# New monitor for my gaming rig



## bc.be4ts (Jul 9, 2014)

Hey guys supp? Dont know if is there i put my question but I will put it anyway. So currently I have a LG 23" 2360 16:9 1920x1080 monitor with a refresh rate of 60Hz. I know my GPU and CPU both can handle 1440p so my question is.

Are there any 27" 16:9 2560x1440p monitor with a refresh rate of 120hz or 144hz? I prefer 144hz. Money isnt a problem but i prefer spending a maximum for this type of monitor 400/500euros  btw my gpu and cpu are gtx 770 dcii oc 2gb + i7 4770k 4.3ghz at moment


----------



## BarbaricSoul (Jul 9, 2014)

a single 770 will have a problem running more than 60 FPS on new games at 1440p. My 3930k @ 4.3ghz/780ti system has problems with newer games and keeping 60 FPS at 1600p. Getting a 120 or 144Hz 1440p monitor for a single 770 is a waste, just get a 60Hz 1440p monitor.


----------



## RCoon (Jul 9, 2014)

BarbaricSoul said:


> a single 770 will have a problem running more than 60 FPS on new games at 1440p. My 3930k @ 4.3ghz/780ti system has problems with newer games and keeping 60 FPS at 1600p. Getting a 120 or 144Hz 1440p monitor for a single 770 is a waste, just get a 60Hz 1440p monitor.



This, and this, and some more of this. Unless you fancy yourself a pro CSGO player or something, I see little point in a 144hz monitor.

I owned a 144hz monitor, overclocked it, it was TN, and I used it for about 6 months before I sold it. IPS is simply superior, screw the extra 3ms input lag, you will never notice it. And obviously you'll never see 144FPS on 1440/1600P unless you're runing XFire or SLI, and maybe playing LoL or Hello Kitty Island Adventure.


----------



## bc.be4ts (Jul 9, 2014)

BarbaricSoul said:


> a single 770 will have a problem running more than 60 FPS on new games at 1440p. My 3930k @ 4.3ghz/780ti system has problems with newer games and keeping 60 FPS at 1600p. Getting a 120 or 144Hz 1440p monitor for a single 770 is a waste, just get a 60Hz 1440p monitor.


Well I tested mine gpu on a 27 monitor 1440p that my friends have and i was all ok. Titanfall same settings that i have on 1080p running stable at 60fps never drop and never goes up because this game is capped to 60fps xD. On bf4 i lost 10 fps of average so instead of getting 100fps i get 90fps, and 70/75 on big map with full 64slots, Crysis 3 my fps gone down from 80 to 60 and sometimes 55fps with all settings in high but shadows low/off and msaa x4. CS GO 300fps because its a cpu game  cod ghosts i have the same fps 91. But I will buy a new gpu the 780ti because its more future proof and i can buy it from a store paying 150euros/month during 4 months and mine 770 i will sell to a friend for 240euros


----------



## RCoon (Jul 9, 2014)

bc.be4ts said:


> Well I tested mine gpu on a 27 monitor 1440p that my friends have and i was all ok. Titanfall same settings that i have on 1080p running stable at 60fps never drop and never goes up because this game is capped to 60fps xD. On bf4 i lost 10 fps of average so instead of getting 100fps i get 90fps, and 70/75 on big map with full 64slots, Crysis 3 my fps gone down from 80 to 60 and sometimes 55fps with all settings in high but shadows low/off and msaa x4. CS GO 300fps because its a cpu game  cod ghosts i have the same fps 91. But I will buy a new gpu the 780ti because its more future proof and i can buy it from a store paying 150euros/month during 4 months and mine 770 i will sell to a friend for 240euros



Those are your Max FPS figures, I'd be interested in your minimum FPS figures and average, because even taking your Max FPS figures into account, that does not scream "buy a 144hz monitor to capitalize" to me at all.
Get yourself a nice 1440p IPS monitor, ignore the 144hz hype. Until it comes to IPS, I have no intention of ever downgrading to TN again.


