Best Computer Monitors: October 2014 (Archive)

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
The majority of budget builders won't buy a monitor over $170. The cheapest you list is $299...Good job though, way to be on point with what people are actually buying. For $300 you can almost buy a 50" tv.
 
I spot a gap in the market.

I personally want a curved 20-30" Ultrawide 1080 monitor with 60Hz Maximum refresh and G-sync/Freesync options as addon modules.
Say £300-400 for the monitor, and £50-100 for a module.

4K is pointless when you sit two feet away from a small screen.
Not many Graphics setups will see the benefits of fps more than a 60Hz refresh, if we can even perceive it.
I'd much rather buy a monitor which can play a game at 40-60fps with no tearing than a more expensive one at 40-144fps
 
The majority of budget builders won't buy a monitor over $170. The cheapest you list is $299...Good job though, way to be on point with what people are actually buying. For $300 you can almost buy a 50" tv.
Click to expand...

Tom's are always out of touch, It's the nature of their business. They get spoiled with free high end stuff. So when a new $100 monitor comes out, the look down on it like it's not worth the time or effort.
 
JonnyDough has hit the nail on the head but I think it points to things we need to educate the new generation of PC gamers to. Many components of a good gaming PC are not a purchase but an investment. A good monitor should give great gaming for 4 to 5 years. Spending a bit more now means you do not spend later and gives a better gaming experience.

Grab your typical $170 monitor, 60Hz with a TN panel. You might get an IPS but it is not a great one. Not compare that to a high quality TN at 144Hz, or a high quality IPS with Freesync. How about higher resolution or the Ultra-wide experience. All of these impact the gaming experience and improve it.

Do not buy your monitor for just today but for tomorrow as well. You might not have the hardware to push it today but these monitors support lower resolutions. That 1440 ultrawide might be a bit much for your system now, no worries it does 2560x1080 perfectly. Invest when it comes to a monitor and realize your purchase should be great 5 years from now.

I personally want a curved 20-30" Ultrawide 1080 monitor with 60Hz Maximum refresh and G-sync/Freesync options as addon modules
Click to expand...

Well bad news for you, anything under 34" on a monitor make the curve a gimmick and have little real positive impact on the experience. The smaller monitors are not wide enough for a subtle curve to have effect and the curves that do effect them are too deep.

The good news for you is that while Freesync will never likely be an "add-on module" is becoming more common and should eventually be a standard in monitors. The addition is not a big deal for the monitor makers, just a choice with little to no cost additions.

4K is pointless when you sit two feet away from a small screen.
Not many Graphics setups will see the benefits of fps more than a 60Hz refresh, if we can even perceive it.
I'd much rather buy a monitor which can play a game at 40-60fps with no tearing than a more expensive one at 40-144fps
Click to expand...

I agree with your point on 4K, you need a really large monitor to use 4K effectively for productivity and for gaming it has less impact on the experience than going ultra-wide. I also agree that the majority of gamers play within a lower frame rate range than the enthusiast market contends. I would say 75 to 30 FPS is the range most gamers play in.
 
I'm waiting for a proper FreeSync monitor that has a range of at least 30 Hz - 60 Hz/75 Hz, is ultra wide, and is a reasonable price. Anything with a low FreeSync limit that is higher than 30 Hz, I will not be buying. Before all those requirements I just mentioned are met, I will simply not be buying any monitor. My current 1080p tv suffices.

The FreeSync monitor that has caught my eye is LG29UM67, and it is actually great at almost everything, except its lowest supported FreeSync framerate is 48Hz, which is WAY too high, so, I'll be waiting...
 
The "Read the Full Review" link of BenQ XL2730Z is wrong! It goes to the Asus VG248QE Review! I don't know about the others but you should fix this.
 
I personally would take 4K monitor any day, because it would be so much better to eyes to have sharp enough letters, that are easier to read.
But, yeah. For gaming 4K is too much at this moment. But you can always run 4K monitor in 1080p resolution when playing games and use 4K resolution when reading and doing work.

I did go from 90 Hz 1600*1200 24" monitor to 60 Hz 27" 1440p flat screen and have never been happy with the sharpness of my new monitor. In today I would definitely buy 4K monitor!
 
Is anybody actually using 1440p monitors to play games right now? Or just 1080p? I plan to get an ASUS PB258Q monitor which is a 25" monitor & the resolution on it is 1440p.
 
