• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Suggestions For A New Gaming Monitor

Durvelle27

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jul 10, 2012
Messages
6,823 (1.44/day)
Location
Memphis, TN
System Name Black Prometheus
Processor Ryzen 7 3700X
Cooling Thermalright PA120 SE
Storage Sandisk X300 512GB + WD Black 6TB+WD Black 6TB
Display(s) ACER AOPEN 34" 3440x1440 144Hz
Case DeepCool Matrexx 55 V3 w/ 6x120mm Intake + 3x120mm Exhaust
Audio Device(s) LG Dolby Atmos 5.1
Power Supply EVGA 600W
Mouse Logitech Trackman
Keyboard Logitech K350
Software Windows 10 EDU x64
What’s up guys, need some help deciding on a new monitor. I currently run 3x 1920x1200 monitorsbut triple monitor gaming is getting long in the tooth and the monitors are limited to 60Hz which is low for me. I’m looking to go with a single 1440p or Ultrawide monitor that supports Freesync 120Hz or more around 27”. Any suggestions
 
All the Ultrawide are 34" or bigger...
27" would be normal 16:9 widescreen monitors.

So I guess this is not what you're after?

If 27" is what you want, maybe this, if you're bold enough to try a new monitor brand and something over the top "gaming"?

Or maybe something more scaled back? Price seems ok as well.

MSI?

Or maybe a Samsung?

It would seem most are curved though, not sure if that's something you'd want or not.

I find buying monitors a pain, as you rarely get to see them and use them properly before it's on your desk and then you might not be happy with it.
I'm not overly impressed by my Asus, as it has been plagued by technical issues, but I do love having a 4K screen and I'm not sure I would ever want to go back to a lower resolution.
That said, I also have a Dell 25" 2560x1440 screen and it was good when I used it as my main screen.
However, I did play with the new Asus ROG Swift PG27UQX at Computex and it looked amazing. It's HDR 1000 with 576 zone local dimming and it looked super crisp. However, I expect it to cost a kidney and half a liver...
 
Last edited:
All the Ultrawide are 34" or bigger...
27" would be normal 16:9 widescreen monitors.

So I guess this is not what you're after?

If 27" is what you want, maybe this, if you're bold enough to try a new monitor brand and something over the top "gaming"?

Or maybe something more scaled back? Price seems ok as well.

Or there's always trusty old Dell...
1. No as it’s only 1080p
2. Price is step
3. Looks decent

I want to stay under $350
 
Sorry, kept adding bits to the post above...

The Acer above is around $300 on Amazon.
Oddly enough, their 31.5" model is slightly cheaper...

Looks like Dell has a FreeSync model on Amazon as well, didn't see it on Dell's website oddly enough.

LG has a 32" model that is 2560x1440.
 
Lot of great options
 
There are some odd brands on Amazon as well, not sure I'd go for one of those though, even though some are quite cheap.
Tends to be lower grade panels and/or no support.
I'd consider the Dell personally, based on my experience with my 25" display.
 
All the Ultrawide are 34" or bigger...
27" would be normal 16:9 widescreen monitors.

So I guess this is not what you're after?

If 27" is what you want, maybe this, if you're bold enough to try a new monitor brand and something over the top "gaming"?

Or maybe something more scaled back? Price seems ok as well.

MSI?

Or maybe a Samsung?

It would seem most are curved though, not sure if that's something you'd want or not.

I find buying monitors a pain, as you rarely get to see them and use them properly before it's on your desk and then you might not be happy with it.
I'm not overly impressed by my Asus, as it has been plagued by technical issues, but I do love having a 4K screen and I'm not sure I would ever want to go back to a lower resolution.
That said, I also have a Dell 25" 2560x1440 screen and it was good when I used it as my main screen.
However, I did play with the new Asus ROG Swift PG27UQX at Computex and it looked amazing. It's HDR 1000 with 576 zone local dimming and it looked super crisp. However, I expect it to cost a kidney and half a liver...

Important note about that, ultrawide absolute display real estate is not much higher with a 34 inch side by side with a 16:9 27 inch.

Something to keep an eye on, its easily overlooked (puns, yes yes).

Its easy to 'downgrade' without knowing it - 34 inch UW is actually slightly lower height than a 27 inch 16:9

That also puts a 1080 vertical res in better perspective for these panels, its not all that bad at all, the PPI gap isn't as large as you'd think with regular '94' DPI.

128551
 
Vivotek any good
 
VioTek I mean
Never heard of them. Seems to be an Amazon only brand. As I said above, there are a lot of strange brands on Amazon that I don't trust, as I have never heard of them and the quality might be sub-par for the panels and/or they have little to no support when something goes wrong.
They do seem to have a US office though, so they might not be all bad.
Maybe call up their support and see how they respond?
The one thing I would give them a minus point for is that they don't offer height adjustable stands on most of their monitors under $400.
 
I strongly suggest to avoid Asus PG series. They're great but the panels quality is terrible, bleeds everywhere, most likely it has something to do with the QC. My uncle owns a PC store all of his 22 units PG27 all bleeds! Some minor some worse, sure its the nature of IPS but Ive seen many other maker or even cheap IPS China monitors that don't bleed at all. Get LG or DELL instead, they're great and much better.
 
I have an AOC AG241QX. It's a 24" 1440P 144Hz FreeSync monitor for under $300. The picture quality seems good for a TN monitor, it has a built in powered USB 3.0 hub, the stand is extremely adjustable, and it has a wired remote to make navigating the on screen menus much easier.