----------



## bc.be4ts (Jul 9, 2014)

Ha and my friends monitor isnt 144hz is 120hz


----------



## RCoon (Jul 9, 2014)

bc.be4ts said:


> Ha and my friends monitor isnt 144hz is 120hz



Are you looking for advice, or for people to tell you to go ahead and buy 120/144hz monitors? I see a lot of people trying to justify an idea once it's in their head, sometimes it's not always best.


----------



## ne6togadno (Jul 9, 2014)

iiyama ProLite XB2779QS


----------



## bc.be4ts (Jul 9, 2014)

RCoon said:


> Those are your Max FPS figures, I'd be interested in your minimum FPS figures and average, because even taking your Max FPS figures into account, that does not scream "buy a 144hz monitor to capitalize" to me at all.
> Get yourself a nice 1440p IPS monitor, ignore the 144hz hype. Until it comes to IPS, I have no intention of ever downgrading to TN again.


Those are currently my average fps on my friends monitor. CRYSIS 3 MAX FPS: 170 MIN FPS: 4 INTESIVE BATTLES
BATTLEFIELD 4 MAX FPS: 160 MIN FPS: 60 
TITANFALL MAX AVG MIN FPS: 60
COD GHOSTS MAX MIN AVG FPS: 60
I did a test and the cpu matters too because with my other pc(fx 4300 oc to 4.5ghz) on the 1080p monitor i cant at the same settings 50 fps on crysis 3 -_-"


----------



## bc.be4ts (Jul 9, 2014)

ne6togadno said:


> iiyama ProLite XB2779QS


Wow that monitor have great reviews  i saw on the store 2 days ago and i was admired how big it is and the picture is very nice  maybe I go for that one  AOC sayed to me that they will launch some 27 gsync monitors I will wait just 1/2 months and see if they worth it. If not i will go with this one  like RCoon says screw the 3ms plus


----------



## RCoon (Jul 9, 2014)

bc.be4ts said:


> Wow that monitor have great reviews  i saw on the store 2 days ago and i was admired how big it is and the picture is very nice  maybe I go for that one  AOC sayed to me that they will launch some 27 gsync monitors I will wait just 1/2 months and see if they worth it. If not i will go with this one  like RCoon says screw the 3ms plus



GSync is also quite interesting to me. I've been on the fence as to whether I'm tempted to jump on it or not, as it has quite a high price point over standard IPS.


----------



## bc.be4ts (Jul 9, 2014)

RCoon said:


> GSync is also quite interesting to me. I've been on the fence as to whether I'm tempted to jump on it or not, as it has quite a high price point over standard IPS.


Well thats true they are expensive. AOC sayed to me that the 24" monitor with 144hz gsync will cost 450euros on Germany  its really interesting this gsync feature


----------



## BiggieShady (Jul 9, 2014)

RCoon said:


> I'm tempted to jump on it or not, as it has quite a high price point over standard IPS.



Do g-sync IPS/PLS monitors exist at all? All I see are TN panels over 120 Hz that have g-sync.


----------



## bc.be4ts (Jul 9, 2014)

BiggieShady said:


> Do g-sync IPS/PLS monitors exist at all? All I see are TN panels over 120 Hz that have g-sync.


What he was saying is that gsync monitors are really expensive compared to ips panel monitors :/ i can get a 27" ips monitor for the price of the aoc gsync 24" 144hz monitor :/


----------



## RCoon (Jul 9, 2014)

BiggieShady said:


> Do g-sync IPS/PLS monitors exist at all? All I see are TN panels over 120 Hz that have g-sync.



Asus claimed to have one coming Soon(tm)

EDIT: I don't get why GSync is being pushed on 144hz TN panels, GSync works best between 40-60FPS anyway, or at least when FPS drops dramatically. It makes little sense to use it when you're gunning at 144FPS and drop a little down to 120 or something. I'm supposing they're dumping it in everything that will turn a profit because of marketing crapwords. IPS panels are still expensive, and quite simply adding GSync to them won't encourage people to buy them because they will be even more overpriced. The market is just in a completely crap place right now, and instead of 1600P IPS/IGZO becoming affordable mainstream, we're getting 4K TN panels being made as cheap as humanly possible and still being sold at £500 a piece.


