[SOLVED] Which monitor should I get?

[laker1706]

Hey guys! Need your help choosing a new monitor.
I play mostly flight sims where 4K gives you a big advantage seeing objects from further away(almost twice as far as with 1080p), and some shooter games as well(not anything fast pacey except for a little csgo, pubg, and bf)
I'm aiming for a size of 27'-29'
I'm currently leaning towards a 4K@60 although I'm still thinking about 2K@144
I'm currently using a terrible 25' 1920x1200 11 years old TV and I've never tried 120hz+ monitor or 4K gaming.
Budget is 500$ tops.
I'm buying in the US but I don't live there so I guess I should stay away from high fault/dead pixels rate monitors.
I do know what every detail means but I am pretty lost in all of them and have no idea whether I want IPS/TN and 1ms or higher.
Thank you!

 

[Darkbreeze]

Best display for the money. Hands down. No question. Not 4k, and a little bigger than you suggested, but not by much. 32" compared to 29", difference is so small I doubt you could even tell one from the other if you didn't see them side by side in terms of guessing which was which.

PCPartPicker Part List

Monitor: LG 32GK650F-B 32.0" 2560x1440 144 Hz Monitor ($339.00 @ Amazon)
Total: $339.00
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2019-10-19 22:02 EDT-0400


And if you are anywhere near a Microcenter, right now you can pick one up for 299.00. Not long ago, these were selling for 550.00. IMO it's the best monitor you can get without spending over 600 bucks.

LG 32GK650F 32" QHD Gaming Monitor Review

We were excited about testing today's monitor because the product falls into one of our favorite categories: affordable but decent gaming monitors. Lots of companies try and...

www.techspot.com

 

[drivinfast247]

First, is your PC up to the task of higher resolutions and faster framerates? Please list specs. And I'll echo what Darkbreeze said about the LG monitor. I have the same one but in the G-Sync version.

 

[Darkbreeze]

It's worth mentioning as well, that while the one I linked to is a Freesync monitor, it works flawlessly with G-sync.

 

[laker1706]

First, is your PC up to the task of higher resolutions and faster framerates? Please list specs. And I'll echo what Darkbreeze said about the LG monitor. I have the same one but in the G-Sync version.

I have i5 6600k, 16gb, GTX 970.
I don't play any heavy games.
I'll probably OC all of them when I'll get a new monitor while I wait for the new AMD GPUs.
Also thinking about doubling my RAM.
And I think 32 might be too much but not sure, my 25' current monitor already feels pretty big.

 

[Darkbreeze]

1440p OR 4k, are FAR too small on anything smaller than a 27" panel. No way I'd ever do that, especially for a flight sim. Even more so when you have already offered that seeing things far away is important, because small details are practically impossible to see as you scale down the size of the panel, UNTIL they get close enough to become larger details.

32GB isn't necessary for most gaming systems. There are a very few, recently released games that might benefit and in fact come with recommendations above 16GB, but for most games somewhere between 8 and 16GB is plenty.

If you are not ACTUALLY using more than 75% of your memory while gaming currently, you are not going to see an improvement by adding more.

 

[laker1706]

1440p OR 4k, are FAR too small on anything smaller than a 27" panel. No way I'd ever do that, especially for a flight sim. Even more so when you have already offered that seeing things far away is important, because small details are practically impossible to see as you scale down the size of the panel, UNTIL they get close enough to become larger details.

32GB isn't necessary for most gaming systems. There are a very few, recently released games that might benefit and in fact come with recommendations above 16GB, but for most games somewhere between 8 and 16GB is plenty.

If you are not ACTUALLY using more than 75% of your memory while gaming currently, you are not going to see an improvement by adding more.

Than I guess I can narrow my requirements to a 32', 4K monitor that's under 500$ including taxes(CA).
Also because I saw that my CPU will have a hard time handling high fps in 2K and I can't afford a new CPU as well, and the game I play the most is using the CPU way more than the GPU.

 

[Darkbreeze]

What are your full hardware specifications? CPU, graphics card, etc?

 

[laker1706]

I have i5 6600k, 16gb, GTX 970.
I don't play any heavy games.
I'll probably OC all of them when I'll get a new monitor while I wait for the new AMD GPUs.
Also thinking about doubling my RAM.
And I think 32 might be too much but not sure, my 25' current monitor already feels pretty big.

