Recommendations for a new Display

[FearlessProphett]

Hi, this is my first post, I recently bought an Acer ED320QR 32' Curved monitor. I know I know...crap monitor but it was black Friday and I needed an upgrade. I am now regretting that decision because the smearing and ghosting on this monitor is awful. I'm looking for help getting recommendations on a different monitor. Any help or feedback is appreciated!

[191x7]

41 minutes ago, FearlessProphett said:

Hi, this is my first post, I recently bought an Acer ED320QR 32' Curved monitor. I know I know...crap monitor but it was black Friday and I needed an upgrade. I am now regretting that decision because the smearing and ghosting on this monitor is awful. I'm looking for help getting recommendations on a different monitor. Any help or feedback is appreciated!

1080p at 32" is a terrible idea. 32" is ideal for 1440p.

 

The smearing/ghosting might be improved by installing the monitor driver

https://www.acer.com/us-en/support?search=ED320QR&filter=global_download&suggest=ED320QR;0

and making sure the refresh in Windows is set to 165, the may that monitor supports,

but also making sure the display itself is set to Fast refresh.

 

Now, if you're looking for a monitor, check Hardware Unboxed and Monitors Unboxed.

Just recently they released updated monitor recommendation videos.

[FearlessProphett]

51 minutes ago, 191x7 said:

1080p at 32" is a terrible idea. 32" is ideal for 1440p.

 

The smearing/ghosting might be improved by installing the monitor driver

https://www.acer.com/us-en/support?search=ED320QR&filter=global_download&suggest=ED320QR;0

and making sure the refresh in Windows is set to 165, the may that monitor supports,

but also making sure the display itself is set to Fast refresh.

 

Now, if you're looking for a monitor, check Hardware Unboxed and Monitors Unboxed.

Just recently they released updated monitor recommendation videos.

Thank you so much! I'll definitely look into those videos as well as the drivers!

[Andrewtst]

1 hour ago, FearlessProphett said:

Acer ED320QR 32' Curved monitor

For 32" idea is 4K. 

 

1440p is idea for 27" Wide,  34" Ultrawide, 49" Super Ultrawide 

 

1080p is idea for 22" ~ 24" Wide, 29" Ultrawide, 40" Super Ultrawide. 

[191x7]

9 minutes ago, Andrewtst said:

For 32" idea is 4K. 

 

1440p is idea for 27" Wide,  34" Ultrawide, 49" Super Ultrawide 

 

1080p is idea for 22" ~ 24" Wide, 29" Ultrawide, 40" Super Ultrawide. 

I disagree.

 

32" 1440p has roughly the same pixel size as 24" 1080p.

With 27" 1440p you either have to have great eyesight or sit way closer to the screen.

 

I would not touch a 4K monitor if it was smaller than 42". Not for work and everyday use.

 

Btw, those are some great videos

 

 

 

[Andrewtst]

2 minutes ago, 191x7 said:

32" 1440p has roughly the same pixel size as 24" 1080p

24" actually it's not enough good in 1080p. The PPI need to pass 100 for sharp and clear.

 

I own 32" 1440p monitor before and it is bad, I sold it within 2 weeks. 

 

32" required 4K and 4K resolution cannot over 42" as it start output bad again 

[191x7]

14 minutes ago, Andrewtst said:

24" actually it's not enough good in 1080p. The PPI need to pass 100 for sharp and clear.

 

I own 32" 1440p monitor before and it is bad, I sold it within 2 weeks. 

 

32" required 4K and 4K resolution cannot over 42" as it start output bad again 

21" 1080p actually causes eyestrain and vision issues when watching it from a reasonable distance (the monitor being far enough so that you can have a keyboard in front of it and enough space for the wrists).

 

PPI is relative to viewing distance. Larger PPI simply means you can (and should) look at it from a bit closer.

 

You might have had a bad monitor as far as I know. Or you were sitting too close to it. Or you have eyesight issues. 

 

32" 4K would require the use of text scaling of at least 120% or even 150%. Text scaling is always terrible!

[Andrewtst]

23 minutes ago, 191x7 said:

21" 1080p actually causes eyestrain and vision issues when watching it from a reasonable distance (the monitor being far enough so that you can have a keyboard in front of it and enough space for the wrists).

 

PPI is relative to viewing distance. Larger PPI simply means you can (and should) look at it from a bit closer.

 

You might have had a bad monitor as far as I know. Or you were sitting too close to it. Or you have eyesight issues. 

 

32" 4K would require the use of text scaling of at least 120% or even 150%. Text scaling is always terrible!

Bigger PPI give you sharpen text and smoother 3D, for example in games which sometimes it is not even required to apply Anti-Aliasing.

Whoever keep using distance to make text clear is cheating own-self.

 

You cannot seen the edge issue on text for PPI less than 100, whose got eyesight issue? Definately the one cannot tell.

23 minutes ago, 191x7 said:

120% or even 150%. Text scaling is always terrible!

Scaling 150% is crazy big everything for 32" in 4K, this another proof who got eyesight issue here.

 

100% scale do a bit small but 125% scale in 32" 4K is similar as 100% scale for 1440p 27" which is perfection scale, but 32" screen size is too big for 1440p as it is far than perfection, thus the 4K resolution is required for 32". Maybe 3.5K is the perfect resolution for 32" but they is no such resolution in the market, so the closer is 4K and that the only should be pick for use in 32" screen size.

 

23 minutes ago, 191x7 said:

Text scaling is always terrible!

This is the case in earlier Windows 10 build, but now it is scale far better for Windows 10 latest build or Windows 11. They is only few classic apps got scale issue which look blur but it is easier fixed by change override the high DPI scaling behavior to Application.

[191x7]

5 minutes ago, Andrewtst said:

Bigger PPI give you sharpen text and smoother 3D, for example in games.

Whoever keep using distance to make text clear is cheating own-self.

 

You cannot seen the edge issue on text for PPI less than 100, whose got eyesight issue? Definately the one cannot tell.

Scaling 150% is crazy big everything for 32" in 4K, this another proof who got eyesight issue here.

 

100% scale do a bit small but 125% scale in 32" 4K is similar as 100% scale for 1440p 27" which is perfection scale, but 32" is too big and 1440p is far than perfection, thus the 4K resolution is required for 32".

And you're still trying to set up norms (by your own standards) completely ignoring eyesight, personal preferences, distance, previous experiences, ergonomics, research, optics, computer science and all other relevant info.

Reminds me of Apple "Retina" and snobbish behavior. Not something I approve.

 

I will repeat; 24" 1080p is optimal for most users and 32" 1440p looks roughly the same from the same distance.

[Andrewtst]

12 minutes ago, 191x7 said:

you're still trying to set up norms (by your own standards)

In fact you are the one keep telling people your standard is standard.

 

12 minutes ago, 191x7 said:

24" 1080p is optimal for most users

This is 2 years ago not now.

 

12 minutes ago, 191x7 said:

32" 1440p looks roughly the same from the same distance

All my monitor all same distance and I won't seat further to make text clear.

 

24" in 1080p and 32" in 1440p is actually same 92 PPI but this is not perfect, it just good but still you can seen the edge issue.

and 32" is everything much bigger, so you can seen more clear the edge issue compare with 24" even thought both is 92 PPI.

 

Once you use the 2160p in 32" which is 138 PPI, you will know 1440p is not perfect and not enough for 32".

Now I own 32" 3840x2160 138 PPI and also 49" 5120x1440 which is 109 PPI and even the 49" 5120x1440 also obvious notice it is not as sharp as the 32" 3840x2160 monitor.

 

Rtings always give you the text clarity result and the text clarity result did not lying.

https://www.rtings.com/monitor/tools/compare/samsung-odyssey-neo-g9-vs-samsung-odyssey-neo-g8-s32bg85/23186/33710?usage=3623&threshold=0.10

 

Left is G9 Neo (5120x1440), Right is G8 Neo (3840x2160) and most 4K monitor in 32" is actually scored 9.5 but this G8 Neo reduce the scores due to the surface issue. Are you telling me 7.5 v/s 9.0 or 9.5 no different? This is big scores differences.

[191x7]

4 minutes ago, Andrewtst said:

and 32" is everything much bigger, so you can seen more clear the edge issue compare with 24" even thought both is 92 PPI.

 

Once you use the 2160p in 32" which is 138 PPI, you will know 1440p is not perfect and not enough for 32".

Now I own 32" 3840x2160 138 PPI and also 49" 5120x1440 which is 109 PPI and even the 49" 5120x1440 also obvious notice it is not as sharp as the 32" 3840x2160 monitor.

 

Rtings always give you the text clarity result and the text clarity result did not lying.

https://www.rtings.com/monitor/tools/compare/samsung-odyssey-neo-g9-vs-samsung-odyssey-neo-g8-s32bg85/23186/33710?usage=3623&threshold=0.10

 

Left is G9 Neo (5120x1440), Right is G8 Neo (3840x2160)

 

Nothing is bigger if it's the same PPI. It's how much stuff there is on the screen (some call it screen space or screen estate).

 

I bet you love laptops with 13-15" 1080p screens and 15-17" 4K screens... I don't. They are unusable. 

 

 

[Andrewtst]

8 minutes ago, 191x7 said:

Nothing is bigger if it's the same PPI. It's how much stuff there is on the screen (some call it screen space or screen estate).

 

I bet you love laptops with 13-15" 1080p screens and 15-17" 4K screens... I don't. They are unusable. 

 

 

And your monitor LG 32GK650F-B (in your signature) is scored in yellow because it is too low and not clear. You though it is clear but in-fact it is bad.

https://www.rtings.com/monitor/tools/compare/samsung-odyssey-neo-g7-s32bg75-vs-lg-32gk650f-b/33691/893?usage=3623&threshold=0.10

 

G7 Neo (4K 32" in common use matte coating) v/s LG 32GK650F-B (1440p 32" in common use matte coating)

 

Below here is comparison of 24" in 1080p v/s 32" in 1440p.

As I said 24" in 1080p is not perfect but it is still better than 32" in 1440p where both is same PPI, is bigger screen matter now in same PPI.

https://www.rtings.com/monitor/tools/compare/aoc-24g2-vs-lg-32gk650f-b/5503/893?usage=3623&threshold=0.10

[191x7]

4 minutes ago, Andrewtst said:

And your monitor LG 32GK650F-B (in your signature) is scored in yellow because it is too low and not clear. You though it is clear but in-fact it is bad.

https://www.rtings.com/monitor/tools/compare/samsung-odyssey-neo-g7-s32bg75-vs-lg-32gk650f-b/33691/893?usage=3623&threshold=0.10

 

G7 Neo v/s LG 32GK650F-B 

 

And you're continuing on your Don Quijote quest of fighting windmills. 

 

At least if you're comparing a 32" 4K compare it to a 24" 1440p, it's not the same PPI but it's the closest I could match (140dpi vs 122dpi) since there aren't that many 1440p screens smaller than 24" on the market.

Compare the same PPI. Don0t mix apples and oranges.