I haven't really had any problems with it other than a temporary stuck pixel (I was able to fix it by pressing on and around it and it hasn't come back since).

There is a 27" version of it, but it isn't available from Amazon as of writing this.
 
Now I’m thinking if 24” would be enough

I wold be sitting about 2-3 feet at way at my desk

And I’m thinking I’ll keep the 3 monitors for work production and have the 1440p for just gaming
 
I'm currently running a 32" 1440p Viotek. Decent performance for the price. My friend just purchased this monitor off Amazon, and the picture quality is solid as well.
 
Now I’m thinking if 24” would be enough

I wold be sitting about 2-3 feet at way at my desk

And I’m thinking I’ll keep the 3 monitors for work production and have the 1440p for just gaming
That's how I have my setup. I have two 19" 5:4 Dell monitors, one on each side of the AOC for productivity. Their vertical screen sizes pretty much match that of a 24" 16:9 monitor, though the resolutions are much lower.

I really wish 5:4 monitors were being made. They let triple monitor setups take up much less horizontal space.
 
5700xt for 3440x1440p at 120hz ? I suggest you stick to 2560x1440.
 
5700xt for 3440x1440p at 120hz ? I suggest you stick to 2560x1440.
5700XT should have no issues at either resolution

It would probably be better to go for a monitor with a refresh rate of at least 100 hz. The refresh rate determines how many frames per second a monitor can show. For example, having a monitor with a refresh rate of 60 hz would mean that your monitor can only display 60 FPS, even if you have 100 FPS in-game. A lot of these monitors tend to be expensive, but here are your choices.
OP states 144HHz monitor
 
Considering you're in the States Pixio/Viotek might be good alternative, especially considering your $350 budget.
https://www.amazon.com/27-Inch-Monitor-Samsung-FreeSync-GamePlus/dp/B078P57ZWL - $299

Pixio has 277h that's IPS, but it's $419. 276h costs 319.99 and has a freesync range of 20-144Hz.
Check Pixio's website for availability:
 
5700XT should have no issues at either resolution


OP states 144HHz monitor

Well, then you should adjust your expectations. You won't be running ultra on that card at that res and get any sort of high refresh action, that is for sure. At medium, maybe high, perhaps. Any higher, problematic.

You're better off rebalancing things a bit. High refresh AND high res is just a waste of money and no, time won't fix that either, quite the opposite. As time goes on, games get heavier, not lighter, at the same resolution. At 1440p, 120 fps is feasible with that card and without sliding your graphics quality into the ground.

I'd focus on a high quality panel and display tech before resolution being 'as high as possible'. Resolution is grossly overrated, the real point is pixel density and when you have enough + a decent viewing distance, higher res only gives problems, not solutions.

27 inch 1440p will give you similar pixel density to what you were used to, while giving you more height than you had and removing your bezels. I'd consider that an upgrade, and its also a good match for a 5700XT if you want this to run at high refresh. One step at a time ;)

Alternatively, you might want to look at 1080 height ultrawides with high refresh. If that is too little in height, I'd just drop the high refresh idea and get a 75 hz ultrawide at 1440p.

Or don't, and you will be feeling like 'missing out' on your spanking new ultrawide high res high refresh panel that cost an arm and a leg... I mean, the 5700XT is new, you will want to upgrade it sooner than later with such a panel or it just won't shine. Its not pleasant being royally under your max refresh rate, you notice it more than you would 60 fps on a 60hz panel. Its playable, but you do notice each frame being held for several refreshes, consistency is down.
 
Last edited:
pcgh does 3440x1440 testing for games as one of few if not the only one.Check it out.It really is a demanding resolution compared to 2560x1440,and 5700xt is frankly not that great for it,it's around oc'd gtx 1080 performance.Fine for 2560x1440,but at 21:9 it'll certainly fall short of driving a +100hz monitor.
 
pcgh does 3440x1440 testing for games as one of few if not the only one.Check it out.It really is a demanding resolution compared to 2560x1440,and 5700xt is frankly not that great for it,it's around oc'd gtx 1080 performance.Fine for 2560x1440,but at 21:9 it'll certainly fall short of driving a +100hz monitor.

Exactly and reviews also show us that Navi does not excel at higher resolutions, but rather loses out on relative performance the higher you go, it actually does best at 1440p.
 
look at 2070 in rage 2


69 fps at 1440p 16:9
52 fps at 1440p 21:9

25% slower.that'd be like running an oc'd 1070/1660Ti at 2560x1440,fine for 60hz but buying a 120hz panel is a waste.

Exactly and reviews also show us that Navi does not excel at higher resolutions, but rather loses out on relative performance the higher you go, it actually does best at 1440p.
that too.seemed weird when I saw it but 8gb turing cards actually gain a few percent compred to 8gb navi/pascals the higher the resolution.

wouldn't go 3440x1440 even with my 2070 super,you're getting a big performance penalty for wider peripheral vision.that's a bad deal to me.frankly I'd like every game to have nvidia multi res shading like shadow warrior does,even on my 16:9 24" monitor I'm only looking at about 2/3rds of the display,especiallt in fast paced games.If you were able to render 1/6th to each side at 1080p I wouln't even notice and the performance could improve a lot.
 
Last edited:
Looks like this is what i'm get

Pixio PX275h as its FreeSync, 1440p, 100Hz, IPS, and HDR
 
Back
Top