Monitors

>>57527730
>4k 60hz TN panel

>1440p 144hz IPS panel

>>57527730
That Samsung is a TN panel.
That Acer is an IPS.

That Samsung will violently explode.
That Acer will nonviolently explode when the warranty is up.

>>57527730
>shitty inbetween resolution that is hard to run at a decent framerate
>shitty inbetween resolution that is hard to run at a usable framerate

Good luck OP.


As for the price the Acer has the gaymen tax.

>>57527831
>this is what people on /g/ actually believe

File: 1471334951574.png (223KB, 320x447px) Image search: [Google]

223KB, 320x447px

>>57527854
>he actually bought a monitor in a shitty inbetween resolution

>>57527831
So, I should just stick with a high-end 1080p display? That's kind of what I was leaning towards after a few days of reading online. Is 4k just a ruse at this point that's not really necessary?

>>57528092
no. getting a 1080p monitor in 2016 is retarded

>>57528092
It depends what you want.

>>57528123
Elucidate for me then, sir. Should I get a low-price 4k display? I'm looking to spend around $500

>>57528123
I vehemently disagree. 1080P monitor and GTX 1070 is perfect right now! Max everything. Feels good!

Only reason you should be thinking of 4K is work stuff, Blu-Rays, and PS Pro/Xbox S/Scorpio.

4yrs from now 4K is going to be so cheap! Wait.

>>57528189
Get a 1440p IPS but don't fall for the 144hz meme which is what drives the price up. 1440p looks great with games, and the extra space is amazing for everyday computing. Having for example Discord, a web browser and IRC up on the screen tiled at all times is not an issue at all.

Don't listen to inbetween shitters, the 1440p gives you actual improved screen real estate while a 4k screen will require you to scale everything up - which can occasionally be an unpleasant experience. You end up with less or as much real estate than 1440p.

>>57528259
Thanks for this response.

>>57528259
>>57528123
>resolution over motion clarity
K, pleb.

>>57528301
Your 1060 can't even do most games in 1440p.

1080p on a 4K monitor looks just the same as 1080p on a 1080p monitor because there is no down sampling involved.

Op here. Looking at the difference between TN and IPS monitors

There are ips 4k monitors in your price-range.
Get them.

>>57528440
TN monitors are shit
they have higher refresh rates but that's it
only dumb /v/ fags buy them.

IPS has better colors and viewing angles

>>57528411
No, it'll look worse because there's space between the pixels

>>57528633
No, you're retarded and I think you should leave this board and go outside.

So, what's a really good IPS 1440p monitor out there? Price around 300€.

>>57528865
No one

>>57528898
There is one, I know it.

Are curved monitors a meme?

>>57527865
Anime is 720p
Enjoy your 1.5x scaling 1080cuck

>>57528663
He's right, 4K has much thinner interpolation, much less "screen door" than 1080p

>>57528865
check out Qnix monitors

>>57527730

The 4K is a standard TN while the Acer is one of those 144hz IPS ones.

>2016 not consider 2560x1080

>2016 not consider 2560x1440

>2016 not consider 2506x1280

>2016 not consider 3440x1440

>2016 not consider 2016x2016

best monitor under 200usd?? My 2007 monitor finally died out and I need some help

>>57530422
Any 1080p IPS should be around your budget. Just get a decent brand.

Op here again. Alright. After some guidance from the anons and a few hours of looking, the configuration I want will be ips, 1080p and height-adjustable. I'm a normie so I need something with audio on it as well, since some don't have it. Still unsure whether a 5-7 ms delay will be bad for me though -- maybe that aspect is negligible

>>57529169
Yeah, but they're nice looking, use them for the living room if you're into them.

Keep in mind scaling a 1080p game/video to 4K won't fuck up any pixels since its 200%

As for the price different, I would say that is mostly on the capacity/demand to manufacter each type of panel.
4K is the next logical standard after 1080p and that is where all the manufactering is and so the race to the bottom pushes prices down.
Meanwhile the 1440p is becoming more niche every passing day.

