Worth the upgrade from 1080p to 1440p and 60 to 120hz?

[driedupfish]

Currently I am gaming at a 1920x1080p monitor at 60hz with a OC'd 7950. I am very tempted to buy the Qnix qx2710 with 2560x1440p and overclock-able to 120hz.

I will need another 7950 to crossfire and a new PSU because my current psu doesn't have enough pci-e connector for crossfire (SeaSonic M12II 620w).

A sapphire 7950 and seasonic psu is on sale right so the total, including the monitor would cost me about $580 total.

Now do you think this price tag is worth it for the upgrade? From 60hz to 120hz and 1080p to 1440p?
Or should I wait and just buy a more powerful single card in the future?

However, I doubt that a crossfire 7950 is even powerful enough to take advantage of the new monitor.

 

[cmdrdredd]

There's no guarantee of 120hz and many times you get color issues and other trouble like vertical artifacts and image retention.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1414965/qnix-qx2710-vertical-gray-bar-in-120hz
http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1039823996&postcount=3

Here's a really good review. http://wecravegamestoo.com/forums/m...eview-2560x1440-matte-overclock-able-pls.html

Just do your due research, understand the risks involved with changing the pixel clock on the monitor before you go all in. I will say that even at 60hz a 2560x1440 monitor is a significant upgrade from a TN 1080p panel and crossfire 7950s should be just fine. I am happy with my SLI 670s and I think you would be around that performance level.

 

[driedupfish]

There's no guarantee of 120hz and many times you get color issues and other trouble like vertical artifacts and image retention.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1414965/qnix-qx2710-vertical-gray-bar-in-120hz
http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1039823996&postcount=3

Here's a really good review. http://wecravegamestoo.com/forums/m...eview-2560x1440-matte-overclock-able-pls.html

If I was to choose either higher refresh rate or higher resolution, which do you think is better? Higher resolution = better image quality obviously. Higher refresh rate = smoother gameplay, less screen tearing.

Hmm...decisions, decisions.

 

[cmdrdredd]

If I was to choose either higher refresh rate or higher resolution, which do you think is better? Higher resolution = better image quality obviously. Higher refresh rate = smoother gameplay, less screen tearing.

Hmm...decisions, decisions.

That's a tough one as 120hz really helps with fps games and even moving windows around. Motion looks smoother with much less ghosting and afterimages. However once I moved up in resolution my games became clearer, text is sharper and my experience as a PC user was better. The big difference is the panel technology itself. IPS just offers better overall clarity and the whole image just pops a little bit better. PLS is supposed to offer a similar level of quality. If it were me I'd take higher resolution IPS/PLS. The single input versions of the Korean monitors have very low input lag as well. The panel might not refresh as quick and track motion as well, but I find the image quality to be worth the trade off.

I never run vsync in my games either so I don't know if that would change anything between 60hz and 120hz refresh rates as I have never been able to try them side by side.

 

[toyota]

yeah isnt it ridiculous that in 2013 our only option for fast refresh rate has to be saddled with just 1920x1080 res and crappy TN panel.

 

[fixbsod]

I have a question on the QNIX -- can anyone explain why it is that the panel is sold as a 60 Hz panel but can be oc'd to 120?? I would think that a panel that can be oc'd to 120 could AT lest be sold as a 72 Hz or 96 Hz monitor. I'm very tempted as it's pretty cheap and worth a shot, esp seeing as even a 1440p monitor can be 2x as much for just 60 Hz.

 

[BrightCandle]

I personally chose higher refresh rates over more pixels. For FPS gaming I find that the high refresh rate makes my aim better. I don't really feel like the 24" monitor is too small, I already can't really focus on all of it so going even bigger doesn't seem worth it for gaming to me. However for work I could definitely do with more vertical space and more screen space in general.

 

[cmdrdredd]

I have a question on the QNIX -- can anyone explain why it is that the panel is sold as a 60 Hz panel but can be oc'd to 120?? I would think that a panel that can be oc'd to 120 could AT lest be sold as a 72 Hz or 96 Hz monitor. I'm very tempted as it's pretty cheap and worth a shot, esp seeing as even a 1440p monitor can be 2x as much for just 60 Hz.

The panel as sold by Samsung is 60hz. You are changing the pixel clock. I don't know the technical details of how or why it works though.

 

[fixbsod]

This I understand, but do you get what I'm saying? That is if the monitor can typically hit 120 (tho no guarantee) I don't see why they wouldn't sell it as a 72 or 96 Hz. IE -- if you had a ton of golden 2600ks that could typically hit 5 GHz (tho some topping out at 4.x or what not) wouldn't you sell them as high OCer 2600ks and not just as a typical 2600k?

The panel as sold by Samsung is 60hz. You are changing the pixel clock. I don't know the technical details of how or why it works though.

 

[cmdrdredd]

This I understand, but do you get what I'm saying? That is if the monitor can typically hit 120 (tho no guarantee) I don't see why they wouldn't sell it as a 72 or 96 Hz. IE -- if you had a ton of golden 2600ks that could typically hit 5 GHz (tho some topping out at 4.x or what not) wouldn't you sell them as high OCer 2600ks and not just as a typical 2600k?

Cause it's a 60hz panel, the electronics allow the pixel clock to change. The panel itself will display the image but sometimes with errors because it is still only a 60hz panel. What I see reported most is what appears to be stuttering, but in reality it's dropped frames. The panel and electronics are not always able to handle going over 60hz and it's dropping anything over 60.

I've been searching for technical info for the past 30minutes or so to see what exactly is happening but I simply cannot find anything to explain it in detail. If I find anything I'll be sure to post it because it would be nice to understand what's really happening.

 

[PrincessFrosty]

I'm seeing this more and more, hurrr durrr overclocking monitors.

The claimed pixel response is 6ms G2G, which means at 120hz or 8.3ms per refresh you're spending basically MOST of that time switching colour and not displaying the correct one, there's a reason these panels are just not natively 120hz, it's because the panel isn't fast enough to keep up.

There's also a good reason why most decent 120hz TNs have G2G speeds of 1ms or 2ms, because it's required to make 120hz look half decent.

 

[Pray To Jesus]

BenQ 120Hz monitors are very good for the price. Too bad they only have 1080p.

 

[hawtdawg]

yeah isnt it ridiculous that in 2013 our only option for fast refresh rate has to be saddled with just 1920x1080 res and crappy TN panel.

LCD's in general suck balls. The best IPS screens on the market have contrast ratio's that are inferior to a 1950's television.

 

[toyota]

so whats the problem then? it seems technology is advancing in all other fields other than monitors.

I was actually thinking about getting a Plasma but every affordable one I looked at has only 2 HDMI inputs. plsu the Plasma screen is so reflective that it will probably be an issue in the room I want to use it in.

 

[hawtdawg]

so whats the problem then? it seems technology is advancing in all other fields other than monitors.

I was actually thinking about getting a Plasma but every affordable one I looked at has only 2 HDMI inputs. plsu the Plasma screen is so reflective that it will probably be an issue in the room I want to use it in.

I actually purchased an ST60 yesterday, the AR filter is pretty good and it has 3 HDMI inputs. The picture is insanely good, especially in a dark room.

 

[toyota]

I actually purchased an ST60 yesterday, the AR filter is pretty good and it has 3 HDMI inputs. The picture is insanely good, especially in a dark room.

lol way too big. I need something around 42 inches with 50 being the very largest. this is just going in my bedroom and will be for movies and console gaming. I was going to experiment with running the pc on it too. of course then I would need 4 HDMI.

 

[Bateluer]

Currently I am gaming at a 1920x1080p monitor at 60hz with a OC'd 7950. I am very tempted to buy the Qnix qx2710 with 2560x1440p and overclock-able to 120hz.

I will need another 7950 to crossfire and a new PSU because my current psu doesn't have enough pci-e connector for crossfire (SeaSonic M12II 620w).

A sapphire 7950 and seasonic psu is on sale right so the total, including the monitor would cost me about $580 total.

Now do you think this price tag is worth it for the upgrade? From 60hz to 120hz and 1080p to 1440p?
Or should I wait and just buy a more powerful single card in the future?

However, I doubt that a crossfire 7950 is even powerful enough to take advantage of the new monitor.

1) I have a single 7950 3GB and it handles 1440p gaming 90% without issue at the highest settings. You'll have no issues with dual 7950s and will be able to max out any game currently on the market with ease. I think Tomb Raider 2013 and a heavily modded Skyrim with ENBs made my single 7950 work for its keep.

2) The upgrade from 1080p to 1440p was worth it for me, and I definitely see the quality increase.

3) On the 60hz vs 120hz, I didn't overclock my Shimian panels because it didn't seem like it worth the risk, given that I didn't have the cash to replace the Shimian displays if it went south. Even at 60hz, they look and perform great and I don't regret the purchase at all.

 

[hawtdawg]

The ST60 I purchased was actually a 50 inch model.