Narrowing Down Monitors

[Hidden Orange]

Another of these threads, asking what monitor I should get, want some opinions on things, and such.

 

So, I'm just going to use the dot points thing from the Build Plan Thread Recommendation to organize things and make it easier on anyone who reads this. Rearranged a bit, though.

 

1. What is your current build?

CPU: AMD Ryzen 5 2600

RAM: Team Dark Pro 16GB, DDR4-3200

GPU: MSI Nvidia GTX 1080 8GB Gaming X 8G

Monitor: Asus VH238, 1920x1080, 60 Hz, and almost 9-years-old. I don't even know what the panel is exactly.

 

2. Why are you upgrading?

I figured since Black Friday was coming up, I'd look to see if I could find a monitor for a decent price. My current monitor which is apparently almost 9-years-old is fine in that it works, but screen-tearing is annoying. Yes, VSync addresses this and just being able to enjoy and experience games at 1920x1080 and a stable 60 FPS is amazing to me coming from a PS3 and a slowly dying Lenovo Y40, but I think I am at the point where I'd like to see games run at +60 FPS without tearing or have games that are locked to 30 FPS or 60 FPS not tear because the system is -- I don't think this is the right words for it -- producing more frames than the game allows.

 

3. Aim

From the second point, gaming at a higher refresh rate or to have a monitor with a variable refresh rate. Examples of games I would play or played include Borderlands 2, Devil May Cry 5, Dragon's Dogma, Hitman 2, Rise of the Tomb Raider, and Tekken 7. I'll play anything really as long as it interests me. So, fast-paced, slower-paced, old, new, games with locked framerates, games without locked framerates, etc. Otherwise, general use. I do not watch films or videos fullscreen a lot, but that is something I would like talk about.

 

4. Budget & Location

Answering the easy part: the United States. Location in regards to where this monitor would be used. A not so brightly lit room. Part of that is laziness in not putting in all four bulbs for the ceiling fan's lights and the other part is that one of them "popped" -- it made a pop noise -- and died. I do have light bulbs. Just didn't care to put in all four. Budget is a bit more complicated and where the bulk of what I'm trying to figure out. I'm just going to put down under $400 for this point. Talk about it more below.

 

I did look around before making this post. Checked https://www.rtings.com/monitor and https://www.tftcentral.co.uk/ along with a few other reviews or overviews of monitors as was suggested by several people. It was overwhelming, but I did get a feel of I was thinking of wanting. Started looking into this, so if anything I type is incorrect, go ahead and correct me.

 

The one thing is a monitor that is Freesync and G-Sync compatible. The recent news of Nvidia adding support for AMD GPUs in new G-Sync monitors is great and all, but that hasn't happened yet. Anyway, I'd just like a more flexible upgrade path, so a Freesync monitor would be nice in the case that my next GPU is an AMD one and it would still work for a Nvidia one.

 

Before that, panels. Probably have used a TN panel, IPS maybe with iMacs around on campus and libraries, and no idea about VA. Any of them are probably fine since it's like showing a guy living under the rock the brilliance of heated seats in a car. That said, I do not know if a VA monitor would fit my environment. Room isn't brightly lit right, but I would use my PC at different times of the day and the reason it's dark now is because of not having all or three light bulbs installed in my ceiling fan.

 

Moving on, as I said, gaming at 1080p is still amazing to me. It was my initial idea to just get a 1080p monitor with a higher refresh rate, so 144 Hz or higher. Having a high frame rate is something I would like. I guess for me, it's like being able to have a lot of headroom. I guess a way to explain this is say I could run some new, looks like it's a demanding, or visually impressive game at a consistent 100 FPS on the highest settings. If so, then I would not need to worry much about staying at or dropping below 60 FPS. The extra benefit is that the game runs really smooth. The other part is stupid amusement. For example, Devil May Cry 4 and Dragon's Dogma, Capcom's older MT Framework games, that were ported over to the PC can hit really high frame rates. I remember back then that people were able to get +100 FPS on mid-range PCs with DMC4 when on consoles, it was running at 60 FPS. So, part of me has this stupid feeling of hey, let's see if I can hit 200 FPS for shits and giggles. This would be generally less expensive. With what people recommended, I would prefer to stay in the 24" range for monitor size for 1080p.