----------



## bc.be4ts (Jul 9, 2014)

RCoon said:


> Asus claimed to have one coming Soon(tm)
> 
> EDIT: I don't get why GSync is being pushed on 144hz TN panels, GSync works best between 40-60FPS anyway, or at least when FPS drops dramatically. It makes little sense to use it when you're gunning at 144FPS and drop a little down to 120 or something. I'm supposing they're dumping it in everything that will turn a profit because of marketing crapwords. IPS panels are still expensive, and quite simply adding GSync to them won't encourage people to buy them because they will be even more overpriced. The market is just in a completely crap place right now, and instead of 1600P IPS/IGZO becoming affordable mainstream, we're getting 4K TN panels being made as cheap as humanly possible and still being sold at £500 a piece.


Btw RCoon can u send me a link of your ips panel? And some 27" ips panel good for gaming please


----------



## RCoon (Jul 9, 2014)

bc.be4ts said:


> Btw RCoon can u send me a link of your ips panel? And some 27" ips panel good for gaming please



My IPS panel probably isn't sold anymore, and there are a lot better ones that I'd buy if I was looking now. I have to say Dell make some shiny ones, and the DGM's in the UK look pretty swanky. I'm not sure which ones are available in your country.


----------



## bc.be4ts (Jul 9, 2014)

I t


RCoon said:


> Asus claimed to have one coming Soon(tm)
> 
> EDIT: I don't get why GSync is being pushed on 144hz TN panels, GSync works best between 40-60FPS anyway, or at least when FPS drops dramatically. It makes little sense to use it when you're gunning at 144FPS and drop a little down to 120 or something. I'm supposing they're dumping it in everything that will turn a profit because of marketing crapwords. IPS panels are still expensive, and quite simply adding GSync to them won't encourage people to buy them because they will be even more overpriced. The market is just in a completely crap place right now, and instead of 1600P IPS/IGZO becoming affordable mainstream, we're getting 4K TN panels being made as cheap as humanly possible and still being sold at £500 a piece.


I think ita because to be a more future proof monitors because on the future you will see many pcs running on ultra settings at 120 or 144 fps on that kind of monitors with 120hz and 144hz. For example a gtx 990ti will be running for fine 120fps or 144fps on gsync monitors at ultra with 2560x1440p  just a tough


----------



## bc.be4ts (Jul 9, 2014)

RCoon said:


> My IPS panel probably isn't sold anymore, and there are a lot better ones that I'd buy if I was looking now. I have to say Dell make some shiny ones, and the DGM's in the UK look pretty swanky. I'm not sure which ones are available in your country.


Im in suisse but dell are too expensive where


----------



## RCoon (Jul 9, 2014)

bc.be4ts said:


> Im in suisse but dell are too expensive where



AOC, Ilyama?


----------



## bc.be4ts (Jul 9, 2014)

RCoon said:


> AOC, Ilyama?


Those are good ones. Can you get me some ips 27" please so i can see prices and all that stuff please?


----------



## BarbaricSoul (Jul 9, 2014)

bc.be4ts said:


> Those are currently my average fps on my friends monitor. CRYSIS 3 MAX FPS: 170 MIN FPS: 4 INTESIVE BATTLES
> BATTLEFIELD 4 MAX FPS: 160 MIN FPS: 60
> TITANFALL MAX AVG MIN FPS: 60
> COD GHOSTS MAX MIN AVG FPS: 60
> I did a test and the cpu matters too because with my other pc(fx 4300 oc to 4.5ghz) on the 1080p monitor i cant at the same settings 50 fps on crysis 3 -_-"



Huh? Are you saying your system performs better than my 3930k/780ti system?