You can get 4K IPS monitors, but I don't believe any exist beyond 60hz right now

>>57530182
Second this

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01BMES072/ref=pe_171560_215444170_em_1p_0_ti?th=1

how would i set this up with my tower?

looking to replace my current shit monitor

just wondering what connection memes ill need

File: 61Fwa004pSL._SL1500_.jpg (69KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 1000x1000px

While were on the subject of monitors

Is this worth it if your budget is around $250?

>>57532727
Oops,

Forget link
https://www.amazon.com/VG248QE-1920x1080-DisplayPort-Ergonomic-Back-lit/dp/B00B2HH7G0?tag=logicaincrem-20

>>57530993
>I'm a normie so I need something with audio on it as well
Built in monitor speakers are pretty much guaranteed to be ultra-crap. The $5 USB speakers you can buy are better.

File: +.jpg (178KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 1920x1080px

https://www.amazon.com/Acer-K272HUL-bmiidp-27-inch-Widescreen/dp/B00JB6HCIC
I can get this of about 180 is it good

>>57532727
>>57532740

I've got one and love it to death. Yeah its 1080p, yeah its TN, but its a very solid monitor for how cheap it is. I remember going over to a friends house, seeing how smooth games looked at 144hz and knowing I needed to buy one and got the same model he had (the vg248qe) the next week.

Out of the box the colors are total shit, google search will come up with some good color settings.

>>57532926
takes up extremely valuable table space on my tiny table that is all I can fit in a tiny room that I all I can get

people are still considering buying 1440p monitors? it's almost 2017. it's been 4 and a half years since mainstream computers started offering higher pixel densities.

>>57532957
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA4SR1WV1728

Small speaker will fit under your screen. They are bad, but still better than the built-in stuff.

>>57532995
well thanks alot trip dude

>>57532970
But where are the 4K high Hz?

>>57529347
>He doesn't download bluray rips of his anime.
>He watches horriblesubs

>>57533034
there are tons of 4k 60Hz monitors. what are you looking for? 120Hz? 144? what for? gaming? grow up.

File: BaitLoli.png (389KB, 603x991px) Image search: [Google]

389KB, 603x991px

>>57533184

>>57533216
>stop playing games
>s-s-stop baiting and triggering meeee!!

>>57533184
>Doesn't appreciate higher refresh rates while navigating the OS

>>57533237
i spend most of my time typing and reading text. i honestly don't pay attention to (or maybe even enable) all these horse shit animations you seem to prize so highly that you'll suffer a lower density screen to keep it.

and you're creating this false dichotomy where 60Hz is suddenly shit for anything moving. the perceptual difference between 60 and 120 is WAY smaller than the perceptual difference between 30 and 60.

stop trying to rationalize your gaymen monitor. it looks childish

>>57533257
>y-yeah
>t-the human eye can only see 24fps anyway

>>57533314
that's not what i said, you hilariously stupid oaf. i said that the marginal perceptual difference between 60 and 120 is significantly lower than the difference between 30 and 60, and that you're creating a false dichotomy by making it out like 120Hz is necessary to see desktop animations as fluid.

>>57533034
4K at consumer friendly prices is quite new. Even IPS+1440p+144Hz has only been widely available in the last 2 years.

>>57533323
>making it out like 120Hz is necessary to see desktop animations as fluid
That is not what he said either, you hilariously stupid oaf.

File: Screen Shot 2016-11-15 at 6.41.18 PM.png (227KB, 1374x1094px) Image search: [Google]

227KB, 1374x1094px

>>57533323
also here. a study that compared 3, 7, 15, 30, and 60 frames per second and people's performance at those frame rates (with stacked resolutions). the slop approaches 0 as you reach 60. i'm not saying it hits 0 ever, but the slope from 30 to 60 is almost certainly more steep than the slope from 60 to 120 would be.

>>57533364
he made that claim earlier, that 120 is nice for seeing desktop animations. don't jump in late without reading the context.

>>57533388
>is necessary
>is nice
Nice backtracking. And I agree with the other guy: 120+ IS nice. Do you deny it?