 

In this case, I think if I could, I'd like to get a monitor for around $150.

Spoiler

 

Acer KG251Q, TN - Microcenter has the 240 Hz model. I have a Microcenter near where I live -- wished I did. For $209.99 plus shipping, though, it could be worth it. The KG251Q has a bunch of models which is annoying to sift through. The 144 Hz model is out of stock on Amazon. Someone here on LTT has it or an older model and said it was pretty good.

AOC 24G2, IPS - This thing is apparently pretty good, but I couldn't find it in stock anywhere. Someone on Reddit said they were able to get one on Amazon for around $160 and my guess is that they bought before I started looking into monitors.

AOC C24G1, VA - Unlike the 24G2, this is in stock. Seems all right. $144.99.

LG 24GL600F, TN - Missed the sale on this one on Amazon where it was priced at $129.99. It's out of stock on Amazon, but BHPhotoVideo has it in stock for the same price.

ViewSonic XG2402, TN - Saw this when I saw the LG 24GL600F on sale. It's more expensive than the LG at $239.99 new or $179.99 like new from ViewSonic on Amazon.

 

 

1440p is, however, interesting to me. The jump from 480p, 1024x768, or whatever low resolution back then, to 720p and 1080p probably upscaled on most games on the PS3, then to 1080p on 30 FPS or more on the Lenovo laptop, and then 1080p with stable 60 FPS or higher if the game didn't have a lot of screen tearing like Borderlands 2 for me were all pretty cool. So, I'm curious what it would be like. I know that while the GTX 1080 can drive 1440p, I will need to lower some settings depending on the game to have 60 or more FPS which is I would be fine with. For instance, a game like Devil May Cry 5 that is well-optimized looks like it can hit 90-120 FPS on the highest settings with a GTX 1080, but games like Monster Hunter: World and Shadows of the Tomb Raider would need some settings to be lowered for a more consistent 60 FPS. Additionally, as people have said before, you do not need to run things at ultra or the highest settings for a good visuals. I would prefer high or medium-high settings in the worst case. At this resolution, anti-aliasing can also be dialed down for not that much loss in quality in return for more performance.

 

Other than the lower framerate and that it's generally going to be more expensive to get a 1440p, 144 Hz monitor than a 1080p, 144 Hz monitor, stuff outside of gaming has me questioning if I should get a 1440p monitor. I mentioned that I do not watch videos fullscreen a lot. 720p videos should be fine on a 1440p monitor and even then on YouTube, I just watch it with the default player and don't even go theater mode. 1080p on the other hand doesn't scale well from what I looked into. In the case I do watch a fullscreen video more frequently, I wonder if maybe I should stick with a 1080p monitor and not go with a 1440p monitor. Should have mentioned that my desk is small, so I do not have room to place two monitors.

 

Prices here are more varied. I'm tempted to just bite the bullet and get the LG 27GL83A-B for $379.99. It's not on sale, but from what I looked into it, it seems pretty good.

Spoiler

AOC CQ27G1, VA - From Linus's video, the low brightness concerns me. The price seems good, though, at $249.99.

Dell S2719DGF, TN - Could have snagged this for around $230 with the 20% discount on the like new Amazon Warehouse offer when it was in stock. Currently $289.99.

LG 27GL83A-B, IPS - Possibly going to be on sale for $319.99 tomorrow: https://www.reddit.com/r/buildapcsales/comments/e3751j/monitor_samsung_c27hg70_27_hdr_qled_quantum_dot/f91gbjj/. Probably should bite then if I do decide on 1440p.

Samsung C27HG70, VA - It's $399.99 new, but Amazon at this moment is giving a 20% discount on a like new Amazon Warehouse offer which brings it down to $308.84 with free shipping. By the time I decide on this, it'll probably be sold out like the Dell.

VIOTEK GN27D, VA - Apparently it uses a Samsung VA panel. Priced at $229.99.

 

TL;DR: Indecisive guy mulls over if he should get 2560x1440 monitor or stick with 1920x1080, but upgrade to a 144 Hz or higher monitor. Also, concerns about 1080p content on a 1440p monitor.

