Looking for a 1440p monitor.

[Siya]

Mainly for gaming, fps/rpg/rts/mmos. Hoping there is a good deal for cyber monday as I don't wanna spend over 300. I've came across this http://www.monoprice.com/Product?c_i...seq=1&format=2 which some people seem to like. 6ms response time seems high as I think mine atm is 3 or 4. Not sure if it would really make a difference though. Any thoughts or suggestions?

[hey]

No 6 ms response time is good for an IPS, and you don't want to get anything else because they're shit. What you linked looks good, and a good deal.

[Prothescar]

I'm not sure I'd recommend a 1440p monitor primarily for gaming, especially for 2/4 of the genres you listed, but if you want one of the most stunning monitors with all the bells+whistles(besides USB) in this resolution range and don't mind paying a premium for it, then this is still among the best 1440p monitors available. That said, I can't see anything wrong with the one you linked, especially at that pricepoint and budget, though I've never actually physically been in front of one and can't tell you much about color depth and viewing angle. i can tell you about the ASUS one though, as I've owned one for a year now.

-Incredible color recreation; nearly 100% RGB
-Unmatched viewing angle. Not a big issue for most people, but I use this as a monitor and a TV so being able to sit elsewhere in the room and still see the screen is a big plus.
-Extremely adjustable. Up, down, left, right, landscape/portrait twist(only useful if you're into graphic design, but it makes plugging shit in a lot easier and you can definitely appreciate that)

It's PLS instead of IPS, which accounts for its price and viewing angle accuracy but doesn't really sacrifice the color depth that a cheap PLS vs a cheap/midrange IPS comparison would normally suffer from. Honestly though the differences between PLS and IPS won't matter here, but was worth mentioning nonetheless.

[Deadgye]

16:10 is the superior aspect ratio for computer monitors! If only 16:9 production being streamlined due to multimedia/entertainment didn't make the cost between the two as large as it is.

[Boyiee]

If you want a good monitor, you have to spend more.

The ASUS ROG Swift 144hz 1440p with g-sync is the best thing you're going to get for the genre's you listed (fps).

It really depends on what you play, if you play more FPS than other game types, you don't want an IPS and you want the better refresh rates and response times. IPS monitors will ghost, but if you are bigger into MMO's and things like that they will be the superior choice.

[hey]

16:10 is the superior aspect ratio for computer monitors! If only 16:9 production being streamlined due to multimedia/entertainment didn't make the cost between the two as large as it is.

The cost difference is massive

[Deadgye]

If you want a good monitor, you have to spend more.

The ASUS ROG Swift 144hz 1440p with g-sync is the best thing you're going to get for the genre's you listed (fps).

It really depends on what you play, if you play more FPS than other game types, you don't want an IPS and you want the better refresh rates and response times. IPS monitors will ghost, but if you are bigger into MMO's and things like that they will be the superior choice.

Maybe I'm just a scrub, but I never noticed any problems with my IPS monitor (Dell U2412M) back when I was playing some competitive tf2. What's the threshold for Gray-to-gray response time before you should start caring? Also, I can't in good faith ever recommend a TN panel to anyone, especially at that price. Once you've experienced superior viewing angles you just don't want to go back.

The cost difference is massive

Yeah, the difference wasn't so bad with x1080 vs x1200, but at x1440 vs x1600 it's bad. I blame marketing and 27" displays. Back when I was still looking at monitors the jump looked like it was going go to from 23" 1080/24" 1200 to ?" 1440/30" 2560. I still haven't decided if higher pixel density is nicer or if it's just a waste.

[Oreth]

I have been using this monitor for a few years. Bought two now from ebay. You can easily overclock these too. Typically get anywhere from 100-120hz. Just do lots of reasearch on them.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...9SIA4JH1NB1871

[Tyche]

I had the QX2710 before my kid threw a toy through it. Had it overclocked to 110 Hz. Was an absolutely beautiful display.

[Kalmado]

Not trying to hijack the thread, but I also was looking at a possible upgrade in monitors. I currently use a 60" plasma 1080p 60hz for my "main" monitor gaming wise. I use a 24" IPS 1080p 60hz AOC monitor for daily tasks but will soon have a secondary gaming pc hooked up to it. My gpu in the main gaming pc is a GTX 770 2gb and in the secondary I will probably be using either a R9 280 or a 7950, both 3gb vram. I play a mix of games. Would my graphics cards even be able to push the limits of a 1440p monitor?

[hey]

I'm using a 7850 with mine, it works fine. Of course i can't often use max graphics settings, but still way better than 1080p. Those cards are quite a bit better too.

[Siya]

Well I ended up grabbing the monitor I linked cause I was scared I'd miss the sale (I wouldn't have in hindsight) however I'm loving it so far.

