Buying 2k/4k monitors refresh rate's not important, don't

UP3216

>>56203841

https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B016WD1RSC/ref=psdc_428652031_t3_B00N9PW01K

not so bad price-wise. What exactly should I be looking out for when checking monitors? The only issues I know of are screen-tearing and dead-pixels. Should I be looking for the cheapest monitor that doesn't have lots of notable feedback mentioning these issues, or are there other things that factor in?

https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/B00JEZTC3I/ref=mp_s_a_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1471839066&sr=8-3&pi=SX200_QL40&keywords=8k+monitor&dpPl=1&dpID=41o65TIO5jL&ref=plSrch

>>56203807
Screen tearing has to do with VSync, or lack thereof rather. It doesn't have anything at all to do with any particular monitor model or brand.

First you should decide on the physical size of the screen, though I wouldn't go below 27" for 4K. Lower screen size means more pixel density (better image quality), a larger monitor is obviously larger, but has worse pixel density. Decide what you want. It's basically extra sharp vs. extra big.
Then decide on the panel type you want. Avoid TN because image quality is the worst. You probably want to go with IPS or something like that.
Watch out for various issues like bad QC, bad backlight bleed, etc.
Also make sure you get a screen that has either HDMI 2.0 or DP 1.2, or both and isn't some MST crap. The very early 4K monitors were tiled displays, as in you'd have 1 actual monitor but each half of it would act like a separate screen because graphics cards/display connections couldn't handle 4K @ 60Hz on 1 screen, so the monitor would pretend to be made up of 2 smaller ones in order to get 60Hz. This is no longer required nowadays and you shouldn't buy one of the old monitors that did this shit.

I personally use a LG 27MU67, 4K 60Hz IPS screen, factory calibrated, comes with FreeSync too. It's gorgeous and I'm very happy with it.

Is there any way I can look at these monitors first-hand before I buy? I'm from Dublin and don't think we have any hardware shops that would have 4k monitors on display. It's not really that i don't trust products on Amazon but it might be better to see them compared with my own eyes rather than videos on youtube or something.

>>56203945
dear God that's cheap

>>56204051
thanks anon. I must be thinking of something else then, not screen tearing. I remember hearing cheaper monitors can flicker on refreshing. Whatever it is, I'm sure I'll come across the name some time over the next while.

The P2415Q from Dell is pretty great for about $380.
Being only 24" gives it a super sharp picture that isn't TV huge.
The colors are nice and it has good viewing angles since it's an ips panel.
Its stand has height, tilt, rotation and orientation adjustment that is easy to use.


Honestly the main feature is getting all those pixels in a fairly high quality ips for under $400.

I have noticed in general that smaller sized, higher pixel density screens are cheaper than their 27" or 32+" counterparts.

>>56203807
You do realize that 144hz isn't just for gaymz? Having a higher refresh rate improves your overall desktop experience. It's much better to invest in 1440p 144hz because you will get desktop space + everything looks butter smooth.

>>56203807
Doesn't Dell have a 4k Ultrasharp for ~$500?

>>56204533

What gfx cards can even handle 1440p 144hz? i didnt even think the 1080 could.

>>56204635
I would invest in a 1440p if I didn't exclusively use it for gaming. The amount of extra desktop space compared to 1080p is crazy. I'm pretty sure that the current top-of-the-line GPU can handle it.

>>56203807
Try your luck with crossover 4k monitors on eBay. I tried the Acer Predator 32 inch at microcenter, very nice monitor, but it's $1200+. Personally I have the PB287q but wish I could of got a 32 inch.