[Juular]

I was contemplating whether to get 1440p or 1080p display too just recently, but for different reasons, i don't really care about brightness since my room is dark too and it don't see it getting any brighter but my desk is also a bit small and 27" 1440p display would look off on it and since i've used 23" display anyway, moving to 24" one would be painless. So i got AOC C24G1, it's good for games, there's some minor ghosting in fast paced scenes when pixels switch from black to white\gray and vice versa but otherwise i've got used to it pretty quickly (i've used 60Hz IPS panel). The brightness is right on spot, it required some color profile tweaking but otherwise it's good.

My recommendation pretty much the same as you've already decided on, if 1080p then either AOC 24G2 if you can get it or AOC C24G1, if 1440p then LG Ultragear, there's no alternatives for it really among 1440p 144Hz IPS displays, it's solid and rather cheap display.

[Hidden Orange]

And the LG 27GL83A-B went out of stock when I woke up...

[SolarNova]

9 hours ago, Hidden Orange said:

Another of these threads, asking what monitor I should get, want some opinions on things, and such.

 

So, I'm just going to use the dot points thing from the Build Plan Thread Recommendation to organize things and make it easier on anyone who reads this. Rearranged a bit, though.

 

~~~SNIP~~~

 

TL;DR: Indecisive guy mulls over if he should get 2560x1440 monitor or stick with 1920x1080, but upgrade to a 144 Hz or higher monitor. Also, concerns about 1080p content on a 1440p monitor.

 

Dull/dark rooms benefit VA panels the most as VA is the only Panel type that can get closer to a real 'black', and has good contrast.

IPS has its characteristic glow and usually has poor uniformity that will show up most when in a dark room and looking at dark content.

TN , whilst not having IPS glow, just doesnt have good contrast and has a poor black level, they also tend to suffer from uniformity issues more so than VA.

 

BUT

 

For fast paced games, especially those with a lot of dark scenes, VA isnt great. There is only 1 VA monitor that i would be comfortable recommending for gaming, and its ~$450 (LG 32GK850G-B). It however is a 144hz (165hz OC) 1440p monitor, a 1080 GPU will have trouble with that in modern titles.

 

Now there is a 25" TN 1080 240hz panel that actually has acceptable uniformity, its still not great on contrast or black level, but it at least shouldnt suffer from as much BLB as u normally see. The issue with it, is its price, its over $500 in the US. HP Omen X25f.

 

You already know of the 2 resources that i use. Rtings and tftcentral.

Did u know rtings has a search and filter tool ?

https://www.rtings.com/monitor/tools/table/14949

Add columns as needed to filter results.

They 'only' have 91 monitors reviewed, but its worth a look.

 

I would suggest , on top of any other aspects ur interested in, that u keep an eye on: Black Uniformity, Response 80% and 100%, size, resolution, frequency, and variable refresh rate.

 

(FYI: the 'price' filter isnt great as they use both $ and £ results)

[Hidden Orange]

10 hours ago, Juular said:

I was contemplating whether to get 1440p or 1080p display too just recently, but for different reasons, i don't really care about brightness since my room is dark too and it don't see it getting any brighter but my desk is also a bit small and 27" 1440p display would look off on it and since i've used 23" display anyway, moving to 24" one would be painless. So i got AOC C24G1, it's good for games, there's some minor ghosting in fast paced scenes when pixels switch from black to white\gray and vice versa but otherwise i've got used to it pretty quickly (i've used 60Hz IPS panel). The brightness is right on spot, it required some color profile tweaking but otherwise it's good.

My recommendation pretty much the same as you've already decided on, if 1080p then either AOC 24G2 if you can get it or AOC C24G1, if 1440p then LG Ultragear, there's no alternatives for it really among 1440p 144Hz IPS displays, it's solid and rather cheap display.

Well, the AOC C24G1 is was on sale for $115.99 now, but...

 

1 hour ago, SolarNova said:

Dull/dark rooms benefit VA panels the most as VA is the only Panel type that can get closer to a real 'black', and has good contrast.

IPS has its characteristic glow and usually has poor uniformity that will show up most when in a dark room and looking at dark content.

TN , whilst not having IPS glow, just doesnt have good contrast and has a poor black level, they also tend to suffer from uniformity issues more so than VA.

 

BUT

 

For fast paced games, especially those with a lot of dark scenes, VA isnt great. There is only 1 VA monitor that i would be comfortable recommending for gaming, and its ~$450 (LG 32GK850G-B). It however is a 144hz (165hz OC) 1440p monitor, a 1080 GPU will have trouble with that in modern titles.

That is my concern about VA panels. Off the top of my head, Devil May Cry 5 would be a fast-paced game and I'm guessing because of how the RE Engine implements lighting, the darker scenes are, well, dark and muted. Unlike Resident Evil 7, though, DMC5 does have areas where things are well-light or even bright. Nioh comes to mind as well, Doom which Linus used to test the AOC CQ27G1, and there's others that I can't think of right now.

 

The Samsung C27HG70 I listed I remember reading some comments about how some people had issues after months of having it. So, there's that. Also, apparently monitors can overheat which is what happened to someone with a Pixio P276h apparently. That's just odd, but also concerning since the person said that while the system still output the same frames, the monitor couldn't and displayed things at 40 FPS or 40 Hz -- not sure which would be the correct one here.

 

1 hour ago, SolarNova said:

Now there is a 25" TN 1080 240hz panel that actually has acceptable uniformity, its still not great on contrast or black level, but it at least shouldnt suffer from as much BLB as u normally see. The issue with it, is its price, its over $500 in the US. HP Omen X25f.

I saw that on rtings and saw it listed as unavailable for their Amazon link button. The 25 version is around $200 and the X 25 is $547.47. Apparently the store on HP has the X 25f in stock for $379.99. Meanwhile, the X 25 is $479.99. Not sure why, but it seems the information on HP is wrong as both are 240 Hz monitors, but their specifications say 60 Hz. Whatever.

 

1 hour ago, SolarNova said:

Did u know rtings has a search and filter tool ?

I did, but I did not go over it as much. The one on TFTCentral was not helpful. I'm guessing TFTCentral has reviewed less monitors, so there weren't as many options the search tool could have given me.

 

Edit: Welp, I got this: https://www.rtings.com/monitor/tools/table/16606.

 

Edit 2: Never mind, the AOC C24G1 is out of stock too.

[Juular]

There's rather cheap LG Ultragear IPS 1080p for 200$ too (they're really slaying the market with this new lineup). Looking at Amazon review i don't see any glaring issues with it like large percent of RMA or prominent backlight bleed so it's my recommendation next to AOC 24G2.

Edit: oh, it's 27" tho ...

[Hidden Orange]

It was discourteous of me to forget this, but thank you @Juular and @SolarNova for your advice. Also, nice Raziel avatar, SolarNova.

On 11/29/2019 at 10:41 AM, Juular said:

There's rather cheap LG Ultragear IPS 1080p for 200$ too (they're really slaying the market with this new lineup). Looking at Amazon review i don't see any glaring issues with it like large percent of RMA or prominent backlight bleed so it's my recommendation next to AOC 24G2.

Edit: oh, it's 27" tho ...

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.

 

On 11/29/2019 at 8:57 AM, SolarNova said:

For fast paced games, especially those with a lot of dark scenes, VA isnt great. There is only 1 VA monitor that i would be comfortable recommending for gaming, and its ~$450 (LG 32GK850G-B).

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.

On 11/29/2019 at 8:57 AM, SolarNova said:

It however is a 144hz (165hz OC) 1440p monitor, a 1080 GPU will have trouble with that in modern titles.

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.

[SolarNova]

7 hours ago, Hidden Orange said:

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.

~~SNIP~~

So it should be noted that i believe the LG 32GK850G-B is significantly more expensive than i previously thought in the USA, so thats out of the question.

Also make sure that if u were looking for it, that u find the 850 not the 650 and the G-B not the F-B.

 

Whilst helping another user out on the forums with a similar budget and requirements, some deals and options have come to light that u may be interested in.

 

(Links on price)

IPS option.

Asus VG27AQ ($430)

 

VA option (yes its 32")

Dell S3220dgf  ($450)

 

Cheaper alternative IPS (u mentioned it)

LG 27GL83A ( $380 )

 

rtings has reviews on all 3

[Hidden Orange]

15 hours ago, SolarNova said:

So it should be noted that i believe the LG 32GK850G-B is significantly more expensive than i previously thought in the USA, so thats out of the question.

Also make sure that if u were looking for it, that u find the 850 not the 650 and the G-B not the F-B.

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.

[SolarNova]

8 hours ago, Hidden Orange said:

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.

You Americans anhalf get some wicked sales :P

 

Hopefully the f-b uses the same panel and internal hardware, otherwise the test results could be different.

 

if u want to give a VA a go thats your best option, especially at that price.

 

 

[Hidden Orange]

2 hours ago, SolarNova said:

You Americans anhalf get some wicked sales

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.

 

2 hours ago, SolarNova said:

Hopefully the f-b uses the same panel and internal hardware, otherwise the test results could be different.

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/.

 

2 hours ago, SolarNova said:

if u want to give a VA a go thats your best option, especially at that price.

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.

[SolarNova]

11 minutes ago, Hidden Orange said:

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.

 

VA tends has the best uniformity in general among LCD displays. (it can get darker than TN and doesn't have to deal with IPS glow like IPS panels)

 

IPS has 'arguably' the worst due to not only having BLB and angled IPS glow to deal with, but also the 'general' glow IPS gives when displaying 'black' (blue glow)

 

TN is 'arguably' the worst due to poor native contrast and black levels emphasizing issues with panel uniformity and BLB.

 

In the regards to viewing angles.

 

IPS has the best hands down.

 

VA and TN are equally bad but VA is a bit more balanced. The shift in color, gamma, and black level is uniform from right to left, up and down. By which i mean ull usually see the same amount of shift XX degrees to the left as u would to the same degree to the right.

TN on the other hand can have a worse shift to the left or right, or up or down.

 

So if u have one monitor that looks good from an angle and another that does not. the good one is IPS, the other is either TN or VA, if it has good black levels and contrast its VA ,, if not its TN.

 

The LG 27GL83A-B is good for the price. it is IPS however so IPS glow will be a thing.

 

If u want a fast VA u end up having to pay a lot more.

 

In the end ur going to have to make concession, its just the nature of LCD.

The LCD display industry is one of compromise, manufacturers have yet to bring the versatility of CRT to the energy efficiency and small form factor that LCD has.

 

[Hidden Orange]

On 12/2/2019 at 11:49 AM, SolarNova said:

So if u have one monitor that looks good from an angle and another that does not. the good one is IPS, the other is either TN or VA, if it has good black levels and contrast its VA ,, if not its TN.

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.

 

On 12/2/2019 at 11:49 AM, SolarNova said:

In the end ur going to have to make concession, its just the nature of LCD.

The LCD display industry is one of compromise, manufacturers have yet to bring the versatility of CRT to the energy efficiency and small form factor that LCD has.

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.

[SolarNova]

7 hours ago, Hidden Orange said:

~~~SNIP~~~

There wont ever be a 'good' time to buy an LCD display, if anything your less likely to get dead pixels nowadays as manufacturing processes have improved somewhat in that respect, but ur never going to be 100% safe from getting them as , as far as i know, no manufacturer / retailer gives a ZERO dead pixel guarantee.

Uniformity, BLB, IPS glow , I've never even seen a manufacturer acknowledge it without being prompted into talking about it, even then they try to avoid the subject, so dont expect it to get any better.

 

Scaling only matters when displaying content outside of the native resolution.

Games for example wont have scaling issues, as u can set the resolution to the native resolution of the display.

The only time scaling really starts to matter is if u try to run your desktop at a resolution other than native, due mainly to text becoming difficult to read.

 

Ignorance is indeed bliss, but thats whats caused the display industry to become what it is today. LCD was brought in as the 'new' tech that is more efficient, cheaper, smaller and lighter than its predecessors, but didnt let consumers know about 'the bad', like the inferior image quality.

Now years on we still suffer from those image quality problems. Sure new technologies are now available with LCD that where not available for CRT (and Plasma for TVs), but the 'base' technology still has its original faults. This is unlikely to change until a new 'base' technology replaces what we have. Until then u have to make do with what we got.

 

Being informed will help u get the most out of whats available, while it may be saddening to know this information (and ignorance may be bliss) the end result should still be that u end up choosing a better Display than u would if u didnt know.

 

 

I personally dread the day my Plasma goes pop or the problems it has become so bad i cant deal with them, as I havnt found a Monitor or TV that is good enough for the price, for me to be willing to buy. So i know how u feel.

 

Good luck in ur search.

 

[Hidden Orange]

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.

 

Spoiler

 

From the packaging, it really was an open box. The cables looked like they were not even used, but maybe the power cable was. No idea if the monitor itself was used or not since its total power time was at 0 hours when I plugged it in and started to mess around with settings. Perhaps it was on for 30 some minutes? I ran through tests to see if there were any dead pixels and there were not any. I think I got lucky since this panel doesn't seem to have much IPS glow or noticeable back light bleed. The only noticeable IPS glow -- I believe it's IPS glow since looking at it directly makes it disappear -- is at the lower left corner where if it were possible to get the panel closer to whatever is holding it, then it would be gone. Everyone has their reasons for returning things, but I wonder what made the person or possibly persons return this. I can only guess.

 

Going from a TN monitor with what seems to be good viewing angles to an IPS monitor didn't feel that different. The colors I think are better and there is no color banding which the Asus VH238 for me didn't have that noticeable color banding unless I looked for it, but the Asus VH238 probably could have been calibrated better if I had the proper means to while the LG 27GL83A I used the settings on rtings. I guess I should not be surprised, but blacks are still grey-ish. The good response time of the LG 27GL83A and TN monitors usually having good response time also made it feel kind of the same. Another thing is the LG 27GL83A and the 27GL850 do not have good contrast ratios from what reviewers and other observed, so I'm guessing that plays a part in this feeling. At the same time, I am not an expert on whatever the profession of dealing with colors and contrast is called, so I probably can't tell much of a difference to begin with.

 

My eyesight is not the great, but text is legible. Not as easy to read as on the Asus's 23" screen, but still readable. The increased screen space is definitely something I like. Programming or whatever with another window or maybe multiple windows is going to be more convenient.

 

I booted up some games, 60 FPS locked and otherwise, and no screen tearing due to the higher refresh rate was much appreciated. Going from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440 on the other hand, not really sure. I've only used this monitor for a few hours, so this will need more time for me to settle on how I feel like going up in resolution. Right now, it doesn't feel as noticeable as going from lower resolutions in the past to 1920x1080. I wonder if my eye sight is a factor for why it doesn't feel that much better. Frame rate is noticeable as was refresh rate. It does feel smoother with I think SoulCalibur VI feeling much smoother than before, but it's been several weeks since I played it. One thing that is good, though, is that I do not have to set anti-aliasing as high as with 1920x1080.

 

The only issue I have with the monitor is that it's tall. Of course, the screen is larger than the Asus VH238, but at the lowest height possible with its stock stand, the LG sits a touch higher than the Asus which had a fixed stand. I guess I could get a different stand that can sit lower, but it's not a big deal. Also, the power brick thing is big, so it takes up another outlet slot on my surge protector and I can't plug it into the outlet on the wall without it covering the other slot for the surge protector.

 

I had some doubt about getting the monitor. The first was that I had considered the LG 32GK850F and the 32GK650F because of their good contrast as VA monitors and that they probably would not have IPS glow, but 32" seemed too big, and with a resolution of 2560x1440, the DPI would have been similar to the Asus VH238, and the 32GK850F was much more expensive new. There is a vendor selling it for $289.99 and shipping, but I didn't want to take a chance as it wasn't Amazon that was selling it. Weirdly enough, though, the same vendor was providing "renewed", refurbished offers of the same monitor for $334.99.

 

Around that time, the LG 27GN950 monitor was revealed. It's a 27", 3840x2160, IPS, 144 Hz monitor, so basically a 3840x2160 version of the 27GL850. Text on at 3840x2160 on a 27" is small from what I remember checking and Windows apparently doesn't scale text well in certain programs. I figured, though, that because of its resolution, refresh rate, and screen size, it would be pretty flexible. Regular use and media can be used at 3840x2160 where 1080p content should scale well. For gaming, less demanding games probably would be fine at 2160p, older games that don't officially support higher resolutions, but do support 1080p I could run at that and it should scale well, and other games I could run at 1440p if I wanted where it perhaps could be similar to using a 27", 1440p monitor or be fine with 1080p for games. In either case, the refresh rate would be 144 Hz. The question of why buy a monitor and not use its native resolution I figure that because a monitor would last a while that eventually I would be able to upgrade to something that handles gaming at 2160p fine. Regardless, the LG 27GN950 is going to be much more expensive than the 27GL850 much less the 27GL83A, so it probably would not be a great purchase in terms of how much I can afford and what I should get for my current needs.