>>57533405
i called it a weak rationalization for someone who wants to play video games. higher pixel density is much nicer than higher frame rates as long as we're talking about work that predicates on things like text (which i would think is most of /g/, but maybe i'm wrong and you're all aspiring professional league of legends players)

>>57527730
the samsuck is probably tn panel.
don't do it.
don't get the acer either.
http://pcpartpicker.com/products/monitor/#r=384002160,256001440&sort=a8&p=1

also wait for nigger friday.

>>57532391
A cable?

>>57533437
Who would take quality over FPS

>>57533646
people who work for a living
so i guess like maybe 1% of /g/

Is there still a hack to make Freesync monitors work with Nvidia cards? I don't want to pay the Goysync tax.
If not, what's the best cheap 144hz monitor?

Is there anything wrong with https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00KO4518I ?

>>57533656
>Implying people who work don't also use a home computer

>>57532970
1440 @ 27" has 110 dpi

whats the fucking point of going higher?

>>57534468
for sharper text.

how do people still not understand this?

>>57533646
I bought a 144Hz TN panel about 4 years ago to see what the hype was.
It was fantastic, no more ghosting, fluid actions
>But a completely washed out image that couldn't be calibrated any better than my IPS as the time, plus holy fucking shit the colour shift on corners
I sold it the next day, not joking.
Some people would rather have true, vibrant colours than throw everything away for FPS.

because the acer is g-sync and that adds $400, not sure why tho

>>57534547
Proprietary hardware/software.

>>57534479
that's what cleartype is for

stop using shit-butt-ass linux text rendering

>>57527730
A 27-inch and 24-inch LG 4K IPS freesync monitors are on sale on buydig for less than $400. Get one of these instead.

https://slickdeals.net/share/android_app/fp/236015

>>57534575
Windows font rendering looks like shit compared to Ubuntu's. Even without a hidpi screen.

I see monitor threads a lot now, so here.

1) every fucking number besides resolution and to a human physically visible properties is a goddamn lie
2) resolution is ideally between 80-120 dpi, unless you press your face up to a monitor you will need to scale to have any comfort using it if its any higher, wasting real estate you gain through a higher resolution and demands more of hardware to run
3) contrast is everything, it is THE ONLY aspect in modern monitors that are not el cheapo 50$ or less models that effects oh good the monitor looks.
4) 120/144hz in normal tasks is CLEARLY visible, I had a 60 and 144 hooked up next to each other, and its shocking how choppy 60 hz is even at moving a window around.
5) for gaming, free/g sync is king, on same 144hz it advertised down to 30 as a minimum, in reality it worked down to 18, possibly lower but we couldn't downclock the gpu further. even at 18, you would think the game felt like hell to play, it didn't, the responsive ness was clearly as good as when the monitor was going at 144hz, this is something you need to take my word for as you will never fully believe it till you feel it yourself.
6) the human eye is able to accurately distinguish objects at 300fps, and its thought the perceivable fps is just shy of 500 if you are not physically disabled
7) Having one the the best non pro ips displays, and a tn, I will tell you the brightness shift when not looking dead on is still there, the only difference between tn and ips is the color doesn't shift, it still kills contrast completely.

Contrast > 120/144 = free/g sync >>>>> tn/ips >>>>>>>>> resolution higher then sweet spot

In that order is the importance of each aspect.
if you have the choice between only high fps or sync, the decision comes down to what will you primarily do gaming goes sync everything else goes fps

Remember, READ REAL REVIEWS, not press releases

>>57534479
move your nose away from the screen, you will need to clean it less.

>>57529347
>Anime is 720p
My anime is not 720p

Plus I interpolate all my Chinese cartoons to 144hz desu. Takes an ass load of GPU power to analyze each frame and estimate where moving objects should be for the newly created in between frames but it's worth it.

