what monitor would you choose strictly for gaming, fps, rts, and rpg/mmo

[raknarius]

I see a lot of info but not to many people telling me there choice. feel free to tell me why it will help others im sure

 

[woltej1]

the 24 inch 1080p and a 450 card. a 1440p screen would be too much for a 300 card and I guess you could do the 144hz screen and a 500 card, but if you can grab a 144hz and a more expensive card than the base 1080p monitor then I wonder about quality.

 

[cookybiscuit]

A $300 card is more than plenty for 1440p, you can easily run a 760 at 1440p.

 

[woltej1]

at medium settings........not worth it.

 

[raknarius]

if you can get a 280x for 300 when the prices come back down I bet that would do good?

 

[woltej1]

yea, 280x is a good card, still won't max some games at 1440p, like bf4, etc. but the mid tier games it will.

 

[cookybiscuit]

You're missing the point, resolution>ingame settings any day of the week. A monitor is also a more likely to stick around than a graphics card.

 

[woltej1]

What's the point of all that resolution if you can't use it?

 

[cookybiscuit]

Resolution is a form of graphics, as is AA, shadow quality, texture resolution etc. It just so happens to work in every game, and be far more noticeable than any other effect you can apply, high resolution with high settings beats low resolution with ultra settings, and a $300 GPU is more than capable of 1440p.

 

[raknarius]

is no one voting on the poll or is it just broken, I see zero votes?

 

[raknarius]

ok heres an idea I just thought of. I do want something I don't have to upgrade, so say I get the gaming monitor at 144, and I can play 1080p max settings with the nice 500 card. three years from now using the same equipment, games are more detailed my 1080p rez will save me because my card wont struggle so hard to keep up performance.

where as if I get the 27inch high res with the mid ranged card, I can probably play high now but three years from now that 300 card will probably be hard pressed to get medium settings at 1440p.

so im now thinking the fast monitor and better card is the way to go, at least in my requirements which is my system lasts longest without upgrade

 

[raknarius]

lol no one voting on poll

 

[tmacg55]

Competitive gamers usually use 60Hz refresh rates because there is less processing therefore less input lag. But 120hz+ is much more pleasing to the eye with fast movement and regular browsing, just feels much more fluid. TN is also a better way to go if you like twitch games and etc, these generally have faster response times. IPS is limited to 60Hz (in exception to Overlord Tempest & Yamakasi 2B) but will offer way better color production giving you a much more immerse experience. If I were you spend the extra dough on the video card and get a simple LED 60Hz 21"-24" gaming monitor. Asus, Dell, Viewsonic, and Benq all make one. Some people underestimate Dell monitors, but they have some of the lowest input lag

 

[raknarius]

Competitive gamers usually use 60Hz refresh rates because there is less processing therefore less input lag. But 120hz+ is much more pleasing to the eye with fast movement and regular browsing, just feels much more fluid. TN is also a better way to go if you like twitch games and etc, these generally have faster response times. IPS is limited to 60Hz (in exception to Overlord Tempest & Yamakasi 2B) but will offer way better color production giving you a much more immerse experience. If I were you spend the extra dough on the video card and get a simple LED 60Hz 21"-24" gaming monitor. Asus, Dell, Viewsonic, and Benq all make one. Some people underestimate Dell monitors, but they have some of the lowest input lag

ive heard great things about the dell monitors, but input lag you mean ms right, usually the dells are rated at like 8ms when I get an asus that's 1 or 2 in a tn panel or 5 in ips, seems weird

 

[raknarius]

lol I think the poll is broken or im the only person who voted

 

[tmacg55]

You are thinking of their photography grade monitors, they also make TN monitor with gaming response times. Keep in mind, response times have nothing to do with input lag. Input lag is the time it takes the display process the registry and response time is transition of pixel color.

 

[bystander]

I'd buy the GPU now, and wait for G-sync monitors, assuming you don't want to pay the premium for the upgraded VG248QE's currently available.

 

[tmacg55]

G-Sync is going to be the best bet for the best possible gaming experience, but would not buy it right when it comes out because it is the 1st of its kind it will have loads of driver issues with games and etc.

 

[bystander]

G-Sync is going to be the best bet for the best possible gaming experience, but would not buy it right when it comes out because it is the 1st of its kind it will have loads of driver issues with games and etc.

I would not expect any driver issues at all. Though it is limited to single screen configurations. G-sync isn't like many things. It works exactly the same for every game. If it works, it works. It isn't something that has to be integrated into games. It will simply be like using v-sync from the control panel.