What are your full hardware specifications? CPU, graphics card, etc?

 

[laker1706]

I'll probably try to hold with my GPU upgrade and OC my G1 970 because I think the market doesn't really fit 4K and the prices are too high but if that doesn't work I'll just get a used 1080ti for about 450$.

 

[Darkbreeze]

Your GTX 970 will be incapable of gaming at 4k with anything beyond medium settings, if you want 60fps or higher.

You would have nearly twice the performance at 1440p (2k). 4k gaming is highly overrated IMO. I've used it, and I think it's a waste of money and a horrific increase in demand on your hardware. Until 1440p becomes completely obsolete to the point where you cannot even get a quality component anymore, I have no plans to make the jump to 4k, ever.

That doesn't necessarily mean it isn't right for you, but I think you'd be a lot happier at 2k.

 

[laker1706]

Your GTX 970 will be incapable of gaming at 4k with anything beyond medium settings, if you want 60fps or higher.

You would have nearly twice the performance at 1440p (2k). 4k gaming is highly overrated IMO. I've used it, and I think it's a waste of money and a horrific increase in demand on your hardware. Until 1440p becomes completely obsolete to the point where you cannot even get a quality component anymore, I have no plans to make the jump to 4k, ever.

That doesn't necessarily mean it isn't right for you, but I think you'd be a lot happier at 2k.

Isn't it gonna be harder to achieve 4k 60 than 2k 100+?
And I know 4K is not that big of a deal for most games but from what I hear from the guys whom I play flight sims with, 4K is a huge gamechanger.

 

[Karadjgne]

I have a gtx970. If you use GeForce Experience, you can set a 4k DSR. See exactly how much usage skyrockets (my skyrim goes from 63% to 99%) and see just what happens to frame rates when that happens. And that's just the rendering side, that's not including actual pixel setting. The gtx970 can't handle anything really beyond windows or YouTube at 4k, especially not gaming of any substance. You'll be spending every bit of that €500 just on a capable gpu, and likely then some.

There's 1.7x as many pixels at 1440p as there is at 1080p, so that's about what the limits of that card are at. 4k is 4x as many pixels. So figure you'd need a gpu that's 4x stronger just to maintain fps as they are now.

A 1080ti, 2080, 2080 super or 2080ti is basically a necessary requirement.

There's also a difference between Tv's and monitors, Tv's have much higher input lag than a gaming monitor, some older Tv's as much as 25ms or higher, gaming monitors generally 5ms or lower.

Stick with 1440p.

 

[Darkbreeze]

And I know 4K is not that big of a deal for most games but from what I hear from the guys whom I play flight sims with, 4K is a huge gamechanger.

Going from 1080p, 1440p is a HUGE gamechanger. Especially, as mentioned, when going from a tv to an actual monitor. If you REALLY want a 4k system, plan on doing what Karadjgne indicated which is having a need to also buy a 1080 ti, 2080, 2080 Super or 2080 ti, if you want to be able to run at anything above medium-ish settings. Might even be worse than that depending on the game and how demanding it is. Certainly if you want a lot of eye candy AND good performance, you'll need something way more capable than the GTX 970 for 4k.

Even a 980 ti won't cut it these days.

And yes, that is my whole point. 4k 60FPS is harder to maintain than 1440p 100FPS. It will look a lot worse too because you're going to have to lose a lot of the eye candy.

 

[laker1706]

Going from 1080p, 1440p is a HUGE gamechanger. Especially, as mentioned, when going from a tv to an actual monitor. If you REALLY want a 4k system, plan on doing what Karadjgne indicated which is having a need to also buy a 1080 ti, 2080, 2080 Super or 2080 ti, if you want to be able to run at anything above medium-ish settings. Might even be worse than that depending on the game and how demanding it is. Certainly if you want a lot of eye candy AND good performance, you'll need something way more capable than the GTX 970 for 4k.

Even a 980 ti won't cut it these days.

And yes, that is my whole point. 4k 60FPS is harder to maintain than 1440p 100FPS. It will look a lot worse too because you're going to have to lose a lot of the eye candy.