>>57534647
Had someone before tell me a 3000:1 contrast was worse then his 1000:1 5k, and it took me a while to find a non press release review, it turned out his monitor was 800:1 at best, and the 5k one was 1200:1

REMEMBER EVERY NUMBER A COMPANY SAYS IS A BOLD FACED LIE

>>57533158
>>57534661

anime can be '1080p' on a blu ray all it wants, compare the 720 rip to the 1080 for almost any anime and it turns out its native 720 and they scaled it up for the 1080.

>>57534647
I don't know of a single async monitor that isn't 120hz at least, vast majority is 144hz now

>>57534688
>tfw flatpanels don't do budget monitor reviews anymore

their excellent reviews helped a lot when choosing my current one. I feel like I'm getting a lot out of it for a 5 year old TN panel.

>>57534694
a number of lower end panels have sync and cap out at 60hz, personally, I only game windowed and sync doesn't work that way so id go for higher refresh, but its still an extreme budget option.

personally, if you aren't going to stick 300-400$ into something you will use for a good 5+ years, why bother?

>>57533257
>the perceptual difference between 60 and 120 is WAY smaller than the perceptual difference between 30 and 60.

While you are right about 60Hz be fine for slow moving objects it's complete dogshit for anything going faster than a retard scrolling very slowly though text.

You don't have to be a fucking fighter jet pilot to see the difference between 60 and 120 http://www.testufo.com/

>i honestly don't pay attention to (or maybe even enable) all these horse shit animations you seem to prize so highly

Let me guess, you're so cool you don't even use a GUI right? Console or bust?

>>57533323
>difference between 60 and 120 is significantly lower than the difference between 30 and 60

Lets do the math on that one

120hz-60hz=60hz difference
60hz-30hz=30hz difference

I love how it's always people who say they don't own/have never used/have no use for a 120hz monitor shitting on it.

Upgrading from a 24 inch 1080p/60hz monitor, would it better to go for an ultrawide 2560x1080 or a 1440p normal aspect? I only have an 8gb rx 480 so 1440p/144hz isn't really an option and I don't need that high fps

>>57533379
What was the sample size of the test group, and when exactly in the 1980's was this test conducted?

>>57534924
144hz monitors have benefits at 60fps too

>>57534949
Don't even bother.
The test only goes to 60, which everyone would have been running, essentially, so 60 is the highest and thus 0.

>>57534967
Yes and no. Low GtG times have benefits at all FPS.

>>57534992
there will also be less jitter/tearing due to game/monitor desync

>>57534920
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delta_timing

>>57534479
I don't know you'd think they would have figured it out by now. 1080p is terrible for text at my preferred screen size. 1440p is adequate. With a larger screen I would go for 4K. I really don't want to go back to 60hz but I enjoy the fuck out of my 0.00005 point font sizes, which 4K accommodates very well.

>>57534920
120hz = 8.33ms
60hz = 16.67ms
30hz = 33.33ms

33.33 - 16.67 = 16.66
16.67 - 8.33 = 8.34

>>57534920
Numerical versus perceived.

File: lollygagging.png (4KB, 208x49px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 208x49px

>>57534575
Oh cleartype works great, just magically fucking makes more pixels for small text. Look how great it works, pic related.

>>57527730
>1) Why is the 1440p Acer monitor $800 while the 4k Samsung monitor is only $370?

Because the Acer monitor says gaming on it. Therefore dumb gamers will think it's better and therefore pay way more for it.

>>57535108
Why are your fonts so small?

>>57535108
You wouldn't be able to read text of that size in print either. So why give a shit?

Looking for a 34" curved Ultrawide monitor (3440x1440) that looks sleek and is above 60hz. Closest thing I've come across is this http://www.lg.com/au/it-monitors/lg-34UC98 but it's 60hz (OC to like 72hz) and costs a fucking arm and a leg.

Is there any similar, cheaper alternatives that don't look like utter shit?

>>57528633
Pixel gap gap gap pixel right?

File: this asshole.png (122KB, 2000x534px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 2000x534px

>>57535168
Well here is the reason why.

>>57535108
Look, I get it, you want to win an argument when you are wrong. Why? Fuck knows what went through your retarded head, but let's make this clear, you zooming out to 33% of the browser and taking a screenshot will never make the text better, its 33% of i'm assuming 1080p and it makes the text 4 pixels high, you want to know what 100% would be on 4k? fucking 10 pixels. want to know what 100% is at 1080p, again, 10 fucking pixels. you zoom it into 33% again and it isn't fucking magically making it look good.

>>57528865
The Dell ones are really good.

>PC gamers still not using HDR displays like PS4 Pro gamers do

Enjoy your subpar pc gaming experience

File: 1478035345034.png (53KB, 256x256px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 256x256px

>>57535721
am i suppose to laugh at posts like these or report them?

>>57535772
Are you aware of the format war between HDR10 and Dolby Vision?

>>57535848
HRD and Dolby vision largely doesn't matter one bit.

Contrast is king, and all hdr content I have seen has had saturation fucked with to a MASSIVE extent, something i do not want.

>>57535891
Oh boy, i imagine in a few years youll buy an HDR monitor once they start making them. Its a huge upgrade in PQ, almost as big as going from black and white to color. You should look into it a bit more before you decide you're going to reject something that is going to change the landscape of displays

>>57527730
are you retarded?

File: IMG_20161116_001607.jpg (1MB, 4160x3120px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 4160x3120px

I have a 4k samsung monitor in 24" (U24E590) and an older lg 23" in 1080p (IPS235). The 4k monitor is pretty much only usable at at 1080p screen space. I bought it because I wanted a high dpi display and it satisfies at 200% scale. 100% scale is usable but very uncomfortable.

For gaming, you probably want something with a higher refresh rate though. 4K is awesome but that resolution only supports 60 hz max with current display port limitations (AKAIK). 1440p at 144 hz is probably better but it doesn't scale as nicely if a lot of your content is 1080p as 1080p content scales linearly on a 4k monitor (with the added bonus of virtually no "screen door" effect) but will have to use interpolation on a 1440p panel and may not look good.

Also, my samsung is PLS, not TN. I believe the monitor in OP is also PLS since it's the same as what I have but larger.

I read the wiki and this Acer fits my needs for some light gaming and regular everyday use.
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0148NNKTC/ref=pd_lpo_147_bs_lp_t_2?ie=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=498QGRMPZBRESJPX2P5Q
Is there anything under $200 better than this?

File: serveimage(5).jpg (47KB, 740x416px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 740x416px

>>57535891
>contrast is king

>>57527730
retard

>>57535918

you know, here
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Ytii58V5V0

this is a best case scenario for hdr, and it still comes out on the shit end. the saturation on the hdr is completely fucked, I do not want that shit, and if I have to actively avoid hdr content because of it so be it, however, note the contrast, if the one on the hdr was not fucked with it would win because of that contrast alone.

>>57535998
do you have any understanding of what hdr is on a tv? because I don't. It sounds like it is 10bit - 12bit video... ok, I get that, but then they always show hdr next to non hdr and hdrs contrast is blown the fuck out every goddamn time.

See, if it was JUST 10bit, then you would never see a difference between left tv and right tv outside of their contrast on a monitor that isn't 10 bit and shot with a camera that likely isn't 10 bit, they would just look identical because if i remember right 10 bit adds 3 extra color gradients in between each color we are use to, and 12 bit is 15 colors in between.

Having worked in 10 bit color with a 10 bit capable monitor, you will never notice the difference in color between 8 bit and 10 bit unless you break 8 bit, as in you have a shitty codec and banding occurs, how often do you notice banding? Ill tell you right now having a 8bit tn display, and the normal windows 7 wallpaper which should show banding like a motherfucker, you just don't see it unless the person was retarded in their encode or editing.

contrast will always be the number 1 thing that determines image quality, professional applications have a use for higher bit depth, but it is not the number 1 thing you look for in a normal monitor or tv, contrast is.

>>57536154
>on hdr and hdrs contrast is blown the fuck out every goddamn time.

fucked up there, saturation is blown out, not contrast... that said, mad max fury road 10 bit is fucking ruined due to them fucking with the contrast bad.