[Prothescar]

Would my graphics cards even be able to push the limits of a 1440p monitor?

think of it this way, it's like running antialiasing 24/7 without any way to turn it off without downscaling, thus making the picture look like shit or reducing the screen space filled by the image. be prepared to play around with settings and not run with some of the fancier ones for some games if you want to maintain 60+ FPS. when I said I'm not sure if I can recommend 1440p for a primarily gaming setting, I meant it. it ends up being a choice of a clearer, more workspace on-screen screen with some drawbacks in terms of overall fidelity, or a slightly less crisp, sometimes better looking (in terms of effects, shadows, etc.) experience at a higher framerate. 1440p really shines when it comes to productivity, desktop applications, and some game genres like MMO and RTS. the extra screen space gives more space for additional windows, easier access to tool trays and multiple workspaces, more space for UI elements (or smaller UI with more of the actual gamespace visible), and stuff like that. but again, could come at a cost. really comes down to the person and what you value in your viewing experience.

i'm not sure if I'll personally be sticking with 1440+ next time I get a monitor, may go back down to 1080 or 1200 and DSR when I can afford the extra performance hit, but again, subjective. I like having all of the fancy shadows and shit turned on and I'm not particularly bothered by having "only" a 24" monitor.

the objective view is that both 1080p and 1440p have their own pros and cons. 1080p becomes a "problem" if you get a lower quality monitor that also happens to be above 24", as you begin seeing individual pixels. higher quality 27" 1080p screens will not be as bad, and it's even less problematic if you don't have your monitor 2' away from your face. 1440p doesn't have that issue at 27" due to its naturally higher pixel density. another thing worth mentioning is VRAM, 2GB is really stretching it thin for most modern games @1440p when it comes to VRAM. 3GB still isn't enough for some stuff that's been coming out recently if you want to run higher res textures. you can still play the game with highest res texutres if you don't have enough VRAM, but there can and will be stuttering/skipping and potentially severe framedrops while the system RAM is accessed to make up for the GPU's lack of sufficient VRAM. the reason for this is simple: the GPU will search for somewhere to store texture data on the system once it runs out of its own storage space. this requires PCIE bandwidth, and system RAM will not perform at the same level as your GPU's dedicated VRAM. Some games can't support the memory required for this, and can crash outright, although that's quite rare these days. If any of that annoys you, it's worth considering as a con.

[RKenshin]

What kind of GPU setup would you need to reduce/eliminate those cons? I was under the impression that a 970 could handle a single monitor at 1440p + max settings on most games, considering some people run multiple 1080p monitors and don't seem to have to sacrifice much in the settings. Would a 980 do the job?

[Adajer]

I have been using an Asus PB278Q for over a year. It is a really great monitor. The only thing I don't like is the 60hz refresh. I am waiting on a real 144hz 1440p monitor that I don't have to diddle with for it to go with a good panel.

I have played everything on it from FPS to MMO and they all work fine. I have also ran this monitor with a 670, a 780, and now a 970. The 670 ran it but dropped every so often below 60 fps. I typically play everything with 60fps+ with everything maxed except maybe shadows or AA depending on game.

It actually came with a dead pixel in the top right corner that was hard to notice. It actually cleared up after around a year of use.

I could never go back to a TN panel. I'll suffer at 60hz til the right one comes.


Games with good textures look REALLY good in 1440p. IMO BF3 in 1440p looks a bit better than BF4.

[Kalmado]

think of it this way, it's like running antialiasing 24/7 without any way to turn it off without downscaling, thus making the picture look like shit or reducing the screen space filled by the image. be prepared to play around with settings and not run with some of the fancier ones for some games if you want to maintain 60+ FPS. when I said I'm not sure if I can recommend 1440p for a primarily gaming setting, I meant it. it ends up being a choice of a clearer, more workspace on-screen screen with some drawbacks in terms of overall fidelity, or a slightly less crisp, sometimes better looking (in terms of effects, shadows, etc.) experience at a higher framerate. 1440p really shines when it comes to productivity, desktop applications, and some game genres like MMO and RTS. the extra screen space gives more space for additional windows, easier access to tool trays and multiple workspaces, more space for UI elements (or smaller UI with more of the actual gamespace visible), and stuff like that. but again, could come at a cost. really comes down to the person and what you value in your viewing experience.

i'm not sure if I'll personally be sticking with 1440+ next time I get a monitor, may go back down to 1080 or 1200 and DSR when I can afford the extra performance hit, but again, subjective. I like having all of the fancy shadows and shit turned on and I'm not particularly bothered by having "only" a 24" monitor.

the objective view is that both 1080p and 1440p have their own pros and cons. 1080p becomes a "problem" if you get a lower quality monitor that also happens to be above 24", as you begin seeing individual pixels. higher quality 27" 1080p screens will not be as bad, and it's even less problematic if you don't have your monitor 2' away from your face. 1440p doesn't have that issue at 27" due to its naturally higher pixel density. another thing worth mentioning is VRAM, 2GB is really stretching it thin for most modern games @1440p when it comes to VRAM. 3GB still isn't enough for some stuff that's been coming out recently if you want to run higher res textures. you can still play the game with highest res texutres if you don't have enough VRAM, but there can and will be stuttering/skipping and potentially severe framedrops while the system RAM is accessed to make up for the GPU's lack of sufficient VRAM. the reason for this is simple: the GPU will search for somewhere to store texture data on the system once it runs out of its own storage space. this requires PCIE bandwidth, and system RAM will not perform at the same level as your GPU's dedicated VRAM. Some games can't support the memory required for this, and can crash outright, although that's quite rare these days. If any of that annoys you, it's worth considering as a con.