Like I said, I know I'll need to upgrade my GPU but as the market stands I'll try to hold as much as I can even if that means I'll play everything on low settings(90% of my gaming right now is done on a flight sim where my GPU could definitely handle it) while I wait for new GPUs or perhaps a price drop to the 20xx series.
Of course if it won't handle Paint and File explorer I'll get a used 1080ti which go for about 450$ here.
I didn't thank you guys even once and I'm sorry for that, really appreciate all the help!
So again, I'm looking for a 4K 32' monitor <500$ total, buying in California.

 

[Karadjgne]

Monitor: Asus VA32UQ 31.5" 3840x2160 60 Hz Monitor ($374.60 @ Amazon)

 

[laker1706]

Monitor: Asus VA32UQ 31.5" 3840x2160 60 Hz Monitor ($374.60 @ Amazon)

Couldn't find any reviews

 

[Darkbreeze]

Not 32", but still great LG panel, 27" 4k with fantastic reviews. A good choice if you have to have 4k. No HDR, but big deal. Mine has HDR and I don't use it anyway. Plus, you didn't mention that as a must have so I'll assume it's not.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1384128-REG/lg_27uk650_w_27_ips_hdr_uhd.html


Reviews:

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/lg-27uk850-gaming-monitor,5708-7.html

https://www.rtings.com/monitor/reviews/lg/27uk650-w

 

[laker1706]

Not 32", but still great LG panel, 27" 4k with fantastic reviews. A good choice if you have to have 4k. No HDR, but big deal. Mine has HDR and I don't use it anyway. Plus, you didn't mention that as a must have so I'll assume it's not.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1384128-REG/lg_27uk650_w_27_ips_hdr_uhd.html


Reviews:

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/lg-27uk850-gaming-monitor,5708-7.html

https://www.rtings.com/monitor/reviews/lg/27uk650-w

I guess the 27UL500 is exactly the same excluding the adjustable stand?
I probably can't go with 32" anyway as it will simply not fit in the suitcase

 

[Darkbreeze]

Not really. Pretty sure it's a totally different panel AND different implementation of supporting hardware/design around the panel.

Doesn't seem to be nearly as good, which is to be expected since that is normally a 300 dollar display while the other one is normally over 500 dollars until recently.

LG 27UL500 Review – Affordable 4K IPS Monitor for Mixed Use

The LG 27UL500 is the next budget variant of the Korean brand’s extensive 4K IPS monitor portfolio which provides excellent quality and performance

www.monitornerds.com

 

[laker1706]

Not really. Pretty sure it's a totally different panel AND different implementation of supporting hardware/design around the panel.

Doesn't seem to be nearly as good, which is to be expected since that is normally a 300 dollar display while the other one is normally over 500 dollars until recently.

LG 27UL500 Review – Affordable 4K IPS Monitor for Mixed Use

The LG 27UL500 is the next budget variant of the Korean brand’s extensive 4K IPS monitor portfolio which provides excellent quality and performance

www.monitornerds.com

Looks like the UL500 does fall behind a little bit behing the 650 models but idk if it's worth the 100$ extra...
If it does, I'll probably go for the K650 and not L650 because they are pretty similar and the K seems to have a little better response times and input lag while is just slightly better in other stuff that I don't really care about when it comes to those similarities.
+I can get the K with a VESA for only 10$ more than the L.

 

[Karadjgne]

There's varying grades many times due to manufacture origin. This is true with Samsung monitors/tvs, the best are made in Korea, the middling are Korean parts assembled in Taiwan and the lowest grade are Taiwanese with Taiwan parts. They'll have similar model numbers, except for a U or S etc.

 

[laker1706]

There's varying grades many times due to manufacture origin. This is true with Samsung monitors/tvs, the best are made in Korea, the middling are Korean parts assembled in Taiwan and the lowest grade are Taiwanese with Taiwan parts. They'll have similar model numbers, except for a U or S etc.

This is me after searching monitors for so long.

 

[Darkbreeze]

LOL.

 

[Karadjgne]

Imagine how Darkbreeze feels then, not only does he have to sift through all the stuff he does know, but also hunts the web like a trap-door spider trying to find answers for only God knows how many posts in a day....

I tick him off every now and then, I think the venting helps him blow off a little steam.... 😁

Did I mention he's also my favorite moderator?