Question 1440p 144hz Monitor Recommendations

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Darkbreeze

Titan
Moderator
Interesting choice as it's close to a 1440p ultrawide but wouldn't be my selection due pixel density and having 5 times the amount of latency that a gaming monitor should have. At that size you might as well go 4k or 1440p Ultrawide because aiming won't be as easy because it's basically a stretched out 27" 2560 x 1440p panel with the same amount of pixels. The same can be said for 27" 1080p panels (As opposed to the 24" 1080p standard) which typically aren't a gamer's go to, especially for first person shooters where aiming is important.
Pixel density is fine. Display looks great. I have one sitting in front of me right now that I've been using for a few months now to game on and there are no issues. There are no readily identifiable single pixels from 2.5ft away than there are with a 24" 1080p display.

The fact is that 1ms or sub ms response times are just overrated. Sure, if you can get a lower ACTUAL response time you're not going to turn it down, but it's not THAT critical.

Let's do a bit of math.
If your refresh rate is 60Hz, that means it takes 1/60th of a second to refresh, which comes out to ~16.7ms per refresh.
If your refresh rate is 144Hz, then it takes ~6.9ms per refresh.
So, any response time under 6-7 ms should always be sufficient.

Plus, that panel has down to a 1ms response time using motion blur reduction, which I know is not as good as a true GTG 1ms response time, but it's still well within what's acceptable and better than a lot of what's out there in this price range.

It also has freesync that actually WORKS, without any caveats, with Gsync.

I know of at least five heavy gamers on here including another member of the moderation team, and none of them have any complaints about it even with much better hardware than mine.

I'm just saying, for around 300 bucks, this is a display you can really live with.

Techspot, who is pretty well respected in this area of reviews, although certainly not as technical as TFT central or Rtings, both of whom gave this unit very good reviews as well, had this to say.

Previously we have recommended monitors like the Viotek GN32DB or the Pixio PX329 in this category. The Viotek option is curved and about $330, while the Pixio is flat and $350. But with the LG 32GK650F also slotting in at $350, it simply offers more than the alternatives at a matching price point.

Specifically, the 32GK650F has faster response times, which reduces blur and provides a true 144Hz experience, unlike the Pixio which is advertised as 165Hz but really can’t deliver true 144Hz. The LG remains a large 32-inch flat VA with good contrast which we feel is better than curved alternatives and it comes with a better stand that’s height and pivot adjustable, neither of which the Viotek nor Pixio offer. Crucially, this monitor is also much easier to find in retailers worldwide although pricing will vary depending on the region.
Rtings said this:

The LG 32GK650F-B is a great gaming monitor, and it delivers decent all-around performance when you're not gaming. The VA panel delivers deep, uniform blacks, and it has outstanding low input lag. It has good peak brightness, excellent gray uniformity, and decent reflection handling. This monitor also supports FreeSync, even from a recent NVIDIA card, which is great. Unfortunately, although the average response time is great, some transitions are very slow, which is especially noticeable in dark scenes.
And honestly, I haven't noticed ANY problems with transitions in dark scenes at all, so I think maybe they simply had a bad review sample. As we know, two different samples of the same monitor can have some wildly different results in some cases.
 
Last edited:

Spaceghaze

Proper
Oct 17, 2019
122
11
115
10
Under 350 dollars, and better than the majority of displays out there including a great many of them that ARE over 500 dollars.

https://www.amazon.com/LG-32GK650F-B-Monitor-FreeSync-Technology/dp/B07FLGR2PN

Unfortunately, much as with pretty much everything you've suggested, it's bigger than the OP would like, so it's not viable, but it's certainly a fantastic display and it won't run you the price of a house payment.
Damn. Would get this but its almost 500€ in my country, still worth it?

Edit: Actually nevermind, answered that my self. No it's not.
 