Crysis 3, single player level in tunnels right after killing the first boss Ceph, 2560*1600, all settings to very high I get between 48-55 FPS

BF4, single player, forgot name of level, but it's the one where at the beginning your character is being interrogated/tortured with a stun gun, 2560*1600, all setting very high, I get between 80-100 FPS

Titanfall, 2560*1600, all settings to highest setting, pegged at 60 FPS

I'm not trying to talk shit about your system, I'm sure it performs nicely. But I find it very hard to believe your 4770k @ 4.2ghz/GTX 770 system performs better than this, even at the slightly lower resolution-


----------



## BarbaricSoul (Jul 9, 2014)

bc.be4ts said:


> Those are good ones. Can you get me some ips 27" please so i can see prices and all that stuff please?




http://pcpartpicker.com/parts/monit...002160,256002048,256001600,256001440&sort=a11


----------



## Hilux SSRG (Jul 9, 2014)

Worthy consideration since you run a dual monitor setup already:

LG 34UM95


----------



## bc.be4ts (Jul 9, 2014)

BarbaricSoul said:


> Huh? Are you saying your system performs better than my 3930k/780ti system?
> 
> Crysis 3, single player level in tunnels right after killing the first boss Ceph, 2560*1600, all settings to very high I get between 48-55 FPS
> 
> ...


I forgot to say i changed to 4.3ghz x) bf4 i dont have full ultra or high. Dont even need full ultra for multiplayer shadows are useless on games like titanfall and bf4. Titanfall is more a cpu game and there are things u dont need to multiplayer  i know a lot of pc tweaks thats why i can achieve that fps with good quality and performance man  my friend have the same rig that you have byt he changed from the i7 3970k to a brand new i7 4790k and the hero vii and he have more fps than me at 1080p and 1440p :/ but yes i can achieve great fps with this gpu. Tough there is games and things u performe better than me. U have a great pc  i just want that gpu u have ^^


----------



## bc.be4ts (Jul 9, 2014)

Hilux SSRG said:


> Worthy consideration since you run a dual monitor setup already:
> 
> LG 34UM95


Its a good one but i dont want a ultra widescreen i want just 27" 2560x1440p but thx btw


----------



## GhostRyder (Jul 9, 2014)

RCoon said:


> Asus claimed to have one coming Soon(tm)
> 
> EDIT: I don't get why GSync is being pushed on 144hz TN panels, GSync works best between 40-60FPS anyway, or at least when FPS drops dramatically. It makes little sense to use it when you're gunning at 144FPS and drop a little down to 120 or something. I'm supposing they're dumping it in everything that will turn a profit because of marketing crapwords. IPS panels are still expensive, and quite simply adding GSync to them won't encourage people to buy them because they will be even more overpriced. The market is just in a completely crap place right now, and instead of 1600P IPS/IGZO becoming affordable mainstream, we're getting 4K TN panels being made as cheap as humanly possible and still being sold at £500 a piece.


I dissagree with that and agree with it at the same time.  Gsync or the Vesa standard will run best when FPS is changing alot in general so at 144hz its probably even more necessary to keep things as smoothly as possible.  That is what I have seen at least because otherwise if your FPS is not changing its pretty much not doing anything beneficial for you.

I also like TN panels just fine if they are done *right.*  There are very poorly done TN panels out there and some decent ones and you can notice a distinct difference.   A good IPS panel is the best but they are behind still for the high refresh high resolution areas and cost a fortune.



bc.be4ts said:


> Hey guys supp? Dont know if is there i put my question but I will put it anyway. So currently I have a LG 23" 2360 16:9 1920x1080 monitor with a refresh rate of 60Hz. I know my GPU and CPU both can handle 1440p so my question is.
> 
> Are there any 27" 16:9 2560x1440p monitor with a refresh rate of 120hz or 144hz? I prefer 144hz. Money isnt a problem but i prefer spending a maximum for this type of monitor 400/500euros  btw my gpu and cpu are gtx 770 dcii oc 2gb + i7 4770k 4.3ghz at moment


I do not think your going to be very happy on a GTX 770 trying to run a 120hz/144hz 2560x1440p or 1600p setup.  You will need a second card to run that effectively.  If you want a high resolution monitor, get a 2560x1440p 60hz monitor and you will be good or if your really wanting the extra FPS then grab a 120/144hz 1080p monitor.  Personally ive used a 1080p 120hz 3D monitor (3D disabled) and in all honesty I did not think it was that amazing compared to the better resolutions at 1440p.  That is just my opinion of course so you can take it as a grain of sand.