>>57528259
There's a noticeable difference between a 144hz and 60hz monitor, it's not just hype

>>57536154
You are thinking of the wrong HDR with the oversaturation of colors. This is new tech.

Your current monitor is probably an sRGB monitor where each pixel can be in a range of 1-256 colors of red green blue. This new HDR10 allows for 1024 colors of RGB, a much wider color gamut. It also has a huge difference in brightness per pixel. Say there is a scene of the sun shining. You will literally squint because the brightness will go up high enough on those pixels if displayed in HDR10 or Dolby Vision. This is not the fake HDR with the color oversaturation

>>57536318
No, I am right with the 8 bit (2^8) vs 10 bit (2^10) and dolby vision 12 bit (2^12) which is 256 1024 and 4096 respectively.

now, if you are talking about that effect, lets say in games, where you walk into a really dark area and everything is to dark to see, or you walk out into a bright area and everything is to bright to see (yea, I know its a real world effect, but games have the effect and its on a monitor) now if you are telling me that this effect is going to come to video... well what a great reason to never get an hdr monitor/tv as that effect is fucking garbage.

Now if you are talking about an oled display, where the oleds emit their own light, so if something is black, its actually black and if something is bright, its actually bright and they can be right next to each other, that is contrast.

Oh, and just to point this out, I have seen an oled tv, fuck me do I want one just for a monitor because it actually has the color black, not some dark grey that bleeds light, That is what makes a screen look good... getting rid of banding in shitty encodes is a side bonus.

>>57536416
The high end samsung and sony LED tvs are pretty close as getting the blacks blacker as with the OLEDs. You are obviously not going to convert today but once you start seeing the huge PQ differences, you will come around

>>57536416
Also, until then, enjoy your lightbleeding pc monitor while i play my HDR10 4k PS4 Pro

>>57536509
Literally all that matters is contrast, I keep saying this, and having used 10 bits for a long time too, there is no single thing that matters more than contrast.

oleds/sed/quantum dots are really the only things that will give you a massive fuck off upgrade to contrast.

and if you are talking about dynamic led matrixes... never use dynamic contrast, its shit for far different reasons.

>>57536553
you are a special kind of stupid.

>>57536557
Im literally using quantum dot samsung ks8000 hdr10 4k ps4 pro gaming master race

>>57536154
(((HDR))) is a stupid meme that covers wider gamut and larger contrast, which together means 8 bit colours will start banding pretty bad, so you need a higher bit depth to support it, that's pretty much it

normies don't understand that shit so they have to show some garish oversaturated bullshit to sell it, of course nobody in the real world will actually enjoy seeing that shit so it will flop, hopefully they'll make some actually good wide gamut displays after that for informed users to buy

>>57528865
BenQ BL2420PT
>250euros
>IPS
>QHD
>23.8in
>even has speakers and I think USB hub
If I had the money I would buy it, I'm still thinking of buying it for myself on christmas, this is fucking hard for me

>>57536607
>googled ks8000 color banding
>Nobody has issues with it

>>57536645
Also forgot to mention 5ms GtG

>>57529169
Past 50 inches they are nice

Pc curved monitors are ultimate meme

>>57536655
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colour_banding

the only time you see color banding is on bargain bin sub 100$ lcds or in really shitty encodes, that tv is a 10 bit display, and should never really show banding,

>>57536566
its an edge lit lcd, not quantum dot.
at least my understanding was quantum dots were self illuminating, yet these advertise quantum dot but are edge lit or full matrix back lit... if someone can tell me i'm right and this is marketing wank or if i'm wrong would be nice.

>>57536691
curved monitors are nice, but you have to be stationary for them to really shine.

>>57530422
Dell SE2717H

>>57536674
>5ms GtG
dropped

Is there a good monitor review site? Also looking for a 1440p 144hz, are they all like 600$+?

>>57539409
Op here. Since yesterday I've been on youtube and reading hardware specs and reviews. I'm thinking now I want an ips with high ghz and gsync (since I went with nvidia) at 21:9 ratio but god damn -- they're all around a thousand bucks. Wait for black friday like me. Sending you a link to a nice one at best buy right now though
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/asus-rog-swift-pg248q-24-3d-led-hd-gsync-monitor-black/5376601.p?skuId=5376601

>>57531743
>Keep in mind scaling a 1080p game/video to 4K won't fuck up any pixels since its 200%

proven bullshit, it depends on the monitor

>>57533323
>stupid unsubstantiated bullshit

we can thus infer that this poster is a cunt

So monitor /g/urus

If you sat say 1.2 meters from your monitor and wanted a more vision filling experience when watching videos or gaming is 24/5 sufficient or is 27 better?

>>57530393
>>57530377
>>57530368
>>57530182
see this kids?
this is how you shitpost. talent right there i tell you hwut

>>57533001
you're an idiot, you shouldn't be wasting money and time on bullshit such as this if you can't even afford decent living space.

>>57539979
Nice, yeah obviously im going to wait till nigger friday/cyber monday but i was going to get the ball rolling on research. Thanks for the info.

wwwwwwww

1920x1200 forever.

>>57528123
My monitor is still 720p

File: hp-2311x.jpg (582KB, 1325x1080px) Image search: [Google]

582KB, 1325x1080px

i found a nice monitor in a bin today, all it needed was a power supply. today was a good day.

>>57542990
>found a monitor
>in a bin

???

>>57539211
What part of every number on the box is a lie do you not understand, every single number is faked, for fuck sake some companies measured how big it is from the bezel so even how many inches it is is not a valid measurement.

>>57539409
if its for gaming, Dell S2417DG 23.8" 165Hz Monitor is about as good as it gets when it comes to pixel response time and input lag, it has about 800:1 contrast and an absolute lag of 25ms

as for sites that review monitors, you take what you can get, just try to find a non press release site.

>>57541374
bigger is better when you want to fill your vision. just try to keep it around 80-120 dpi

>>57541374
>1.2 meters
>24 inches
>vision filling

1.2 meters is 40" TV land

>>57544477
if you want 4k, sure, but you will have problems at 1080p

>>57544628
maybe you're an american, but 1.2 meters is a pretty far distance to be sitting, common desk viewing distance is on the order of 20 or 30 cm

>>57544848
I can never understand how people can press their faces ip to a screen like that.

The closest i can get to my computer screen is about 30cm and that's leaning in with my face as far forward as I can get without falling out of my chair

normal distance I want to say is closer to 100cm, with viewing distance being 150-200, and if I go to my bed to lay down and watch a movie, 300~

I just can never understand how people press their faces up to a screen.

>>57544956
if your monitor is on your desk and you sit at your desk
40 or 50 maybe if it's a big desk and you lean back

100+ when sitting normally? no way

>>57532740
i have it too, but in hindsight right NOW: I would order a TN 144hz panel that has been going on sale recently as low as $150. i bought mine for $220

>>57545030
got a ruler right here that goes up to 60cm, my normal distance sitting is about 1.5 the length of it so between 85 and 120cm.

>>57545146
>>57532727
get this one

http://www.costco.com/Acer-XF240H-24%22-Full-HD-Monitor-with-AMD-FreeSync.product.100316061.html

its $170

>>57528092
If you want a quality display for a reasonable price and don't need it to be huge, get a 1080p. If you want a bigger monitor and don't mind spending the extra money (and have the rig to handle it) get 4K.

>>57528245
>PS Pro/Xbox S/Scorpio.
>Implying native 4K
They scale from 1080p.

>>57528440
Always go IPS.

How are VA Monitors?

>>57529347
>implying my gup movie is not 1080pee

>>57530422
http://pcpartpicker.com/product/hLs8TW/benq-monitor-gw2470h

>>57535721
https://www.nextpowerup.com/news/31594/playstation-4-pro-suffers-from-overheating-a-user-reports-melted-casing/

>>57545905
see
>>57546890
better than cheap ips with muddy colours and ips glow.

So i sit roughly 60-70cm from my monitor, what would you say the monitor size & resolution sweet spot would be?

>>57545905
the only viable choice due to low ghosting + high contrast