I just received that Asus PB258Q. I wanted it more for side-by-side viewing of documents (e.g. while working on reviews), but when I have some time I do expect to play games on it. My GX970 should handle it just fine. It is crisp and clear, with zero dead or bright pixels. A little bright out of the box, some manual setting easily fixed that.
 
Have you looked at the AOC U2870VQE 28" 4K LED Monitor for $350 at Microcenter? I recently bought this to replace a 27" 1440 monitor and after adjusting the picture settings its great. It works fine for the Total War games that I play. I've got two overclocked 980s in sli.
 
MrXtreme
I am using the BenQ XL2730Z and gaming in 1440p is amazing. I highly recommend the higher resolution. Of course the color isn't anywhere near as good as my IPS monitors but that's not why I got it. :)
 
I'm now using a 4K monitor at work. Some things can be adjusted (e.g. most Microsoft products), but in others, text is really too small. We're supposedly going to get another one, whereupon I will set their resolutions to 1920x1080 and be extremely happy.
 


I won't argue about the monitors/displays being the best in their respective classes, but everybody also deals with price-points (as do manufacturers. Unfortunately $0.01 can break a manufacturer's price-point and we can suffer from the repercussions depending on where that penny was shaved from.)

IOW: it may serve the community better if the best monitors was organized by price-point, as GPUs and CPUs are. Johnny may only have $200-250 to spend, so he needs to know what is the best models in that price range. Geoff may want 3D and only have $400 to spend. Ronny may have money to burn and the ones you listed are fine, Emmy may want her monitor to do ultra-wide and only has $350. WHAT do they do? Ronny is the only one taken care of here,
 


I agree with what you say, but I do have to say that a $300 50" TV just might be garbage and/or have a lower standard HDMI input restricting your desired video quality.
 


I agree. I've got an ASUS VK246H as my primary monitor that is still serving me well at its rated 1080p 60Hz. I got it almost 6 years ago now. The rest of my build that is from when I got it? Well, it's getting a little long in the tooth, despite being top end single GPU (XFX HD5870) and near top end CPU (AMD Phenom II 955BE, Well, Okay, maybe near top-end AMD CPU anyway.)

 
That sounds awesome. 😀 What about for video editing like creating 1440p videos or watching movies in 1440p?
 


How's the color presets & screen size? Is it good?
 


That sounds awesome. 😀 What about for video editing like creating 1440p videos or watching movies/youtube videos in 1440p?

 
I think the only things I changed in my slightly darkened work area was to turn down the brightness and maybe increase the blue filter.
The screen size is good, especially since there is almost no bezel at all. Another half-inch of bezel all around would have made fit notably more difficult on my desk, as there is another monitor (1920x1080) for another PC on it as well.
 
I'm waiting for a proper FreeSync monitor that has a range of at least 30 Hz - 60 Hz/75 Hz, is ultra wide, and is a reasonable price. Anything with a low FreeSync limit that is higher than 30 Hz, I will not be buying. Before all those requirements I just mentioned are met, I will simply not be buying any monitor. My current 1080p tv suffices.

The FreeSync monitor that has caught my eye is LG29UM67, and it is actually great at almost everything, except its lowest supported FreeSync framerate is 48Hz, which is WAY too high, so, I'll be waiting...
Click to expand...
I'm waiting for a proper FreeSync monitor that has a range of at least 30 Hz - 60 Hz/75 Hz, is ultra wide, and is a reasonable price. Anything with a low FreeSync limit that is higher than 30 Hz, I will not be buying. Before all those requirements I just mentioned are met, I will simply not be buying any monitor. My current 1080p tv suffices.

The FreeSync monitor that has caught my eye is LG29UM67, and it is actually great at almost everything, except its lowest supported FreeSync framerate is 48Hz, which is WAY too high, so, I'll be waiting...
Click to expand...
I'm waiting for a proper FreeSync monitor that has a range of at least 30 Hz - 60 Hz/75 Hz, is ultra wide, and is a reasonable price. Anything with a low FreeSync limit that is higher than 30 Hz, I will not be buying. Before all those requirements I just mentioned are met, I will simply not be buying any monitor. My current 1080p tv suffices.

The FreeSync monitor that has caught my eye is LG29UM67, and it is actually great at almost everything, except its lowest supported FreeSync framerate is 48Hz, which is WAY too high, so, I'll be waiting...
Click to expand...

They have settled on 48Hz as it's double 24Hz as in the 24fps of legacy TV media.
They won't go down to 30, as there is no point. They achieve the same affect by running the screens at 60Hz and showing the same frame twice.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom