What screen type would be better?

[KeyboardDemon]

I have been wanting to upgrade my screen for a long time and now seems like a good time to decide on which screen to get, but I am at a loss as to what to go for and don't really understand the benefits of each type of screen I could pick for.

I am considering either a 27" 1080p panel with 144hz and nVidia 3d Vision 2 such as this Asus or a 27" 2560x1440 like this Dell or the wildcard would be a 21:9 aspect ratio screen like this Asus.

Three very different types of monitors, offering three completely different experiences.

The first offers higher refresh rates, 144hz should give me smoother animation which I won't get with a 2560x1440 screen but this offers higher resolution all be it at the same aspect ratio and then the ultra wide screens will allow me to see more of the gaming world (providing the game I'm playing supports it). I will also be using the screen for Photoshop so I am interested in getting more screen real estate for menus etc... plus colour accuracy would be good too, I want at least 100% support for sRGB and good calibration out of the box.

So generally confused about what I should be thinking about, the only thing I know for sure is I want one that's G-Sync compatible to use with a GTX780Ti GPU, 3d is not essential but I might use it from time to time if I had it.

[jim]

AFAIK there aren't any G-Sync monitors out at the moment - and I suspect they'll cost a lot.

[KeyboardDemon]

At the moment only Asus has one out but there are more planned as Asus, BenQ, Dell and Philips all have some on their 2014 road maps at a variety of types etc... and yes it is at a premium right now, but as more come out it should drop in price, fingers crossed.

In the meantime, I wanted to start my research and find out what I should be looking for, I intend the screen to see me through a few upgrade cycles that should take me into 2018/19 at least, so I want to make sure I buy a good screen and I am willing to invest a decent amount in it as I will be looking at it for a long time.

[Pantalaimon]

Well you'll be able to add the G-Sync board in separately for some monitors, so buying one and getting the unit later could be an option.

[KeyboardDemon]

How would I know which monitors will accept the G-Sync upgrade?

Once I find out which monitors can be upgraded I will still be torn between three possible options and I am still unsure as to which would suit my needs best.

[jim]

I might be totally wrong here, but I suspect that if you want G-Sync, it's going to nullify most of your other requirements. It's a gaming technology, and right now any gaming screens seem to be 1080p TN panels.

Personally, I'm waiting for the Dell 28" 4K panel, because for me my primary concerns are firstly resolution (the higher the better), and secondly screen technology (I want LED and IPS). As for 3D screens, I've heard the refresh rate is amazing, but the benefit I'll get from higher resolution is much more tangible, and as for G-Sync, it's a nice idea, but again, I'm not that bothered about tearing.

You could certainly make a decision now about what resolution, what size screen, which display technology, 3D capabilities, but it seems a bit pointless to me when what will probably happen is that it will never come out in a G-Sync model. Would seem to make more sense just to revisit once there are a few options out there and we know a bit more about how seriously the monitor manufacturers intend to support G-Sync.

[kalniel]

If you can wait, I'd do so. Buying now means you have to pick between colour accuracy and refresh rate, while new technologies are on the horizon (as mentioned G-sync isn't viable yet, and 4k isn't quite here affordably).

G-sync looks ace, but I'd take a colour accurate high res (ideally 4k) display in preference, as it'll benefit more things (and you can get around tearing problems by throwing more GPU power at it - it's only really a solution for times when you can't afford v-sync).

Hence the new Dells sound really exciting...

[KeyboardDemon]

I might be totally wrong here, but I suspect that if you want G-Sync, it's going to nullify most of your other requirements. It's a gaming technology, and right now any gaming screens seem to be 1080p TN panels.

Personally, I'm waiting for the Dell 28" 4K panel, because for me my primary concerns are firstly resolution (the higher the better), and secondly screen technology (I want LED and IPS). As for 3D screens, I've heard the refresh rate is amazing, but the benefit I'll get from higher resolution is much more tangible, and as for G-Sync, it's a nice idea, but again, I'm not that bothered about tearing.

You could certainly make a decision now about what resolution, what size screen, which display technology, 3D capabilities, but it seems a bit pointless to me when what will probably happen is that it will never come out in a G-Sync model. Would seem to make more sense just to revisit once there are a few options out there and we know a bit more about how seriously the monitor manufacturers intend to support G-Sync.

Thanks for this reply jim. from this I can see how little I understand about screen technology, so first I need to decide on what type of panel I want, and you're right, I don't want to get a TN screen I definitely want an IPS (or equivalent) panel type because this is where I will get the wider colour gamut that I want.

With IPS screens, if I'm not mistaken that would mean I wouldn't get the higher refresh rates like the 144hz and as a result G-Sync would offer very little value in the immediate future for me, at least until a time comes when I'm playing a game and my frame rate drops below 30fps or in games where I am experiencing excessive tearing that can't be rectified by lowering settings. I think with G-Sync I am more interested in getting a new gadget then I am in what the gadget can do to help me, so I'll push that down to a lower position in my requirements.

I think the questions I need to deal with now are what size, resolution and aspect ratio? I don't think I can justify buying a 4k screen at the moment, so I think resolution would probably go to 2560x1440 max, I think 2560x1600 is a little out of my price range but I still don't know about the wild card with 21:9 screens. What are then benefits of this over 2560x1440 screens?

Basically, I need to try and balance out the pros and cons of each. Any help with this would be greatly appreciated, unfortunately there isn't anywhere I can go where I can see screens like these on display, unless Scan have them on display, I'm 30 minutes away from Bolton and will be until tomorrow when I return to London so I could make the drive over there if they have these things in a showroom.

[jim]

Thanks for this reply jim. from this I can see how little I understand about screen technology, so first I need to decide on what type of panel I want, and you're right, I don't want to get a TN screen I definitely want an IPS (or equivalent) panel type because this is where I will get the wider colour gamut that I want.

With IPS screens, if I'm not mistaken that would mean I wouldn't get the higher refresh rates like the 144hz and as a result G-Sync would offer very little value in the immediate future for me, at least until a time comes when I'm playing a game and my frame rate drops below 30fps or in games where I am experiencing excessive tearing that can't be rectified by lowering settings. I think with G-Sync I am more interested in getting a new gadget then I am in what the gadget can do to help me, so I'll push that down to a lower position in my requirements.

I think the questions I need to deal with now are what size, resolution and aspect ratio? I don't think I can justify buying a 4k screen at the moment, so I think resolution would probably go to 2560x1440 max, I think 2560x1600 is a little out of my price range but I still don't know about the wild card with 21:9 screens. What are then benefits of this over 2560x1440 screens?

Basically, I need to try and balance out the pros and cons of each. Any help with this would be greatly appreciated, unfortunately there isn't anywhere I can go where I can see screens like these on display, unless Scan have them on display, I'm 30 minutes away from Bolton and will be until tomorrow when I return to London so I could make the drive over there if they have these things in a showroom.

Right now, as far as I'm aware there aren't any 120Hz IPS panels. Some people have tried buying the Korean imports and overclocking them, but it's not a route I'm interested in, personally.

I think 2560x1600 is a pointless investment, when you're talking around £950 vs £450 (approx figures) for the equivalent 2560x1440 option. As for 21:9, the benefits are exactly what it says on the tin - 2560x1080 resolution. Thing is, Dell are charging about the same for their 21:9 2913WM as they are for the 2713HM (2560x1440), and you get the extra height with the 2713HM. It's the standard for films, so I guess if you're a film buff and you hate black bars then it might make sense. Personally, I don't see the attraction.

I would advise getting an IPS screen, but it sounds like you're already on that page, as am I. I would also want a screen that's LED backlit, but it's hard to get hold of CCFL screens these days anyway. In that case, refresh rates/3D/G-Sync aren't really an immediate consideration because you can't get them.

