Looking for monitor recommendation

[Nightbound]

Basically, in a nutshell im after a decent gaming monitor that's 27" and 1440p that won't kill the budget. I would prefer to keep it under $500 US. Was wondering if people had any solid recommendations? Ive been eying the MSI Optix MAG27CQ (https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=24-475-009) but I know very little about the differences in panels, etc... Currently running https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=24-011-188 as my primary

If it helps, my pc,is currently running a 4790k stock speeds with a gtx1070, 16gb ddr3 1600

 

[photonboy]

First, it depends on the PURPOSE. Gaming? Productivity work?

IPS is better than TN panels in general (if it says "1ms" it's likely TN and if it says "4ms" or so for response time it's likely IPS).

But, if the TN panel is good (see customer feedback) the other features like FREESYNC (for AMD cards while gaming) may offset.

(BTW, Newegg is making a mistake and calling 2560x1440 monitors "2K" which is incorrect. It means 2048 and is sometimes used to refer to 1920x1080 as it's about 2000 just like 4K means about 4000 as in 3860x1440 hence 2K x2 = 4K)

 

[photonboy]

(I know you must game but I should have said do you ALSO do productivity as in how important is color accuracy?)
Some points as I look:

1) CURVED (for the MSI) is not good for such a small monitor. It's needed for ultrawide but the con is it warps straight lines. I'm sitting less than two feet from a 27", 2560x1440 monitor and it looks fine.

I guess the point here is if you want up to THREE monitors then curving makes sense (?) but otherwise avoid this.

2) Refresh rate (higher is better) matters especially for gaming. 60Hz is the minimum but for the price probably the best you can do.

3) MY MONITOR has the same basic specs as the Acer and I enjoy it a lot (27", IPS, 2560x1440, 60Hz). For me to upgrade I'd be going with a GSYNC, 144Hz panel but they are expensive so I'm waiting.

4) I linked monitors up to $549USD here filtered to 25" or higher, 2560x1440 and 4 or 5 stars:
https://pcpartpicker.com/products/monitor/#r=256001440&R=5,4&X=0,54900

THESE are the same filtered to 144Hz: https://pcpartpicker.com/products/monitor/#r=256001440&R=5,4&X=0,54900&sort=-rating&page=1&W=2500,5500&H=144,240

THIS one has Freesync which you can't use currently (but may work with XB1/PS4 and later once support is added or future AMD card, or if NVidia and AMD find a way to support each other... it's not a hardware issue just software so they could):
https://pcpartpicker.com/product/c298TW/asus-monitor-mg279q

(Freesync is being picked up for HDTV's in the future so consoles will start adding support. The GSYNC approach is technically better but adoption may end up problematic long-term so I hope they can resolve this but currently NVidia has little incentive).

 

[ElectrO_90]

Just don't waste your money on a Gsync enabled monitor. You are paying $100+ for a sticker. So a $500 Gsync Monitor is the same as a $400 Freesync monitor, just you pay over $100 for the "gsync" technology.
Freesync monitors will work with nvidia, just you can only use the 144hz setting.

 

[photonboy]

144Hz without asynchronous support for your card (GSYNC) does mean you need to think carefully about how VSYNC works.

If you get one then you have options like:
1) VSYNC OFF - will get screen tearing but it may be minimal (ties into the Hz/FPS ratio since the faster the monitor updates vs how many new frames it gets affects tearing).

I would even CAP some games like Tomb Raider to 60FPS for more consistent experience, then tweak game settings appropriately for 50FPS average or so.

2) Adaptive VSYNC Half Refresh - great compromise (NCP-> manage 3d settings-> add game...)
- auto disables VSYNC below 72FPS (half 144)
- adds tearing but helps prevent added stutter for when VSYNC is on but you can't maintain the FPS (and tearing is reduced as per #1)

This option works great for when screen tearing is annoying... tweak settings appropriately depending on tear amount. Maybe 80% or higher locked to 72FPS.

3) VSYNC ON - if you can almost always maintain 144FPS


4) Adaptive VSYNC - same as #2 but for full 144FPS... may be good for a game like Overwatch if you can maintain 144FPS (so again, locks to 144FPS until you can't output that then VSYNC is turned off).

 

[photonboy]

Just don't waste your money on a Gsync enabled monitor. You are paying $100+ for a sticker. So a $500 Gsync Monitor is the same as a $400 Freesync monitor, just you pay over $100 for the "gsync" technology.
Freesync monitors will work with nvidia, just you can only use the 144hz setting.

Gsync is not the same as Freesync except for laptops where they don't need the physical GSYNC Module that much as they know the panel being used.

I'm not going to waste a lot of time discussing the technology here though, but a lot of people seem confused on it. For example, even when you get a good Freesync monitor you may have overdrive issues that affect color which is something a GSYNC module can do.

GSYNC/Freesync HDR will require us to reevaluate but Freesync HDR requires more work so it adds to the monitor cost anyway so the differences are shrinking in terms of quality and cost (freesync is improving but costing more).


The biggest problem with Freesync is for when the range is under 2.5x (i.e. 40Hz to 60Hz) as you get Freesync support in that range only but not below whereas GSYNC always has support below the low-end... Freesync DOES support LFC for say 30Hz to 75Hz range (if it's 29FPS the driver software just doubles so you get "58FPS" to keep the monitor in Freesync range).