 

 

@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.

[Oopy Doopy]

11 hours ago, Hidden Orange said:

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.

As an owner of a decent VA panel currently (viotek gn34cb) and a former user of a TN, IPS, and owner of an OLED TV, I can tell you that they all have pros and cons.  The smearing is real, and even when it isn't outright smearing (which really only happens on black to near white transitions, but that's a fairly common scenario), there's a noticeable hit to "motion resolution" compared to a high end IPS or basically any TN.  IPS will make you want the blacks of a VA, VA will make you want the motion response of a TN, TN will make you want either of the two for both color and contrast haha.

 

I'd suggest not stressing about it until fundamentally new technology is available.  If you ask me, IPS is the sweet spot for monitors right now.

 

That said, every time I sit in front of my OLED TV I get very frustrated with the state of monitors haha.  Other than the potential for burn in, that's pretty much a perfect technology to me.

[Hidden Orange]

49 minutes ago, Oopy Doopy said:

As an owner of a decent VA panel currently (viotek gn34cb) and a former user of a TN, IPS, and owner of an OLED TV, I can tell you that they all have pros and cons.  The smearing is real, and even when it isn't outright smearing (which really only happens on black to near white transitions, but that's a fairly common scenario), there's a noticeable hit to "motion resolution" compared to a high end IPS or basically any TN.  IPS will make you want the blacks of a VA, VA will make you want the motion response of a TN, TN will make you want either of the two for both color and contrast haha.

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.

 

49 minutes ago, Oopy Doopy said:

I'd suggest not stressing about it until fundamentally new technology is available.  If you ask me, IPS is the sweet spot for monitors right now.

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.

[Oopy Doopy]

1 hour ago, Hidden Orange said:

snip

You should check out Hardware Unboxed's monitor reviews.  They'll have all the technical details you could ask for and they compare to a pretty big range of panels.  Unfortunately, what you'll also learn is that even the crazy expensive options aren't necessarily much better than the budget options.  But, you still might find something that you want.

 

Of course, I'm not sitting in front of that monitor, but for me even jumping from a 1080p 120hz panel to a 1440p 144hz panel (TN to TN) felt like a night and day difference, particularly when both were 27".  I can imagine going from a 24" 1080p panel to a 27" 1440p panel mostly just feels like a bigger screen since the PPI different isn't massive.  Freesync/gsync is also a game changer (highly recommend capping your framerate arbitrarily to w/e framerate you average in any given game, outside of like, cs:go).  Buttery smooth frametimes without needing to pick a multiple of your monitor's refresh rate is amazing and I feel that this is a frequently overlooked method of using freesync/gsync.

 

That said, the biggest improvement I felt pretty much ever with a monitor was going from 1440p 144hz to 3440x1440 100hz.  The refresh rate dip didn't bother me as much as I thought it might and the extra screen real estate is truly a sight to behold, particularly in games that focus on macro details.  That said, if you think black bars on some games would bother you, probably best to avoid ultrawide.  If you're interested, here's a link to my amazon review for my current monitor:  https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-reviews/R3M3S9RTSKQDHQ

[SolarNova]

If ur interested in upcoming display technologies, CES is has just happened and TV technologies have been heavily showcased as they do every year. Aswell as a few less breathtaking monitors, like the 360hz monitor.

 

DualCell LCD is an interesting development, im very interested myself in how reviews of Hisense ULED XD Tvs turn out. Their technology effectively fixes the backlight issue LCD's have.

 

The LG CX series 48" OLEDs are the front runner to replace my Plasma this year ..finally...

I have learned today that the 48" does thankfully include ALL the features of the larger 55"+ panels. This includes Gsync certified VRR, BFI, and 120hz 4k. Which is huge.

Ofc ill have to also upgrade from my 1080ti to this years up coming GPUs as ill need HDMI 2.1, but still, a full fat 48" OLED will be friggin awesome, especially if i can get some kind of Burn-In guarantee from LG, given their advertising strategy towards gaming at CES i suspect i should be able to get some binding assurances from LG directly.

