About monitors

[eskiMoe]

I wonder what the price will be. ROG Swift cost around 850€ new and it was a TN panel.

Also, @Guy N'wah since I have no interest in the current or upcoming line up of G-Sync monitors, is it possible to install G-sync in a 60hz monitor of your choice? No UWQHD VA screens with G-Sync available or even rumored.. :/

 

[GuyNwah]

@eskimoe
nVidia promised to make G-Sync available for field-installable kits. Only ASUS took them up on it. You can get a G-Sync kit for the ASUS VG248QE (nice TN monitor, but still TN), $200 US.

There's also a very different G-Sync card for professional graphics; it requires two nVidia Quadro cards in SLI, and it's used where you need to sync multiple renderers or sync your workstation to an external signal.

(My guess is this is why G-Sync is so complicated and so proprietary. It's a consumer port of a technology nVidia developed for professional video.)

 

[Garrison72]

Alright guys, please help me decide. More of a budget gaming monitor but with all the specs required for fast performance:

Asus VS248H-P 24-Inch Full-HD LED-lit LCD Monitor

http://www.amazon.com/Asus-VS248H-P-24-Inch-Full-HD-LED-lit/dp/B0058UUR6E/ref=sr_1_22?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1430876026&sr=1-22&keywords=gaming+monitors

Or a more expensive Dell with lots of bells and whistles. If the performance hit is minimal I want to go with ISP because I've bought the hardware to support it. I just need to know if I'm picking monitors with the right specs for solid gaming here:

Dell UltraSharp U2414H 23.8 inch Widescreen IPS LCD Monitor

http://www.amazon.com/Dell-UltraSharp-U2414H-Widescreen-Monitor/dp/B00H3JIGHA/ref=sr_1_3?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1430877183&sr=1-3&keywords=Dell+Ultrasharp+LED+24"+U2414H+IPS

I need to order one pronto.:help:

 

[eskiMoe]

Or a more expensive Dell with lots of bells and whistles. If the performance hit is minimal I want to go with ISP because I've bought the hardware to support it. I just need to know if I'm picking monitors with the right specs for solid gaming here:

Um. Panel technologies won't impact your gaming performance. And IPS doesn't require any specific hardware for it compared to TN or VA. If you're going for a high refresh rate (120-144hz) monitor and/or with G-Sync or Freesync then you will need to consider about your GPU choices though, but neither of those monitors support higher refresh rates or gsync/freesync.

[video=youtube;YC-KHOKM7ck]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YC-KHOKM7ck[/video]


Basically TN (Asus) is better for multiplayer games since it has higher response times, but the Dell IPS panel offers better image quality and viewing angles so it's better for everything else.

 

[BlackWolf500.298]

I wondered about a new monitor too.

When making YT videos, do you think it hurts the quality if I have a 1680x1050 monitor and record in 1600x900 (because YT aspect ratio is 16:9)?
I mean I would of course use SuperSampling to increase graphical fidelity, recordings would be made with a GTX970 using Nvidia Shadowplay. (hoping to get "high" or "very high" footage of TW3 that way).

I would like to upgrade in a year or two when I have the money (to a 1080p or a 1200p monitor (anything bigger would be bad for my eyes considering the short distance to my monitor)). I heard G-Sync monitors are coming and I recon if I wait a year or two I might get the second generation of G-Sync monitors (so the "problems" of the first generation are mostly fixed) and a second GTX970 to use in SLI.

What do you think? What do you recommend? Know anything about the monitor brands? Which company sells the best for the best price?

 

[GuyNwah]

1600x900 gets scaled to 1280x720 and re-encoded, I believe; so in 16x9 format, use 1280x720 or 1920x1080. YouTube veterans may have tricks for avoiding this.

If you are using it just to put your card in a mode where you can capture 1920x1080 video, any inexpensive monitor will do. Or use a headless display terminator.

 

[BlackWolf500.298]

1600x900 gets scaled to 1280x720 and re-encoded, I believe; so in 16x9 format, use 1280x720 or 1920x1080. YouTube veterans may have tricks for avoiding this.

If you are using it just to put your card in a mode where you can capture 1920x1080 video, any inexpensive monitor will do. Or use a headless display terminator.

That unfortunately doesn't solve my problem.
IF I do ever get a new monitor I do not want "any inexpensive monitor" because of course I want to ENJOY playing those games, even if I record it.

As for the 1600x900 to 1280x720 scaling...... wtf? Why? Is a PC incapable of having a TRUE 1600x900 format? It fits the 16:9 scheme.
If I would find a way to capture 16:9 footage with 1680x1050 or put the 16:10 videos into Youtube WITHOUT black bars on both sides I would do it, but it seems impossible.

As for the monitor. Fact is I can't or do not want to afford a new one atm.

My question would be (beyond recommendations for monitor purchases), will AA help increasing the graphical fidelity despite not having FULL 1080p, will I be able to reach similar graphical fidelity, to provide good video quality when recording on my 1680x1050 monitor by adjusting the graphical settings?

Also do you find black bars left and right of a Youtube video annoying or not?

 

[GuyNwah]

What the PC does is irrelevant. It's what Youtube does. Youtube doesn't do 1600x900. If it's 16x9 format, it has to be 1920x1080, 1280x720, or some greater or lesser resolutions Youtube supports.

https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/1722171?hl=en

You need a video source at 1920x1080 or 1280x720, not one at 1680x1050 or 1600x900. One way to get it is to get a monitor that does 1920x1080 and hook it up only when you're capturing video. Another way is to get a terminator that pretends it's a 1920x1080 monitor.

If you can't live with that, your recourse is to Youtube tech support at Google. There are cows I would get more out of talking to.

 

[Gilrond-i-Virdan]

@Garrison72: I can't compare with Asus, but I'm pretty satisfied with Dell U2413 that I'm using close to a year already. It happens to be one of the few Dells that is 16:10 (which I prefer). I don't like 16:9 aspect ratio, even though it's most common now.

UPDATE: apparently there is now U2415 which is the next iteration of U2412M. It's 16:10 but cheaper than U2413:
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/dell_u2415.htm

---------- Updated at 04:22 PM ----------

And unlike U2413 it has some flexibility with response time compensation (which is good, since it can help reducing ghosting):

The U2415 comes with a user control for the overdrive impulse available within the OSD menu in the 'display' section as shown above. This is rare for a Dell screen as normally you end up being reliant on the factory setup and often this has lead to issues with overshoot on some models (e.g. Dell U2413, U2713H, U3014). There are two options available here in the menu, for 'normal' and 'fast' modes.

First of all we carried out a smaller sample set of measurements in both of the 'Response Time' settings. These, along with various motion tests allowed us to quickly identify which was the optimum overdrive setting for this screen.
...
The overall gaming performance of the Dell U2415 was very good and we were pleased with what Dell have done with the response time control. This is the first time they've made a response time setting available from the normal OSD and it's nice that they've not forced an overly aggressive overdrive impulse on us like they did on some previous models (e.g. U2413, U2713H). Instead, the two response time settings allow you to choose the best option for your needs. The 'normal' mode was our preferred option, giving a fast (for IPS) response time of 8.6ms G2G, without introducing any real overshoot. A success really for this type of panel technology. It is a screen lacking higher refresh rate support or any advanced gaming features like blur reduction modes or G-sync, but as a general screen with decent IPS gaming performance, it's impressive.

If anything, aggressive RTC is the only thing that bothers me in U2413, since it can at times produce annoying ghosting. Now I think whether I should get U2415 or not...

 

[eskiMoe]

[video=youtube;tnhYkw-KMcY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tnhYkw-KMcY[/video]

Neat.

 

[BlackWolf500.298]

What the PC does is irrelevant. It's what Youtube does. Youtube doesn't do 1600x900. If it's 16x9 format, it has to be 1920x1080, 1280x720, or some greater or lesser resolutions Youtube supports.

https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/1722171?hl=en

You need a video source at 1920x1080 or 1280x720, not one at 1680x1050 or 1600x900. One way to get it is to get a monitor that does 1920x1080 and hook it up only when you're capturing video. Another way is to get a terminator that pretends it's a 1920x1080 monitor.

If you can't live with that, your recourse is to Youtube tech support at Google. There are cows I would get more out of talking to.

What is if I use Nvidia Shadowplay? In the settings Nvidia Shadowplay seems to give you the option to record in a different resolution that your native one. So you can for example say "record 1080p and 60fps, despite having the monitor I have (1680x1050). Do you think that works?

 

[GuyNwah]

What is if I use Nvidia Shadowplay? In the settings Nvidia Shadowplay seems to give you the option to record in a different resolution that your native one. So you can for example say "record 1080p and 60fps, despite having the monitor I have (1680x1050). Do you think that works?

It works, at least some of the time, and is definitely worth a try. Good find.

 

[jockmick]

Just ordered an Asus ROG Swift! It's going to be amazing to experience The Witcher 3 for the first time on 27" and 1440p.

 

[eskiMoe]

Just ordered an Asus ROG Swift! It's going to be amazing to experience The Witcher 3 for the first time on 27" and 1440p.

Why not the Acer XB270HU? 1440p, 144hz and IPS. Would've been a big improvement over ROG Swift image quality wise..

 

[Gilrond-i-Virdan]

Can anyone recommend mini DisplayPort 1.2 to mini DisplayPort 1.2 cable that is VESA compliant? I need a long one (3m / 10ft).

 

[sidspyker]

Can we take a moment to talk about an upcoming monitor(Acer Z35) that sounds too good to be true?
VA Panel
G-Sync 144hz
21:9

It's like a dream come true, though I wonder at what cost this dream comes at and if it's 4:4:4

 

[jockmick]

Why not the Acer XB270HU? 1440p, 144hz and IPS. Would've been a big improvement over ROG Swift image quality wise..

It's not in stock anywhere in Sweden right now and it's over 100 euros more expensive.

 

[eskiMoe]

It's like a dream come true

Yeah. A dream.

35" @ 2560x1080. That's 79 PPI btw. Sorry but that's just pants on head retarded and for the life of me can't understand why people want massive monitors like this (or the LG 34" freesync model) with pathetic resolutions. 2560x1080 is more suited for 25" monitor, not 35". /rant

 

[sidspyker]

35?!?!? Well, there it goes, flying. WE FINALLY FOUND THE CATCH! I thought it was smaller, I don't have the space nor do I sit at a distance suitable for 35 inches.

 

[BlackWolf500.298]

Yeah. A dream.

35" @ 2560x1080. That's 79 PPI btw. Sorry but that's just pants on head retarded and for the life of me can't understand why people want massive monitors like this (or the LG 34" freesync model) with pathetic resolutions. 2560x1080 is more suited for 25" monitor, not 35". /rant

I think the answer is simple. Lot of people these days (mainly non-PC gamers, or rather people not playing only or primarily on PC) do play further away from the monitor. Mine is only a few meters away from me so I do not need a big one, but those people, they don't mind the shitty resolution since the distance to their monitor compensates for that.

I can't understand it either. I prefer high resolutions and middle-sized monitors to low-mid resolutions and big or gigantic monitors.
Just like people buying a TV that covers half their living room but only has 1080p. -.-