Even if the monitor says 144Hz the actual Freesync range might only be 40Hz to 90Hz so you could be gaming and keep dropping in and out so you might get screen tearing then not or stuttering then not. It's a big mess which is why AMD decided to force a better standard for Freesync HDR.

 

[ElectrO_90]

Exact same monitors - Price Difference, so gsync can be $200 more for the "tech"
The Alienware FreeSync monitor costs $499.
The identical G-Sync model is priced at $699.

 

[photonboy]

Exact same monitors - Price Difference, so gsync can be $200 more for the "tech"
The Alienware FreeSync monitor costs $499.
The identical G-Sync model is priced at $699.

See my comment above. If you want to discuss more PM me but I don't want to hijack this thread.

 

[Nightbound]

Couple people replied asking what i'm purchasing this for, I stated in my opening sentence i'm searching for a "Gaming" monitor

And yes, that mean's it is for gaming

As for the comment about the MSI, understood i'll avoid the curved monitor's unless its 21:9.

Mostly just looking for a solid recommendation if the MSI is not worth it. Saw the ASUS Monitor, definetly will keep that one in mind

 

[photonboy]

Just FYI, but I have difficulty reading on monitors. I tend to SKIP words which is a hassle.

IPS is better than TN. 4ms or below for response time is desired (which minimizes motion blur/ghosting but note that 4ms on 60Hz is more noticeable than 4ms on 144Hz so probably there's very SLIGHT on the former but I doubt you could see ANY ghosting at 4ms/144Hz). There are reasonably good TN panels, and of course you have to try to estimate the quality of the monitor by perhaps using NEWEGG as a guide (overall egg average and look at 1/5 and 2/5 comments to see if common issues like failing or backlight bleed)… AMAZON sucks as they still after YEARS mix up user reviews between similar items. Includes TV's, movies, and so on.

Possibly the best feature for you is to have the HIGH REFRESH of 144Hz.

Again, this means you really need to understand (as you should anyway) how the following work. Pros and Cons to each.

1) VSYNC ON
2) VSYNC OFF
3) Adaptive VSYNC
4) Adaptive VSYNC (Half Refresh)

The main issues for the above really are SCREEN TEARING (vsync off), LAG (VSYNC adds one or multiple buffers), and added Stutter (VSYNC ON if you can't maintain the FPS).

You can use NVInspector to cap the FPS. Is there a better tool? Maybe. Anyway, here's a couples examples that MAY be optimal at 144Hz:

1) Tomb Raider (slower game). Either:
a) Adaptive VSYNC Half Refresh (tweak to optimize for 72FPS but allow drops below), or

b) VSYNC OFF (tweak settings for approx 50FPS or so, possibly set FPS cap for more consistent response and minimize tearing)


Possibly 50FPS is ideal depending on the screen tearing. It's also a tradeoff as always between FPS and visual quality unless you can run the game at max settings.


2) Diablo III
a) VSYNC - if you can maintain 144FPS
b) VSYNC OFF - I'd cap in this case to minimize screen tearing... makes CURSOR less smooth but screen tearing less annoying
c) Adaptive VSYNC Half Refresh - no screen tearing since it is effectively 72FPS. It's slightly less laggy/sluggish than it would be on a 72Hz monitor with VSYNC ON but more sluggish than VSYNC OFF on a 72Hz monitor.

I hope I didn't confuse things more... I think if you get the basic idea that VSYNC eliminates screen tearing but adds lag (and can add stutter if you don't maintain the FPS) then the options make more sense.

When I played Assassin's Creed Brotherhood I kept getting major STUTTER with VSYNC ON. I might do a jump from a building or whatever then suddenly it wasn't smooth... so I turned off VSYNC and it went away but the screen tearing was really horrible.

Then NVidia announced Adaptive VSYNC and I tried that. Where I normally got the stuttering I just got a little screen tear but the time was SHORT so it was barely noticeable unlike the stutter that was somewhat game breaking.

In Max Payne 3 it auto locks to half the FPS with VSYNC ON... so if I was at 60FPS/60Hz but dropped to 59FPS or below then BAM, locked to 30FPS/60Hz and it's really much more sluggish which sucks... forced on Adaptive VSYNC and problem solved... I just adjusted the GAME SETTINGS so I stayed on 60FPS about 90% of the time or more which was a good tradeoff between visual quality being good and occasional screen tearing due to VSYNC being forced off below 60FPS.

 

[photonboy]

… and WTF is going on with the text? It is forcing another line of text if it thinks there is a new paragraph. Aaargh. I'm not writing a fucking novel here Toms (f it's your fault).

UPDATE: There are also a few games such as Skyrim, Fallout series etc that may have issues if you go too far away from 60FPS as the physics engines are tied to the FPS. In that case maybe Adaptive VSYNC Half Refresh (72FPS), or VSYNC OFF and cap to 60FPS manually with NVInspector or other tool.

Possibly some other games with similar issues. A couple I know are limited to 30FPS so not sure how they do that on non-60Hz monitors. I think they use VSYNC but back-pressure the game engine to generate only 30FPS but non-multiples of 30 may cause stuttering issues.

 

[Nightbound]

<<< Super confused now... I honestly was just after a general recommendation... I don't need the biggest baddest thing out there... I just want a monitor that is above the one I run, has good quality. The reason I specifically want a 27" monitor is the other two I have are 27" 1440p 60HZ monitors that I want to flank the one I will buy soon.

All this Vsync stuff, while I'm sure is important, is super confusing lol...