Last edited:

mortemas

Reputable
Feb 11, 2015
683
45
5,190
80
The Dell S2719DGF is the bargain option 27" 1440p monitor. It can be found on sale for under $300 USD from time to time (currently $322 on Amazon). It's 155Hz. works with G-Sync (over Displayport), and has a TN panel (yeah, black levels are not the best). It doesn't have HDR color, but modern humans have been doing without it in their monitors for 10,000 years.

https://pcpartpicker.com/product/MXQG3C/dell-s2719dgf-270-2560x1440-155-hz-monitor-s2719dgf

RTings review:
https://www.rtings.com/monitor/reviews/dell/s2719dgf
 
Last edited:
The Dell S2719DGF is the bargain option 27" 1440p monitor. It can be found on sale for under $300 USD from time to time (currently $322 on Amazon). It's 155Hz. works with G-Sync (over Displayport), and has a TN panel (yeah, black levels are not the best). It doesn't have HDR color, but modern humans have been doing without it in their monitors for 10,000 years.

https://pcpartpicker.com/product/MXQG3C/dell-s2719dgf-270-2560x1440-155-hz-monitor-s2719dgf

RTings review:
https://www.rtings.com/monitor/reviews/dell/s2719dgf
My friend purchased that monitor and had to return it because he said it had excessive input lag. He is also VERY sensitive to that kind of thing and remember even of the same make and model, performance can vary unit to unit. You may have a good experience using that monitor, but just keep that in the back of your head if you have any issues with it. Remember you get what you pay for and some times hardware may be on sale for a reason.
 
Reactions: PCDesignerR
Remember there's this model which is 1ms GTG and has all the benifit of IPS and HDR:

PCPartPicker Part List
Monitor: LG 27GL83A-B 27.0" 2560x1440 144 Hz Monitor ($379.99 @ Amazon)
Total: $379.99
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2019-11-08 14:05 EST-0500

You really are getting the best of both TN & IPS worlds with this model. If I didn't have a slow single core performance R7 1700, i'd purchase this to use along with my GTX 1080 TI. These models have the latest "nano IPS" technologies for vibrant color accuracy and low 1ms response times and have the latest & greatest technology.
 
Last edited:

Darkbreeze

Titan
Moderator
That looks to be a very good display and I'm interested in seeing reviews of it when they become available. I might buy one or two to go with the other LG panel I have now. Unfortunately, I don't see any reputable reviews yet but if it is anything like the other LG products that have been released with similar specs over the last year or two then it is probably a very good unit.
 
Reactions: SgtScream

mortemas

Reputable
Feb 11, 2015
683
45
5,190
80
My friend purchased that monitor and had to return it because he said it had excessive input lag. He is also VERY sensitive to that kind of thing and remember even of the same make and model, performance can vary unit to unit. You may have a good experience using that monitor, but just keep that in the back of your head if you have any issues with it. Remember you get what you pay for and some times hardware may be on sale for a reason.
Yes, definitely cheap for a reason. I think mostly because it's not glitzed up with fancy decorative plastic or RGB like some of the gaming monitors that manufacturers do the hard sell on. The color accuracy was impressive after calibration, but again it being a TN means black levels weren't as good as other panel tech. Rtings measured input lag at 4.3ms for most cases, but interestingly 60Hz input lag was the worst and nearly double at 9.1ms, so it really shouldn't be used at that refresh rate - especially considering it's capable of VRR with max 155Hz. I game on my LG C7 TV and I deal with 21ms, or just above 1 frame when at 60Hz, but I'm not a competitive gamer. The S2719DGF is not a bad monitor for the price point, I'm certain, but there are definitely better ones out there for a bit more money.

As for the LG IPS monitor with 1ms GTG, it comes with a catch if it's the same model I researched recently. Tim on Hardware Unboxed determined that image quality was so bad with the 1ms setting that the feature is unusable. The conclusion was that LG did it just to put it on the box - he doesn't expect many to actually use the feature after they see it. Not saying it's a bad monitor, just that feature. Let me see if it's the same one and I'll post the link...

Here's the link to the review for the LG 27GL850. It's been available since June, apparently. Not sure if it is a variant or the overseas model number or just something different than the 27GL83A-B, but I'll see if I can find out (SEE EDIT BELOW). In any event, it also advertises IPS 1ms GTG and I would think the basis for the tech is the same even if they are slightly different models.
View: https://youtu.be/T5Loh7vOcVM?t=277

As far as I can tell, the 27GL850-B advertises HDR capability and quotes color accuracy figures in the DCI-P3 space, and the 27GL83A-B doesn't seem to be HDR capable and the sRGB color space is specified. For what it's worth, despite advertising HDR capability the 27GL850-B misses the mark, but many displays, including TVs, do also. It still seems to be a good monitor. Here's the Rtings review:
https://www.rtings.com/monitor/reviews/lg/27gl850-b

I'd like to see Tim do a side by side comparison when the 27GL83A-B is available.
 
Last edited:
Yes, definitely cheap for a reason. I think mostly because it's not glitzed up with fancy decorative plastic or RGB like some of the gaming monitors that manufacturers do the hard sell on. The color accuracy was impressive after calibration, but again it being a TN means black levels weren't as good as other panel tech. Rtings measured input lag at 4.3ms for most cases, but interestingly 60Hz input lag was the worst and nearly double at 9.1ms, so it really shouldn't be used at that refresh rate - especially considering it's capable of VRR with max 155Hz. I game on my LG C7 TV and I deal with 21ms, or just above 1 frame when at 60Hz, but I'm not a competitive gamer. The S2719DGF is not a bad monitor for the price point, I'm certain, but there are definitely better ones out there for a bit more money.

As for the LG IPS monitor with 1ms GTG, it comes with a catch if it's the same model I researched recently. Tim on Hardware Unboxed determined that image quality was so bad with the 1ms setting that the feature is unusable. The conclusion was that LG did it just to put it on the box - he doesn't expect many to actually use the feature after they see it. Not saying it's a bad monitor, just that feature. Let me see if it's the same one and I'll post the link...

Here's the link to the review for the LG 27GL850. It's been available since June, apparently. Not sure if it is a variant or the overseas model number or just something different than the 27GL83A-B, but I'll see if I can find out (SEE EDIT BELOW). In any event, it also advertises IPS 1ms GTG and I would think the basis for the tech is the same even if they are slightly different models.
View: https://youtu.be/T5Loh7vOcVM?t=277

As far as I can tell, the 27GL850-B advertises HDR capability and quotes color accuracy figures in the DCI-P3 space, and the 27GL83A-B doesn't seem to be HDR capable and the sRGB color space is specified. For what it's worth, despite advertising HDR capability the 27GL850-B misses the mark, but many displays, including TVs, do also. It still seems to be a good monitor. Here's the Rtings review:
https://www.rtings.com/monitor/reviews/lg/27gl850-b

I'd like to see Tim do a side by side comparison when the 27GL83A-B is available.
I'm not discounting this or stating it's not true, but that's one YouTube channel that tested one monitor. I did take note of the review link above also. Making a decision based off of one review is somewhat bias which is the reason why I didn't tell the op not to purchase the Dell monitor when asked above. Don't get me wrong i'm not saying your post states that i'm just bringing this up because of how this thread has transpired over the past few days. There's no way of determining if that monitor was defective because they didn't have more than one to test against to see if there are performance variations. If you look hard enough you can find a reason out on the world wide web not to purchase something no mater what the make and model is. Not only that but monitors are extremely subjective and dependent upon the individual. What may work for one person might not for the other and personal preference may favor a certain monitor technology over the other. The OP is just going to have to dive right in and make an informed decision based on what he's learned so far. What monitor do you recommend? I've been looking at Gigabyte seeing how good their monitors are. I'm not 100% sure but they appear to be new to the game.
 
Last edited:

mortemas

Reputable
Feb 11, 2015
683
45
5,190
80
First off, I value discussion for the varied opinions because my monitor at my desk is an 10+ year old 60Hz IPS 1680x1050 that I'd like to replace with a 1440p high refresh display that has good color and HDR if possible (that doesn't cost $750) so I'm very interested in everyone's input. I leave most of my statements open ended so the reader can ultimately decide, but there are sometimes things that stand out, like the fact that many displays don't meet proper HDR standards under scrutiny by independent reviewers despite the advertising as HDR capable. Both Tim from Hardware Unboxed and the folks at Rtings came to the same conclusion that the 27GL850-B falls short on HDR. Absolutely I agree with you that it doesn't mean people aren't going to like it, but there comes a point where the shortfall can start to be significant. And even if the user likes what they see, there is still a defined standard for HDR that technically should be met. The display has to be capable of peak brightness above 1000 cd/m2 (m-squared, superscript not working). You'll see that many TVs fall short here if you look at the test results on this page:
https://www.rtings.com/tv/tests/picture-quality/peak-brightness

Now here's the peak brightness of the LG 27GL850-B:
https://www.rtings.com/monitor/reviews/lg/27gl850-b#comparison_1560

It's even less than many of those TVs, which mostly also don't meet HDR standards. That's all I'm saying. It doesn't meet the technical definition. But, certainly you would want to make sure the TV or display is not at the bottom of the list or you might be disappointed. There are actually several levels of HDR defined, but as Tim stated the LG display doesn't even meet the lowest tier definition, which is HDR-400. See here for more info:
https://displayhdr.org/

Yes, I saw the reviews for the new Gigabyte monitor. I liked it until the reviewers scrutinized it :p Really, I do agree with you. At some point you have to pick something and just see how it is. Obviously price is a big starting point for many people, and then you just try to find something in that range that the manufacturer has done a good job with - the best model at the price you can afford. It's not always an easy choice. I think I'd miss the beautiful color of my TV if I get a monitor that isn't OLED, but there aren't many OLED monitors out there right now and I'll have to choose between TN, IPS, VA, or whatever - and they all have their strengths and weaknesses. There are some games I can't play on the TV, and my old monitor just doesn't pair with my new PC. I'm glad we are getting more HDR options in the monitor market, but I haven't decided yet. Honestly, I'll probably put off buying a new monitor for a while by only playing the games suited to TV just so I won't have to spend the money. Time will only bring better and hopefully more affordable options the longer I wait, but if the product and the price is right I will go for it. I did want to provide some more info here because I do have some applicable info from my own efforts and I think more information is always better. So I guess you could say I've got some analysis paralysis! Seriously, though, I think you said this before - very few options, if any, are going to have everything you want.
 
Last edited:

mortemas

Reputable
Feb 11, 2015
683
45
5,190
80
For the OP, Rtings have purchased both the ASUS TUF VG27AQ and the LG 27GL83A-B and I suppose they will be coming out with reviews for them soon:
https://www.rtings.com/monitor/suggestions

I do trust their information. FWIW, I think it's a great site and they are very technical and seem to know their stuff. One of the advantages to a site like that is you can compare the different models side by side because they perform all the same tests on them. The data is objective, interpretation of it might be subjective. IE: maybe a 6.5 on HDR score doesn't mean that much to you if all the other categories are 8s and 9s. They also offer consideration to alternative models in any particular review and mention the advantages or disadvantages of these alternates.
 

Darkbreeze

Titan
Moderator
(that doesn't cost $750)
Careful, Daddy Warbucks might hear that and start ranting all over again.

I'll be honest. if everything else works well, I could care less whether HDR does too, or if it even has it. Obviously, if you pay MORE for a display BECAUSE it has it, then you want it to be a good example of that technology, and if it's not then another model is probably a better choice, but I could completely live without it so long as it is a good at everything else. Pretty much true for viewing angle as well unless you plan to be sitting way off center of the display in question. I think that is one thing in reviews that should ONLY be a factor if it's going to be a side panel on a three panel display setup, because otherwise I don't know of much of anybody that wouldn't be directly in front of their display and most people really don't care whether it looks good to somebody sitting off to the side unless they are a professional doing graphics or 3d work. So that can usually be ignored IMO.

It's probably 100% true, that 100% of displays have SOMETHING that can a deal breaker for somebody. Even 1000 dollar monitors have shortcomings.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: mortemas
First off, I value discussion for the varied opinions because my monitor at my desk is an 10+ year old 60Hz IPS 1680x1050 that I'd like to replace with a 1440p high refresh display with good color and HDR if possible (that doesn't cost $750) so I'm very interested in everyone's input. I leave most of my statements open ended so the reader can ultimately decide, but there are sometimes things that stand out, like the fact that many displays don't meet proper HDR standards under scrutiny by independent reviewers despite the advertising as HDR capable. Both Tim from Hardware Unboxed and the folks at Rtings came to the same conclusion that the 27GL850-B falls short on HDR. Absolutely I agree with you that it doesn't mean people aren't going to like it, but there comes a point where the shortfall can start to be significant. And even if the user likes what they see, there is still a defined standard for HDR that technically should be met. The display has to be capable of peak brightness above 1000 cd/m2 (m-squared, superscript not working). You'll see that many TVs fall short here if you look at the test results on this page:
https://www.rtings.com/tv/tests/picture-quality/peak-brightness

Now here's the peak brightness of the LG 27GL850-B:
https://www.rtings.com/monitor/reviews/lg/27gl850-b#comparison_1560

It's even less than many of those TVs, which mostly also don't meet HDR standards. That's all I'm saying. It doesn't meet the technical definition. But, certainly you would want to make sure the TV or display is not at the bottom of the list or you might be disappointed. There are actually several levels of HDR defined, but as Tim stated the LG display doesn't even meet the lowest tier definition, which is HDR-400. See here for more info:
https://displayhdr.org/

Yes, I saw the reviews for the new Gigabyte monitor. I liked it until the reviewers scrutinized it :p Really, I do agree with you. At some point you have to pick something and just see how it is. Obviously price is a big starting point for many people, and then you just try to find something in that range that the manufacturer has done a good job with - the best model at the price you can afford. It's not always an easy choice. I think I'd miss the beautiful color of my TV if I get a monitor that isn't OLED, but there aren't many OLED monitors out there right now and I'll have to choose between TN, IPS, VA, or whatever - and they all have their strengths and weaknesses. There are some games I can't play on the TV, and my old monitor just doesn't pair with my new PC. I'm glad we are getting more HDR options in the monitor market, but I haven't decided yet. Honestly, I'll probably put off buying a new monitor for a while by only playing the games suited to TV just so I won't have to spend the money. Time will only bring better and hopefully more affordable options the longer I wait, but if the product and the price is right I will go for it. I did want to provide some more info here because I do have some applicable info from my own efforts and I think more information is always better. So I guess you could say I've got some analysis paralysis! Seriously, though, I think you said this before - very few options, if any, are going to have everything you want.
Definatly some quality good info there. Honestly I didn't pay too much attention to the HDR aspect, as that technology is still new to me. Don't think PG348Q has it. After x number of hz I think you get less HDR on the LG so for high refresh rate gamers HDR is kind a mute point, until HDR quality can be sustained at 144hz. I still think it's impressive that they were able to get the LG IPS panel down to 1ms GTG (Especially the ultrawide variant) because i'm so used to seeing 5ms response time. All i'm looking for is a good quality 1440p 165hz 1ms latency response time 27" panel. Going from an old Asus 1080p 144hz 1ms panel from 2013 to an Asus 3440x1440p ultrawide ips panel is a great immersive experience, however I feel going with the most absolute lowest latency monitor I can find will give me a tactical edge out on the battlefield. Have you looked at BenQ at all?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts