Element Gaming 27" QHD 144hz 1ms Gaming Monitor-£269.97

[stuartb04]

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Element-Gaming-QHD-144hz-Monitor/dp/B07G8KJBW5

https://www.bit-tech.net/reviews/te...ing-27-qhd-144hz-1ms-gaming-monitor-review/1/

Good review,Good price. very tempting.

 

[Deleted member 178884]

Interesting, though I personally don't like the stand too much. I'd make a nice upgrade for you though over your 1080p display with that gtx 1080.

Another review here.

 

[stuartb04]

yea thats what the review stated also.

but at that price.cant go wrong.

really want a g-sync monitor though.

 

[Deleted member 178884]

really want a g-sync monitor though.

No chance in this price range, freesync is free and gysnc uses a module near enough 50% of this monitors cost.

but at that price.cant go wrong.

Yep, 1440p 144hz is supposed to be the "best experience" for gaming - I personally use 4k 60hz but with the g sync cost your better off with that monitor unless your willing to go around the £400-500 mark

 

[stuartb04]

No chance in this price range, freesync is free and gysnc uses a module near enough 50% of this monitors cost.

so g-sync isnt really essential if you have a card like ours.

 

[Deleted member 178884]

https://www.dell.com/en-uk/work/sho...&acd=2397242036629860&VEN3=411004604152611689
£380 with g sync - much more expensive...

so g-sync isnt really essential if you have a card like ours.

Depends whether you have screen tearing often - freesync will always be superior since it's software and costs nothing

It's just sort of syncing the monitor display and gpu or something like that to make it more fluid.

You do need a amd card for freesync though - there has been people running freesync with their nvidia card but it will require an AMD APU as the processor and I wouldn't call it anywhere near worth it. If you feel like you need g sync you'll have to save more but I have no experience with anything above 60hz but I'd recommend that monitor you found - at that price point it's excellent.

 

[stuartb04]

https://www.dell.com/en-uk/work/sho...&acd=2397242036629860&VEN3=411004604152611689
£380 with g sync - much more expensive...


Depends whether you have screen tearing often - freesync will always be superior since it's software and costs nothing

It's just sort of syncing the monitor display and gpu or something like that to make it more fluid.

You do need a amd card for freesync though - there has been people running freesync with their nvidia card but it will require an AMD APU as the processor and I wouldn't call it anywhere near worth it. If you feel like you need g sync you'll have to save more but I have no experience with anything above 60hz but I'd recommend that monitor you found - at that price point it's excellent.

although i do have the money for say that Dell monitor you linked, im finding it a bit hard at the moment to spend 300+ £ after i just bought my gtx recently.

but i feel 1080p is a waste (altough still good) for my gtx. i want to experience its true power!

found it cheaper again
https://www.morecomputers.com/a?pid=GS27>>Element+Gaming

 

[Deleted member 178884]

although i do have the money for say that Dell monitor you linked, im finding it a bit hard at the moment to spend 300+ £ after i just bought my gtx recently.

I'd get that element gaming monitor - I understand the pain, I paid £765 for my 1080 ti ftw3 new thanks to miners.

 

[John Naylor]

so g-sync isnt really essential if you have a card like ours.

At 1440p, G-Sync is where it's at due to the fact that there's a substantial amont of popular games that land either side of that magic 560 fps line.

Adaptive Sync

G-sync gives you adaptive sync from 30 fps on up
Freesync gives you adaptive sync from 40 fps on up


Motion Blue Reduction - As the impact of adaptive sync trails off rapidly after 60 fps, you can generally get a better experience with MBR if you can average 70 fps or better.

G-Sync provides ULMB via the hardware module which accounts fo the price premium between FeeSync and G_Sync
FreeSync has no hardware module so no MBR technology. Some Monitor manufacturers provide their own MBR option, quality / effectiveness is highly variable.

Other Options:

At 1080p, today you can reasonably obtain > 60-70 fps in most games and there the value adaptive sync from either camp is limited.

 

[kmetek]

TN instant pass for me.

 

[Vayra86]

DId you look at the review, or...

I have literally never seen a TN that has such dreadful contrast ratio. 1:470 MAXIMUM. The bog standard, 'just sufficient' contrast is 1:1000

And then there is uniformity. Basically you have a white spot and a dark spot on opposite corners of the screen. Combined with 'barely any contrast' you might as well just close your eyes, its a better image.

Color accuracy is just weak, and it has visible color deviations in the blue/green spectrum as well. What that means is: the panel looks blueish. Like the ones you get in budget laptops.

*AVOID*

Note; The reviewer says it too, but sugar coats it, probably hoping to get future samples.
:
Contrast, as expected, comes out on the low side, even for a less expensive screen. This is perhaps the weakest element of the screen in that it is actually noticeable. The default white point is slightly blue-tinged at 7,800K, and although the preset values vary wildly from what they purport to be, the User setting hits a very nice sweet spot with a close-to-ideal white point of 6,700K and a boosted contrast ratio to match.

Slightly blue tinged... at 7800k? Dude. That's almost as blue as the sky. Even calibration cannot get it to a good white point, because 6500K still is the very highest you'd want to go. This panel won't make it.
Here is a scale: As you can see, for comfortable viewing, a white point calibrated to anything over 6000K is already 'going blue'. Its also bad for your eyes. (Look up blue light reduction tech, its nothing more than a warmer color temp in disguise).

 

[stuartb04]

DId you look at the review, or...

I have literally never seen a TN that has such dreadful contrast ratio. 1:470 MAXIMUM. The bog standard, 'just sufficient' contrast is 1:1000

And then there is uniformity. Basically you have a white spot and a dark spot on opposite corners of the screen. Combined with 'barely any contrast' you might as well just close your eyes, its a better image.

Color accuracy is just weak, and it has visible color deviations in the blue/green spectrum as well. What that means is: the panel looks blueish. Like the ones you get in budget laptops.

*AVOID*

Note; The reviewer says it too, but sugar coats it, probably hoping to get future samples.
:
Contrast, as expected, comes out on the low side, even for a less expensive screen. This is perhaps the weakest element of the screen in that it is actually noticeable. The default white point is slightly blue-tinged at 7,800K, and although the preset values vary wildly from what they purport to be, the User setting hits a very nice sweet spot with a close-to-ideal white point of 6,700K and a boosted contrast ratio to match.

Slightly blue tinged... at 7800k? Dude. That's almost as blue as the sky. Even calibration cannot get it to a good white point, because 6500K still is the very highest you'd want to go. This panel won't make it.
Here is a scale: As you can see, for comfortable viewing, a white point calibrated to anything over 6000K is already 'going blue'. Its also bad for your eyes. (Look up blue light reduction tech, its nothing more than a warmer color temp in disguise).

View attachment 108174View attachment 108175

im not an expert on monitors.so these sort of things will bypass me.

thanks for clarifying that for me.

that dell monitor is tempting that TEK linked though.

 

[Deleted member 178884]

that dell monitor is tempting that TEK linked though.

Try hotdeals uk : ) they post deals often that's how I found that monitor, I'd personally hold out till black friday / cyber monday OR check ebay/gumtree frequently - I had found my x7200 clevo laptop that way (in the post still) for £210 posted and you can find new stuff there people just don't want, you might find a deal worth getting.

 

[Vayra86]

although i do have the money for say that Dell monitor you linked, im finding it a bit hard at the moment to spend 300+ £ after i just bought my gtx recently.

but i feel 1080p is a waste (altough still good) for my gtx. i want to experience its true power!

found it cheaper again
https://www.morecomputers.com/a?pid=GS27>>Element+Gaming

As for its true power, just give it a year and the 1080 will be sweating on 1080p anyway. Or upgrade now and find yourself looking for more GPU grunt not much later

Bottom line: don't cheap out on a monitor. Even that Dell is still a TN and not a stellar one either.

 

[Deleted member 178884]

Bottom line: don't cheap out on a monitor. Even that Dell is still a TN and not a stellar one either.

I guess so, I cheaped out on my 4k 28" electriQ TN panel, it's a good monitor but nothing *too* impressive, monitors can be expensive but I guess it's worth saving the cash, however my panel isn't getting changed for a few years