If you want some suggestions, here is a couple:

Asus 2560x1440p 60hz
http://www.amazon.co_uk/dp/B009668YPM/?tag=tec053-21

Asus 1080p 144hz.
http://www.amazon.co_uk/dp/B008IER7BU/?tag=tec053-21

If you really want a 120hz 1440p monitor the choices are very limited and are going to cost alot.


----------



## XSI (Jul 9, 2014)

That LG 34UM95 do want  no need for eyefinity...only thing needed is $$$


----------



## Hilux SSRG (Jul 9, 2014)

bc.be4ts said:


> Its a good one but i dont want a ultra widescreen i want just 27" 2560x1440p but thx btw



I understand but just wanted to say you can run 2560x1440p games, programs, etc. on that with no issues.  The extra widescreen is nice for movies and having two/three windows side by side for super productivity.


----------



## BarbaricSoul (Jul 9, 2014)

Hilux SSRG said:


> I understand but just wanted to say you can run 2560x1440p games, programs, etc. on that with no issues.  The extra widescreen is nice for movies and having two/three windows side by side for super productivity.



my 2560*1600 is equal to 4 of my 15" laptops monitors, probably my favorite thing about my monitor.


----------



## BiggieShady (Jul 9, 2014)

GhostRyder said:


> I dissagree with that and agree with it at the same time. Gsync or the Vesa standard will run best when FPS is changing alot in general so at 144hz its probably even more necessary to keep things as smoothly as possible.



Yeah, but g-sync being beneficial for 144 Hz somehow translates to having absolutely no mid range monitors with g-sync, as if it wouldn't be beneficial for 60 Hz and someone playing games on weaker GPU at higher resolutions. Yes, they are pushing it as a premium feature at first, but for how long ... and also I expected cheaper asic at this point, not expensive fpga.


----------



## GhostRyder (Jul 9, 2014)

BiggieShady said:


> Yeah, but g-sync being beneficial for 144 Hz somehow translates to having absolutely no mid range monitors with g-sync, as if it wouldn't be beneficial for 60 Hz and someone playing games on weaker GPU at higher resolutions. Yes, they are pushing it as a premium feature at first, but for how long ... and also I expected cheaper asic at this point, not expensive fpga.


From what I gather your saying it would be beneficial on mid range solutions like a 1920x1080p 60hz monitor correct?  Well that being said most mid and high end GPU's are getting to the point stability at 60hz on a 1080p screen is a snap for them.  Those GPU's normally sell aroudn the price point of 300 bucks which is about the premium you pay for a monitor with Gsync (I think 250 may have been the lowest I saw) which would beg the question as to why you didn't just invest in the higher card to begin with since you would probably be paying around 450-550 bucks for the monitor alone.  Would it make a difference though, yes it would but not until the price comes down on the modules to make it more manageable at the lower price points.  I see Gsyncs uses at higher resolutions and especially great at the high refresh monitors where stability is difficult which includes the low range if you can not keep the FPS stable.  But I still stand by saying that you might as well just invest that money into a better video card at that point.

Personally, I just skipped it all and went for the next step up beyond 1440p.

@bc.be4ts If you want a Gsync monitor,  I could suggest a few as well but I personally have only seen one in action so far.


