How big is your gaming display?

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Anteaus

Platinum Member
Oct 28, 2010
2,448
4
81
I run a 27" 4K LG monitor. I run a GTX 1070 and it's fine for playing most games at high or better settings. It can be lacking in some titles.
 

Rebel_L

Senior member
Nov 9, 2009
449
61
91
I'm running 3 24" 1920x1200's. I honestly am starting to look forward to the day I move to an extra wide single monitor. Triple monitor is great when it works well, it just doesn't work well often enough. Even windows has issues with a 5760x1200 that neither amd or nvidia have bothered to fix in forever from what I can tell
 

Midwayman

Diamond Member
Jan 28, 2000
5,723
325
126
I had a 27'' 1440p for a short period of time before selling it and sadly outside of the colors the IPS panel gave i was not impressed coming from a then Dell 24'' 1200p e-ips panel screen.Yeah the monitor was bigger and stuff appeared a bit sharper but i found nothing that amazed me.Having tried 27'' 1080p monitors before yup anything pass 24'' you immediately can start seeing pixels so i guess i get the 1440p resolution but idk i wasn't to impressed.At 24'' and 1080p as well as 144hz this monitor i use now isn't bad but bigger would be nice.

I see the market for the 32'' 1440p being extreme viable for people like me perhaps,its that or a 32'' 4k. The ppi of a 32'' 1440p is the same as a 24'' 1080p so just maybe?

It had less to do with seeing pixels due to size. At either 24 or 27" I think 1440p is pretty ideal. Just at a certain point the monitor gets too large to keep the whole thing focused in the central part of your vision. Visual acuity falls off quickly away from the center of your vision. But only really important for competitive FPS type games.
 

Oyeve

Lifer
Oct 18, 1999
21,916
823
126
55" TCL 4K HDTV for all my gaming. Mostly play PC games at 4K and HDR if the game supports it. I sit around 5-6 feet from screen when gaming.
 

mopardude87

Diamond Member
Oct 22, 2018
3,348
1,575
96
It had less to do with seeing pixels due to size. At either 24 or 27" I think 1440p is pretty ideal. Just at a certain point the monitor gets too large to keep the whole thing focused in the central part of your vision. Visual acuity falls off quickly away from the center of your vision. But only really important for competitive FPS type games.

This is all very true. i am able to game better on a 24' cause the entire screen is in my focus.I jump into the 27''+ range and sure i miss things from the far left and right.Depends on my distance that i sit.I gave thought to a 24'' 1440p panel but without hands on user reviews i wouldn't know what i was stepping into.It does seem like a nice stop gag for those who don't want to deal with scaling issues yet want a sharper image.

I did sit closer on my 27'' 1440p though then i do with my current monitor but not even a foot of difference really.I know the closer to a screen you sit the more obvious it is that you see pixels. Maybe i had high expectations for 27'' 1440p that was not met?

I can't find a store demo of a 24'' 1440p panel anywhere,i would be purely trusting internet reviews and other user accounts.
 

ibex333

Diamond Member
Mar 26, 2005
4,091
119
106
32" 1440p HP Display

60Hz, but overclocks to 72. Has FreeSync, which I never use.


I dont play shooters, and when I rarely do, I only play the campaign, so refresh rate is irrelevant. Sheer size and resolution are more important for my needs.
 

sweenish

Diamond Member
May 21, 2013
3,656
60
91
Refresh rate is not irrelevant. Variable refresh rates allow you to turn off v-sync for better response (can be felt and can be annoying in single player games as well), and still not have tearing. It's a benefit you should be taking advantage of.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Igo69

cmdrdredd

Lifer
Dec 12, 2001
27,052
357
126
Refresh rate is not irrelevant. Variable refresh rates allow you to turn off v-sync for better response (can be felt and can be annoying in single player games as well), and still not have tearing. It's a benefit you should be taking advantage of.

A lot of games in single player aren’t twitch based enough to matter for a few ms of response. Now if you are going from say 20ms to 40ms then I’d have a problem.
 

sweenish

Diamond Member
May 21, 2013
3,656
60
91
You're not wrong, but it's not about twitch response. It's about the game reacting when I press a button/key. If I can sense a delay, it annoys me to no end. I'm not some high-end competitive player. Nothing I stated was incorrect.
 

cmdrdredd

Lifer
Dec 12, 2001
27,052
357
126
You're not wrong, but it's not about twitch response. It's about the game reacting when I press a button/key. If I can sense a delay, it annoys me to no end. I'm not some high-end competitive player. Nothing I stated was incorrect.

No but I’m just saying that playing tomb raider at 30ms or so might not be as bad as playing doom at 30ms. I too really do not like a delay in my games but I can deal with it a little better when it’s not a shooter.
 

Midwayman

Diamond Member
Jan 28, 2000
5,723
325
126
FWIW the button to photons lag being perceptible is generally about 20ms. (That's 50hz)
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
348
126
I can't tell the difference between some of the monitors. For example, I saw the Acer 'ED347CKR' is on sale on Newegg for $399, and it sounds just like the one I got for a lot more - felt a bit bad it's hundreds less now, but mine is the "XR342CK" and it's still a similar price (now $650). So what the heck the difference is, why to pay $250 more for one, who knows.
 

cmdrdredd

Lifer
Dec 12, 2001
27,052
357
126
I can't tell the difference between some of the monitors. For example, I saw the Acer 'ED347CKR' is on sale on Newegg for $399, and it sounds just like the one I got for a lot more - felt a bit bad it's hundreds less now, but mine is the "XR342CK" and it's still a similar price (now $650). So what the heck the difference is, why to pay $250 more for one, who knows.

Less of the panel lottery? I imagine that higher end models get the better panels.
 

JujuFish

Lifer
Feb 3, 2005
11,003
735
136
27" 1440p 144hz G-Sync.

I'd like to move up to 4K HDR 144hz, but I'd like a bigger screen than the ones currently available (maybe 32"?) as well as 144hz HDR at 4:4:4 chroma subsampling. And also a lower price. Everything is so expensive right now.
 

rivethead

Platinum Member
Jan 16, 2005
2,635
106
106
27" 1440p 144hz G-Sync.

I'd like to move up to 4K HDR 144hz, but I'd like a bigger screen than the ones currently available (maybe 32"?) as well as 144hz HDR at 4:4:4 chroma subsampling. And also a lower price. Everything is so expensive right now.

Agree with the "everything is so expensive right now".

I want to upgrade from my 23" 1080p monitor (which has served me really well for over five years) to a 27" 2560x1440 model. It's confusing trying to shop for this. If you end up looking at a "gaming" monitor you get much higher refresh rates (120hz) but at a much higher price. But there are still monitors with "regular" refresh rates that are still really expensive. I don't fully understand what's driving the price. Maybe it's this panel thing (which I also don't understand): TN vs IPS.

Guess the point of my rant is: I didn't think monitor shopping would be this complicated.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
348
126
Agree with the "everything is so expensive right now".

I want to upgrade from my 23" 1080p monitor (which has served me really well for over five years) to a 27" 2560x1440 model. It's confusing trying to shop for this. If you end up looking at a "gaming" monitor you get much higher refresh rates (120hz) but at a much higher price. But there are still monitors with "regular" refresh rates that are still really expensive. I don't fully understand what's driving the price. Maybe it's this panel thing (which I also don't understand): TN vs IPS.

Guess the point of my rant is: I didn't think monitor shopping would be this complicated.

There's that $399 34" 1440p I mentioned on sale at newegg...
 

rivethead

Platinum Member
Jan 16, 2005
2,635
106
106