My shitty Samsung monitor that I was using as a secondary screen

And before anyone asks, the Samsung monitor is beyond fixing. I replaced all the caps with good quality Japanese ones 2 years ago the first time it broke, but this time the logic board is what's dead and there's nothing I can do for it.

Might as well ask here, what's a decent monitor for €150 or less?

I've been looking at the Asus VX239H-W, 23" IPS, it's 155 eurobucks

Is it good or are there better options for the money (or less money)?

>>51426105
I would def save up and buy a decent G-Sync monitor. I just got me the BenQ 1440p 144hz Freesync monitor and it is amazing. Be careful though because I think some G-Sync monitors only work between certain Hz. Same goes for Freesync. Mine is between 40 ~ 144hz.

>>51426392

So if a game runs at 30 fps, the monitor doesn't work?

>>51426483
The monitor will work but it will be like any other monitor running a game at 30 fps. Shit.

>>51426544

Is it really that noticeable when you go beyond 60 fps and all the way to 120 or 144?

>>51426604
Yes. Just because you get 80 ~ 120 fps in a game doesn't mean it is going to feel smooth. The only way for 100% smoothness without Free/G-sync is only if you run said game at lets say 120 fps. If you dip even 1 fps you will get tearing and stuttering. With Freesync/Gsync it removes all that. I play now play BF4 at 1440p with 60 ~ 100 fps and it feels as smooth as butter. I turned it off just to see the difference and it was awful.

File: fs2735-fs.png (318KB, 1228x900px) Image search: [Google]

318KB, 1228x900px

I wanted to buy a Freesync display ever since the tech came to the market, but none of them where 'quite right' in my book.
I wanted a 144Hz display, it has to be IPS, I'm quite sensitive to the viewing angles on TN displays, hell, I still do notice them on IPS.

Came across this a while back, and have been hyped about it for a few months now.

>QHD
>IPS with response times close to TN
>Freesync range of 35-144Hz (35-90 and 56-144Hz modes)
>Very low display lag
>Excellent warranty

>http://www.eizoglobal.com/products/foris/fs2735/index.html
>https://www.eizo.de/foris/fs2735/

>>51426932
I hear the Eizo panels for their monitors are from Sharp. The panels used in their displays are the ones that did not meet up to Sharps standards. So basically these are shit hand me down panels from Sharp.

also
>ips
enjoy your bleeding.

>>51427056
If it bleeds, you send it back and get your money back. Bleeding is poor construction, and I highly doubt I'll ever see that in a Eizo.

Not meet which standards? Their warranty includes a new panel if it has so much as a single bright subpixel in the first 6 months after purchase. Show me someone with a better warranty.

>>51427185
Hey I'm just saying that they are Sharp's hand-me-down panels. I don''t know what they passed and didn't pass.

>>51426392
Hmm. Since I cannot afford gsync, AND I have nvidia, should I either

a) stick with my 1080p 60fps until I can buy a 1440p 120Hz gsync ips panel for cheaper

B) get a 1440p ips 60Hz no sync anything in the mean time.

I have 970gtx and right now mostly use my computer for work.. i have two monitors and now am thinking of finding something with thinner bezle. 1440p for workspace over 1080p.

>>51427287
Personally I would wait and save. But that is just me being biased since I have already bought and experienced the monitor. There will always be more chances and new monitors that come out that could end up being cheaper and better.

>>51427204
You got any source for that? Their panels tend to be of a higher quality than what almost every other vendor offers.

>>51427287
Don't buy a QHD 60Hz display that doesn't even support your brand of adaptive sync. Save up for the Acer XB270HU (best QHD G-sync display), if you're interested in gaming performance, or a 4k display if you're interested in screen estate and a good picture.

>>51427407
Not even interested in 4k, since prices and just cards cant even handle untill you seriously invest, and I do 2 monitors. 4k video takes too much space also.

Im already concerned that my 720/1080p video on a 1440p monitor will look worse at the same displayed size of the video. (Real world size on the screen being the same). Or that I would have to run some games at 1080p anyways, which would look like shit even moreso on a 4k.

>>51427463
You don't run a game at lower than native resolution ever. That makes the image look like shit. Just turn down the one or other setting, but enjoy the crisp image.

>>51427463
There are 4K, FreeSync, IPS displays that come cheaper than these "high-end" "gaming" QHDs. Like the LG 27MU67. Trade off is refresh rate, but there's no connection to drive 4K @ 120Hz yet anyway.

>>51427734
Even if there was a cable for 4k 120hz you would have to buy triple 980 Ti or Fury X to even get close to that.

>>51427764
Yes, true enough.

Good monitor for PC Gaming/movies? maybe some PS4 gaming too

im looking for good quality here.

>>51427837
How good? >>51426932 is the best money can get you.
Other than that, look for a display that fits your needs and has low input lag. Friend of mine just ordered a Iiyama XB2783HSU, best QHD Freesync display for the budget.

>http://www.prad.de/new/monitore/test/2014/test-iiyama-xb2783hsu-b1-teil9.html#Fazit

>>51426604
For me, yes. Desktop use is also a nicer experience with 144hz. Some game genres are more noticeable than others-- for example, a twitchy FPS will be a lot more noticeable than a third person RPG.

>>51427908

The Ezio hanst been release yet.

also im looking for a PS4 solution too, so no QHD, the image. will be upscaled.

>>51426932
Have you looked into the Asus MG279Q?
I'm looking to get the same panel rather soon.

Not OP, but how is this monitor? I want QHD and IPS, but I wish this was >60hz

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00P0EQD1Q?*Version*=1&*entries*=0

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B00X9FBM6E/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1634&creative=19450&creativeASIN=B00X9FBM6E&linkCode=as2&tag=recommendedmonitors-21

is this good? VA panel, 27 and 1080, im aming for console gaming.

>>51426932
>>51426304
>>51427287

You don't really need IPS. I just turn up the contrast ratio on my TN panel a little
looks about the same to me

>>51428684
Don't speak for others. Different people have different colour perception.
Some people don't notice how the colours on a TN display shift from top to bottom. Personally, I still occasionally notice the colour shift on IPS, even though it's that much weaker.
What you're suggesting is akin to colour-blind person saying: 'You don't need a colour display, a grey one looks about the same to me'.

File: 1444499936979.jpg (5KB, 200x179px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 200x179px

>>51428742
>buttmad ips fags rationalizing their wasted money
every time

>>51427734
May get a free sync ips 1440p then 60Hz is fine its the change in frame rate that I notice, even 25fps looks fine but if it keeps dropping to 23 or up to 27 then I notice, I hope lower res video wont look even worse by much.

Just need small bezel... and hopefully the same company makes an identical looking monitor, thats maybe just IPS 1440p without freesync for a bit cheaper... No point in both monitors being gamer.

>>51428684
Possibly not I've never used one, I know I need a monitor that had the mounts in the back though for proper dual display mounting. Especially if it isn't IPS, because then I need it more well angled.

>>51428906
you don't need to mount anything if you don't want to.

>>51429008
My current ones arent and they are dissimilar brands so I have a book under one..lame.

Maybe if the included base is very good I dont need the mount screws

>>51428684
...Is this true /g/?
is IPS just a meme?

>>51430604
Unless you do photoshop professionally, or plan to have many people view the screen from many angles especially verticle, yeah I'd say its a bit of a waste.