That leaves the simple question of price vs. resolution. Right now I have a pair of Dell 2212HM panels, which are 1920x1080 and really good value for money. There have been some amazingly cheap LG panels floating around lately that are 1080p/IPS/LED, IIRC around £130. The next logical step up is 2560x1440, and I would personally go for the Dell 2713HM for about £450. If you want to save some cash, there are a few budget options like DGM, or you can go down the Korean import route. There are loads of threads around on the web with more information about that. Then the next logical step is 4K, and as far as we know, Dell's 28" offering should be under $1000.

[KeyboardDemon]

I looked up the Dell and found expected prices to be around $1300 to $1500 when that comes out, I'll post links later.

You mentioned height as one of the key factors behind you going for the 2560x1440 route, in your opinion why is height more important than width? I know you mentioned video playback and black bars but I couldn't follow which screen type you were favoring with that comment.

[jim]

The Dell quotes tend to look like this:

No word yet on how much exactly the UltraSharp 28 will cost, but Dell did say we can expect it to be under $1,000 when it hits shelves in "early 2014."

from Engadget - I've read similar on most websites. That could have changed, but sounds like quite an extreme change?

And I don't think height is more important than width, I'm just making the point that if a 2560x1080 monitor is the same price as a 2560x1440 monitor, I don't see why you would buy the former. Apart from 4K panels, there's nothing wider than 2560 pixels on the market.

[KeyboardDemon]

The Dell quotes tend to look like this: from Engadget - I've read similar on most websites. That could have changed, but sounds like quite an extreme change?

That was the article I read on my phone earlier, but I think I read the price for the 24" Ultrasharp as the price of the 28" and then didn't read through to the end of the sentence, I've just read it again, so yeah, I guess $1000 is around £820 here in the UK.

I'm just making the point that if a 2560x1080 monitor is the same price as a 2560x1440 monitor, I don't see why you would buy the former. Apart from 4K panels, there's nothing wider than 2560 pixels on the market.

Ok, I think I see what you are saying, a 27" 2560x1440 offers nearly 1 mega pixels more than a 29" 2560x1080 and more pixels per inch so games would look more detailed while the 21:9 would only offer me a stretched 1080 screen.

So in the end I think from this discussion I will be thinking about an IPS 27" 2560x1440 screen, I need to sell my HD6990 first and then hopefully I'll have enough to spend around £450 on a decent screen. I think I would prefer to avoid the budget brands and Korean imports though and instead go for an established brand with better support.

*edit* What's the difference between IPS and PLS? Which is better?

[jim]

I think we agree, yeah, although "stretched" is possibly the wrong word, as that implies that you're sending 1920*1080 to the screen, and the screen is inventing the missing horizontal pixels. The game would send the full 2560x1080 pixels, but as you say it would be around 1 megapixel less detailed because of the missing vertical pixels as compared to a 16:9 panel.

As for IPS and PLS, I don't know, but http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/articles...chnologies.htm is a good reference. It suggests that IPS is LG's tech, and PLS is a similar solution from Samsung, which most monitor manufacturers tend to also call IPS to reduce confusion (or in this case, increase it!). It also suggests that there's little difference in practice between the two.

I would seriously consider the 2713HM according to the specs you're after, just make sure you get it from a retailer that supports a no-dead pixel warranty. I think PCBuyit have one, not sure about other retailers.

[kalniel]

I would seriously consider the 2713HM according to the specs you're after, just make sure you get it from a retailer that supports a no-dead pixel warranty. I think PCBuyit have one, not sure about other retailers.

Is the 2713HM still a Class I display as previous ultrasharps have been? If so it can't have any dead pixels anyway (or you're not getting the advertised product).

[Spreadie]

There's quite a difference in price and quality between the 2713HM and the 2713H. The HM is much cheaper and still probably a great monitor but, if you need colour accuracy, the wider gamut of the H will be more desirable.

[jim]

Is the 2713HM still a Class I display as previous ultrasharps have been? If so it can't have any dead pixels anyway (or you're not getting the advertised product).

I mean if one develops over the course of the warranty, as opposed to dead pixels on arrival. As far as I know, some retailers won't RMA for a single stuck/dead pixel.