Wow thank you for the thorough reply! While I am a gamer, I'm a very frugal gamer. I always try to get the max for my dollar, but it seems I would have to essentially reinvest in my builds to make a 1440p monitor work. With this being the case, I may look at a tv at a higher resolution. I really do not have any complaints with my current tv and monitor, but like everyone I'm always looking to have better. It seems like right this minute the cost doesn't make sense for someone like me.

[hey]

think of it this way, it's like running antialiasing 24/7 without any way to turn it off without downscaling, thus making the picture look like shit or reducing the screen space filled by the image. be prepared to play around with settings and not run with some of the fancier ones for some games if you want to maintain 60+ FPS. when I said I'm not sure if I can recommend 1440p for a primarily gaming setting, I meant it. it ends up being a choice of a clearer, more workspace on-screen screen with some drawbacks in terms of overall fidelity, or a slightly less crisp, sometimes better looking (in terms of effects, shadows, etc.) experience at a higher framerate. 1440p really shines when it comes to productivity, desktop applications, and some game genres like MMO and RTS. the extra screen space gives more space for additional windows, easier access to tool trays and multiple workspaces, more space for UI elements (or smaller UI with more of the actual gamespace visible), and stuff like that. but again, could come at a cost. really comes down to the person and what you value in your viewing experience.

While this is true, i think it's really a no brainer even if it does end up being worse for some games. Certainly some games will give you problems, and you'll need to lower settings to the point where it looks worse. But the thing is, not all of them will. Tons of games will run just fine without a great gpu. For those you will definitely benefit. Not to mention, for non-gaming, where it's always a HUGE benefit. I had a 5770 when i first got my 1440p monitor, and don't regret it for a second, even though most modern games couldn't keep up very well at all.

Unless you literally do nothing but play games that your gpu is much too bad for at 1440p, then i think it's pretty much always worth it. And in that case, upgrade your damn gpu.

What kind of GPU setup would you need to reduce/eliminate those cons? I was under the impression that a 970 could handle a single monitor at 1440p + max settings on most games, considering some people run multiple 1080p monitors and don't seem to have to sacrifice much in the settings. Would a 980 do the job?

Yeah, 970 is more than enough for probably every game, at 60 fps. Something in the $200~ range is sufficient to make it not a serious issue, imo.

[Prothescar]

This page has several benchmarks for higher end GPUs on various games at 1440p and the highest settings they could get while achieving playable framerates (sometimes below 50). I run two 780s, so oftentimes I can run max or near max settings without dropping below 60 very often. But like I said, for some recent games (Shadows of Mordor, Inquisition come to mind right away) there are framedrops if everything is turned up to 11.

[Siya]

What kind of GPU setup would you need to reduce/eliminate those cons? I was under the impression that a 970 could handle a single monitor at 1440p + max settings on most games, considering some people run multiple 1080p monitors and don't seem to have to sacrifice much in the settings. Would a 980 do the job?

I haven't got to test much but so far I've played a couple games I can give you a little bit of an idea. WoW is easy, hell the 970 could do 4k DSR so no problem there. Shadow of Mordor I didn't expect to max , running at max (not including HD textures) I can hit 60fps when stuff isn't going on but it can drop to 40 so I turned some stuff down (shadows to high instead of ultra) to keep it at 60+. BF3 can be maxed np played a match with no issues. Overall it's very nice having such a big monitor and resolution. I mainly got it for MMOs but also play other games on the side.


970 G1 Gigabyte OCed to 1445. I could push it more with voltage increase, but so far it's doing good.

[Kalmado]

This page has several benchmarks for higher end GPUs on various games at 1440p and the highest settings they could get while achieving playable framerates (sometimes below 50). I run two 780s, so oftentimes I can run max or near max settings without dropping below 60 very often. But like I said, for some recent games (Shadows of Mordor, Inquisition come to mind right away) there are framedrops if everything is turned up to 11.

Quote from a recent build on Pcpartpicker.com: "The EVGA GTX 760 is a great card for the price. I tried out the older FarCry 3, and it does not even break a sweat running at ultra settings at 2560x1440." https://pcpartpicker.com/b/TKNNnQ

Do you buy it?