PC Master Race 4k Gaming Monitor

[Wij]

I feel the need for one for Christmas but I don't know which.

Help me.

 

[ECA]

I would recommend going for a 34" 21:9 monitor over 4k honestly.
I was having this discussion with a friend the other day actually, the tldr is

DX9 games w/ shit AA or console ports: 4k.
Action/3rd person games: 34" 21:9
Sim racing/flight/space: VR ( Vive allegedly december 8th ordering ).

 

[ECA]

Oh and first person shooters, a 144hz panel should be priority over anything else.

 

[Wij]

Was looking at ones with GSync. Hoping for 27/28" tbh.

The main reason for 4K is that I'm spoiled by phones and my Mac. 1080p just looks blocky on a 24" monitor now. Not so much for games but just in general. Yes, I'm being a poncey prick but indulge me.

 

[Wij]

This says 144:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Acer-Predat...&qid=1446419509&sr=8-1&keywords=acer+predator

Taking a bit of a punt with build quality on Acer but any thoughts on it?

 

[Wij]

This says 144:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Acer-Predat...&qid=1446419509&sr=8-1&keywords=acer+predator

Taking a bit of a punt with build quality on Acer but any thoughts on it?

Ah, wrong res. D'oh.

 

[Wij]

Just read somewhere that 4K and 144Hz don't exist together at the moment. Is this true?

 

[soze]

I would watch some of the monitor videos by Linus Tech Tips. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL8mG-RkN2uTx1lbFS8z8wRYS3RrHCp8TG he goes over a lot of your options as well as saying why a G Sync 1080p might be the sweep spot. A gaming monitor should 100% have G Sync as it is meant to be the bollocks. But to run at 4k with G Sync on Ultra settings you are talking a 980 TI level card. If you have one not a problem

 

[caLLous]

Just read somewhere that 4K and 144Hz don't exist together at the moment. Is this true?

I don't think so, yet. It only just exists at 3440x1440:


There isn't a not-stupidly-expensive graphics card setup that can run 4k anywhere near 144Hz yet.

 

[Wij]

I would watch some of the monitor videos by Linus Tech Tips. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL8mG-RkN2uTx1lbFS8z8wRYS3RrHCp8TG he goes over a lot of your options as well as saying why a G Sync 1080p might be the sweep spot. A gaming monitor should 100% have G Sync as it is meant to be the bollocks. But to run at 4k with G Sync on Ultra settings you are talking a 980 TI level card. If you have one not a problem

I could run my newer games at 1080p @ 144Hz and use the 4K for older games and anything not-gaming.

 

[caLLous]

A gaming monitor should 100% have G Sync as it is meant to be the bollocks.

Err, unless you have an AMD card.

 

[Exioce]

I would watch some of the monitor videos by Linus Tech Tips. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL8mG-RkN2uTx1lbFS8z8wRYS3RrHCp8TG he goes over a lot of your options as well as saying why a G Sync 1080p might be the sweep spot. A gaming monitor should 100% have G Sync as it is meant to be the bollocks. But to run at 4k with G Sync on Ultra settings you are talking a 980 TI level card. If you have one not a problem

Two of those more like, and even then it's just enough. You're still looking at switching to medium, and low for games in a couple of years time.
Just fitted a 980ti OC and I've since decided against the 4k G-Sync monitor @Wij was looking at.
Ultra-wide or 1440p 144Hz G-Sync I reckon.

 

[Wij]

Err, unless you have an AMD card.

I don't

 

[caLLous]

I don't

Yeah, but he said "A gaming monitor should 100% have G Sync" which is misleading.

And anyway (in passing), the Fury X is now as fast as or faster than the 980 Ti (at stock) and better value.

 

[soze]

Yeah, but he said "A gaming monitor should 100% have G Sync" which is misleading.

And anyway (in passing), the Fury X is now as fast as or faster than the 980 Ti (at stock) and better value.

But I said that in response to a question which had already mentioned G Sync. So G Sync should be looked at as a higher priority than 4K on a gaming monitor. Which I still think is true.

 

[soze]

I could run my newer games at 1080p @ 144Hz and use the 4K for older games and anything not-gaming.

Running anything at non native resolution make me sad Could you go for a dual monitor set up with a Gaming monitor and a 4K for productivity?

 

[Wij]

Running anything at non native resolution make me sad Could you go for a dual monitor set up with a Gaming monitor and a 4K for productivity?

Exactly half native should look OK shouldn't it? Dual-monitors make me sad :/

 

[ECA]

How do you use less than 3 monitors?

 

[Wij]

How do you use less than 3 monitors?

