very good customer service and their warehouse is based in CA.  

 

For me the Pixio Prime gives me the resolution I need now for productivity and for gaming on a GTX 1070 on PUBG I keep the graphics on High at 3440x1440 and get 60FPS or play at 1920x1200 on Ultra I am getting 90FPS.  PUBG is wildly fluctuates in FPS so maybe that is the best example of performance, but that is one the games I play most.  

 

But if you don't want to go off brand a course Acer and Asus make some great gaming monitors but run $250-$500 more, but you never mentioned your budget  

The Problem is my GPU.

As i understand it, FreeSync is not usable with Nvidia GPUs. So with anything non GSync i need to hit the native refresh rate of what ever monitor i get. Getting 100fps in 3440x1440 is not doable with a 1050ti.

 

So going with the UW 34" (without GSync) means either gaming at 2560x1080 interpolated and/or only getting 50fps. Also Overwatch not supporting Ultrawides decently is a major let down. Would i have a 1070 or be a big Battlefield guy, this would be an easy pick. Sadly i'm not. So i'm debating looks and Desktop real estate over Gaming Performance and Usability without major Upgrades to the System.

[Jrasero]

12 minutes ago, Domsch said:

The Problem is my GPU.

As i understand it, FreeSync is not usable with Nvidia GPUs. So with anything non GSync i need to hit the native refresh rate of what ever monitor i get. Getting 100fps in 3440x1440 is not doable with a 1050ti.

 

So going with the UW 34" (without GSync) means either gaming at 2560x1080 interpolated and/or only getting 50fps. Also Overwatch not supporting Ultrawides decently is a major let down. Would i have a 1070 or be a big Battlefield guy, this would be an easy pick. Sadly i'm not. So i'm debating looks and Desktop real estate over Gaming Performance and Usability without major Upgrades to the System.

I think you solved your own question.  I would prioritize a new GPU over screen unless you are waiting for Volta  

[Andrewtst]

Get monitor with 144hz or higher, you will see the different and enjoy with it.

 

Your main game do not support 21:9 else I will recommended you get this LG 34" Ultrawide monitor - LG 34UC79G, it is a very awesome 2560x1080 Ultrawide monitor, I am currently using it. I not go for 3440x1440 as it will be my laptop 970M GPU burden. Previously I own 32" 2560x1440 wide monitor and certain games already not as smooth as it suppose, but it still play pretty well in 2560x1080 resolution.

 

Frank speak I find 1080p still nice in 27" or ultrawide 34". I got another 24" 1080p monitor where I don't see differences much on sharpness and clarity on both my 34" and 24" even though the DPI is reduce from 92 to 84.

[Domsch]

So, after work i just did some more testing.

1440 over 1080 even at native resolutions looks way nicer. Since i've been using my 1080 panel for most gaming and the 1440 panel for all other stuff (for pure space sake. Can't get a Browser, discord and all the other random stuff onto an 1080 panel) i forgot a bit how much a difference it makes.

 

I made some "measurements" in game with varying resolutions in Overwatch. FPS limit and VSync off.

With the "normal" low settings i like which are fine for me i got

1080 - 210 fps

1440 - 120 fps

With changing Settings i don't care much for in direct comparison, i can get 1440 up to 140fps stable.

 

This is inline with expectations. 1440 has around 1.77 times the pixels of 1080p and i'm getting 1.75 times the performance on 1080p. So extrapolating from that i could expect solid 90fps on 3440x1440 without changing settings.

 

So something like the Z35P would be doable. With GSync i'm still surpassing my current VSynced 60fps. That's great.

Also all the 1440p 144hz gsync Monitors would work for the current things i want to do. Great.

1080p Ultrawide is out because i already find the difference on 24" to be staggering. No new 1080p panel for me.

Everything without GSync is out because i can't hit consistent 100 or 144 fps on the desired resolution at the moment. The Upcharge for GSync is still less than buying a new 1070 or 1080 to get to 100 or 144 fps in 1440p. Plus having GSync will be handy even after Upgrading the Graphics Card for more demanding titles.

 

This leaves me with to options. Buckle up and spend about 1100€ on a Ultrawide or stay on 16:9 with something like the Benq XL2735 or the Asus PG278QR and save around 500 bucks. Which would already be a new graphics card... In the end, 16:9 plus new graphics Card might still be the better deal than the Ultrawide monitor.

 

Heart or Head...