 

@Hidden Orange

I suspect u may very much want to consider the LG 32GK850G-B. yes its big at 32" and somewhat expensive , but its the best VA monitor currently reviewed in regards to response time. So ull get the contrast and black levels of VA whilst also getting motion clarity close to that of ur average IPS.

[Hidden Orange]

On 1/11/2020 at 11:25 AM, Oopy Doopy said:

You should check out Hardware Unboxed's monitor reviews.  They'll have all the technical details you could ask for and they compare to a pretty big range of panels.  Unfortunately, what you'll also learn is that even the crazy expensive options aren't necessarily much better than the budget options.  But, you still might find something that you want.

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.

 

On 1/11/2020 at 11:25 AM, Oopy Doopy said:

Of course, I'm not sitting in front of that monitor, but for me even jumping from a 1080p 120hz panel to a 1440p 144hz panel (TN to TN) felt like a night and day difference, particularly when both were 27".  I can imagine going from a 24" 1080p panel to a 27" 1440p panel mostly just feels like a bigger screen since the PPI different isn't massive.  Freesync/gsync is also a game changer (highly recommend capping your framerate arbitrarily to w/e framerate you average in any given game, outside of like, cs:go).  Buttery smooth frametimes without needing to pick a multiple of your monitor's refresh rate is amazing and I feel that this is a frequently overlooked method of using freesync/gsync.

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.

On 1/11/2020 at 2:03 PM, SolarNova said:

I suspect u may very much want to consider the LG 32GK850G-B. yes its big at 32" and somewhat expensive , but its the best VA monitor currently reviewed in regards to response time. So ull get the contrast and black levels of VA whilst also getting motion clarity close to that of ur average IPS.

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.

 

Spoiler

Dragon's Dogma: Picked this game because of its dark scenes and how easy it is to drive high framerates. The game is a medieval fantasy game with a day and night system. Think Monster Hunter with Devil May Cry's combat, but toned down. Blacks appear as greys on the Asus and LG and the lower left IPS glow of the LG is noticeable in dark areas.

 

Something unique with this game is that I own the PS3 version of it, so I booted that up too. My consoles are hooked up to a 32" Toshiba something TV that I think is 1080p. It was very jarring going from 144 FPS back to an unstable 30 FPS. Locked 60 FPS was smooth on the 60 Hz Asus and 144 FPS on 144 Hz LG is even smoother. Considering the short time frame from switching, I think had I decided to continue playing the PS3 version, I would be okay with it.

 

Ignoring the difference in graphics, the lower PPI -- 68.84 PPI if it is 1080p -- was noticeable with the game looking blurrier, but at the same time, that might be the lower graphics quality than on PC. The TV had the same issue with blacks looking a bit grey, but unfortunately, because I didn't want to delete my save file, I could not compare the exact same scene as on PC. Unlike with the LG, there was not or the IPS glow as not as noticeable.

 

Overwatch: Along with being a FPS that is easy to drive, it's a vibrant game. Not much to say about this. Higher refresh rate is awesome. The Asus does look a bit bluer, but not that big of a deal for me.

 

Rise of the Tomb Raider: The different areas of a desert in the prologue, snowy areas, ice caverns, rock caverns, ruins, lush and cleared forests, and underwater was one reason I picked it to compare. The LG looks more accurate than the Asus, especially before I tweaked the settings to get a less blue picture. The game looks like it's closer to seeing things in real life aside from some special effects. Considering the game's art direction, this works really well with it.

 

I was going to use RotTR to test dark scenes, but because Lara immediately uses a glow stick in caves, tombs, and similar areas, it wasn't as easy to check. She does this in Tomb Raider (2013) too where she uses a light source, but she uses a torch in that game and always holds it, so the light is above and in front of her whereas in Rise and Shadows, she breaks out one of her infinite glow sticks and when she's not holding it, she attaches it to her hip which brings the light closer to her and brightens the surrounding area to her. Open areas in night time would have worked, so I can check later.

 

Overall: I did observe running 1920x1080 on the LG and yes, it looked blurry. All the games booted up by default at that resolution, but it was noticeable in Final Fantasy XIV and Overwatch.

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.