By not being a nob.

 

[soze]

Exactly half native should look OK shouldn't it? Dual-monitors make me sad :/

I think I would go for the middle ground and run a 1440 G Sync monitor at native for both games and productivity. Try to find some reviews about a 4k monitor that is scaled down to 1080p first and see if they handle it well.

 

[ECA]

There isn't a not-stupidly-expensive graphics card setup that can run 4k anywhere near 144Hz yet.

The 5k dell works by using 2 displayport cables to get the bandwidth, the 5k mac has 2 internal adapters and runs at 1440p by default, unless you set it to native 5k. ( not recommended cuz of the mobile gpu luls ).

You could get 144hz 4k by using 2 displayport cables in the same fashion, but nobodies done it yet.
Single displayport is getting 160hz in the new gsync monitors at 3440x1440, so it's definitely doable w/ 2 displayports for 4k.


@Wij - what games do you mostly play? And what is your price range?

 

[ECA]

I think I would go for the middle ground and run a 1440 G Sync monitor at native for both games and productivity. Try to find some reviews about a 4k monitor that is scaled down to 1080p first and see if they handle it well.

Ofc they scale down pretty well, as long as you're going to a 16:9 aspect ratio res it's all good.
I scale mine down ocassionally - some games suck dick at 4k support ( game scales great, ui doesn't, so it's all unreadable ), triple monitor for racing - can't run mixed res 4k+2x1080p sides, or 2x4k+1x1080p sides, so I run it at triple 1080p.

 

[old.user4556]

Two things:

- what is 144Hz, why would I care, and what do I need it?
- recommend me a 34" 21:9 monitor, I want to spunk cash, this looks nice and reviews well (primary use Photoshop, secondary FPS games)

 

[Raven]

More hz more frames!

Not specifically though but higher refresh rate, so if your PC is flinging out say 120fps you will be able to see it. Quite a lot of monitors are 60 hz so regardless of what your PC is flinging out you will only hit 60fps.

 

[old.user4556]

More mhz more frames!

Not specifically though but higher refresh rate

So 60 FPS isn't enough?

 

[Raven]

See edit, premature ejaculation.

 

[Moriath]

So 60 FPS isn't enough?

For serious fps players they think that more FPS means they see threats sooner and react quicker than someone on 60 as you see the action quicker.

For most people 60 is fine.

 

[Raven]

What?

No, it makes it smoother. 120 > 90 > 60 > consolescrubsfps...obviously

You can and will notice the difference the higher you go, especially in FPS/driving games, or any game that is fast moving.

 

[old.user4556]

Cool, thanks - sounds like something I don't need.

 

[ECA]

Two things:

- what is 144Hz, why would I care, and what do I need it?
- recommend me a 34" 21:9 monitor, I want to spunk cash, this looks nice and reviews well (primary use Photoshop, secondary FPS games)

60hz = 60 maximum frames per second.
144hz = 144 maximum frames per second.

Where they really shine is high motion where they feel so much better.
A good example is an action game - look at the background/periphery and move the camera around fast, it'll look/feel jerky even at 60hz, at 144hz everything is much clearer when in motion.



The 21:9 ones do not do 144hz just FYI.

Acer have some new "gaming" 21:9s that support higher refresh rates - claim to OC to 100hz via the on screen display settings, no faffing required.

If you have an AMD card:
http://www.scan.co.uk/products/34-a...r-3440x1440-75hz-4ms-300cd-m-100m1-tilt-dp-md

If you have an nvidia card:
http://www.scan.co.uk/products/34-a...r-ips-60hz-3440x1440-4ms-10001-tilt-dp-hdmi-u

Yes the nvidia one is £200 more - that's because the gsync uses an additional hardware component AND nvidia charge because it's proprietary.
Freesync was adopted into the displayport standard, and requires no additional hardware, so uh yeah.
Same way SLI motherboards are £20 more, because nvidia charge for it, while crossfire is free, so standard on most boards.

They use the same panels as the LG, but they have different bezels/inputs/etc blahblah, main advantage is higher refresh rates.

If you intend to run @144hz and wont get fps drops, then you can just buy the amd even if you have nvidia.

Biggest caveat with 21:9 or 4k monitors - YOU MUST HAVE A DISPLAYPORT CONNECTION ON YOUR GRAPHICS CARD.
AMD have had them for a while for quite a few gens, but some nvidia manufacturers don't put them on, make sure you check, otherwise you can't run them at the correct refresh rates



tldr, if you're not a CSGO/BF4/Cod wannabe pro gaymer, you probably don't need the framerates and the LG you linked will do just fine