----------



## bc.be4ts (Jul 9, 2014)

GhostRyder said:


> From what I gather your saying it would be beneficial on mid range solutions like a 1920x1080p 60hz monitor correct?  Well that being said most mid and high end GPU's are getting to the point stability at 60hz on a 1080p screen is a snap for them.  Those GPU's normally sell aroudn the price point of 300 bucks which is about the premium you pay for a monitor with Gsync (I think 250 may have been the lowest I saw) which would beg the question as to why you didn't just invest in the higher card to begin with since you would probably be paying around 450-550 bucks for the monitor alone.  Would it make a difference though, yes it would but not until the price comes down on the modules to make it more manageable at the lower price points.  I see Gsyncs uses at higher resolutions and especially great at the high refresh monitors where stability is difficult which includes the low range if you can not keep the FPS stable.  But I still stand by saying that you might as well just invest that money into a better video card at that point.
> 
> Personally, I just skipped it all and went for the next step up beyond 1440p.
> 
> @bc.be4ts If you want a Gsync monitor,  I could suggest a few as well but I personally have only seen one in action so far.


Thanks man but i prefer the 27" 1440p too like you  i just need a good one for gaming/editing sony vegas and cinema 4d


----------



## GhostRyder (Jul 9, 2014)

bc.be4ts said:


> Thanks man but i prefer the 27" 1440p too like you  i just need a good one for gaming/editing sony vegas and cinema 4d


I actually didn't get 1440p or 1600p, I instead went for 2160p.

The Asus 27inch I linked gives really good color reproduction and looks great.  I have seen that one personally and like the monitor the way it plays and looks!.  If Asus puts their PB branding on it, then it means its a top notch product!


----------



## BiggieShady (Jul 9, 2014)

GhostRyder said:


> Well that being said most mid and high end GPU's are getting to the point stability at 60hz on a 1080p screen is a snap for them.



Not high end gpus, gsync would be beneficial on these screens for low power, low heat steam-boxes that can push full hd in 30-60 fps range (gtx 750 for example)


----------



## bc.be4ts (Jul 9, 2014)

GhostRyder said:


> I actually didn't get 1440p or 1600p, I instead went for 2160p.
> 
> The Asus 27inch I linked gives really good color reproduction and looks great.  I have seen that one personally and like the monitor the way it plays and looks!.  If Asus puts their PB branding on it, then it means its a top notch product!


 i cant open the link from amazon it givesme an error


----------



## GhostRyder (Jul 9, 2014)

bc.be4ts said:


> i cant open the link from amazon it givesme an error


http://www.amazon.co_uk/dp/B009668YPM/?tag=tec053-21

Try that one.


BiggieShady said:


> Not high end gpus, gsync would be beneficial on these screens for low power, low heat steam-boxes that can push full hd in 30-60 fps range (gtx 750 for example)


Still a hard sell unless the price of the module is dropped to around 50 bucks or 100 bucks.  Again its highly doubtful you would rather spend 500+ bucks on a monitor then spend 150 on a GPU for gaming purposes at least.


----------



## bc.be4ts (Jul 10, 2014)

GhostRyder said:


> http://www.amazon.co_uk/dp/B009668YPM/?tag=tec053-21
> 
> Try that one.


and again a error  can you give me from another store or asus page?


----------



## ne6togadno (Jul 10, 2014)

bc.be4ts said:


> and again a error  can you give me from another store or asus page?


change underline between co and uk with dot and you will see it


----------



## GhostRyder (Jul 10, 2014)

bc.be4ts said:


> and again a error  can you give me from another store or asus page?


http://www.asus.com/Commercial_Monitors_Projectors/PB278Q/
Asus homepage of the monitor, I do not know why the links do not work...


----------



## Chetkigaming (Jul 10, 2014)

ASUS ROG Swift PG278Q g-sync 1440p 144hz 1ms response 27" , created for OP.


----------



## bc.be4ts (Jul 10, 2014)

Chetkigaming said:


> ASUS ROG Swift PG278Q g-sync 1440p 144hz 1ms response 27" , created for OP.


Thx but its too expensive


----------



## BiggieShady (Jul 10, 2014)

GhostRyder said:


> Still a hard sell unless the price of the module is dropped to around 50 bucks or 100 bucks.



I agree, that's why I mentioned they should have by now produced cheaper module with g-sync ASIC instead of FPGA. 
FPGAs are usually used in pre-production to test, quickly re-iterate, develop and optimize chip design before it goes into mass production.
I feel like they're doing hardware version of selling early access for games ... plus of course premium price tag.


----------

