Panel Type and 1080p vs 1440p

jme2010

Hi all,

I've settled on an RTX 2070 paired with i5 9600K.

I need help with one big question. I want that buttery smooth 144HZ but paired with 144fps right?

I've read that rtx2070 is a sweat spot for 1440p/144hz but the benchmarks are not near 144 fps, more like 90fps and on ultra 1440p with the most demanding titles there are drops below 60fps [gasp]

For the best eye candy and ideal DPI on the monitor would I be better with a 24" 1080p 144hz monitor and get 144fps in most games on highest settings or

go 27" 1440p 144hz but 60-90fps.

My point is: does it not defeat the purpose of a 144hz monitor if I can't push 144 fps at it's native resolution.

Q2: After all that. I can not for the life of me decide on a panel type. Each one sounds worse when you read the cons of each. Urgh. I just want a bright vibrant panel with none of the bad things you read about, ghosting, light bleed etc.

I'd play a lot of fps and some basic competitive stuff but nothing serious.

Thanks in advance for any advice

You'd probably want to aim for a VA panel. And about the 144hz thing. You'd be hard pressed to notice the difference between 90hz and 144hz. Maybe a slight bit but nothing that large imo. If you're into competitive stuff then a TN panel will give you better response times and unfortunately with monitors it can be a lottery on the quality of panel that you'll get.

Venom

Monitor panels can currently be broken down into 3 main types....


TN which gives the faster response times but mediocre colors, VA which offers a blend of both TN and IPS so great colors and good response times and IPS which offers the best colors but suffers from poor response times and a large risk of black light bleeding. Read any IPS monitor review to see how its very much a case of returning the monitor over and over until you get a good one that doesn't suffer too much BLB. VA's panels are just the way to go these days.


Personally, I found moving from a 24" TN 1080p monitor at 60hz to a 32" VA 1440p monitor at 144hz is unreal for both gaming, web browsing and general windows stuff. The best comparison I can use to explain it is going from having your OS on HDD to an SSD. It's that much of a game changer.



While you might not hit 144 FPS on every title at the moment, as Grahamer72 stated, you will be hard pushed to notice the difference past 90 FPS and monitors tend to be kept a good few years, so the next gen of GPU's or the ones following that should make hitting 144 FPS easy and with the likes of G-sync and Freesync, games will run super smooth.

jme2010

@Grahamer: Yeah, maybe I'm trying to talk my wallet out of the extra 150 bucks.

You're probably right. I should value resolution over frame rate, especially at 90+ fps if it can be displayed on 1440p

jme2010

Venom wrote: »

VA's panels are just the way to go these days.

I was strongly leaning towards VA...then of course I go and read that the advertised response times are nowhere near stated and use strobing to appear smoother.

If you can clear that up and/or point me to a VA monitor with actual 1ms response time I'll lock it down for my choice.



EDIT: I have seen 1ms VA monitors but are they really?

I have a 27" IPS and was very lucky that there is only minimal back light bleed and no dead or stuck pixels.

Venom

jme2010 wrote: »

I was strongly leaning towards VA...then of course I go and read that the advertised response times are nowhere near stated and use strobing to appear smoother.

If you can clear that up and/or point me to a VA monitor with actual 1ms response time I'll lock it down for my choice.



EDIT: I have seen 1ms VA monitors but are they really?

The real world response times of any given monitor can be night and day compared to the monitor's advertised response times so you really need to look for the more detailed reviews. There are also various "modes" built into newer monitors like FPS 1-3 or Gaming 1-3 settings that use various software tricks to speed up response times.


I honestly don't know of any 1ms VA monitors but something you do need to take into account is most monitor panels are made by the same manufacturer so it's not as easy as just picking an LG, Samsung, Asus or Acer monitor, you really have to do so much more research over the like of any other computer component.


Saying that, I moved from a 1ms TN panel to a 4-5ms VA panel and honestly haven't noticed a difference in either gaming or general usage response wise unlike I have with how much better colors look overall and how super smooth games run.

wotzgoingon

Another thing to watch out for is ghosting with a IPS. I never noticed it until one day and what has been seen can not be unseen and since that day I seen it all the time. Saying that I was lucky there was no light bleed.

One thing to deffo get is a adaptive sync panel. Freesync/gsync is amazing and since Freesync is now available on Nvidia make sure you get one.

shamelessidiot

On the games where exceptionally higher refresh matters, most players just use the lowest possible settings anyway, having slightly better graphics isn't worth the lower frames. Personally my preference is refresh rate > panel type >>> resolution. I've never been one to really care about graphics (you don't really miss ultra 60fps once you've switched to low/med 144fps+), so I'll happily lower them if it means more frames. It's all personal preference.

Dcully

I have a dell 27" 2440 gsync 144hz 1ms TN monitor and sitting beside it is an IPS monitor and the difference in colours is 5% at most its barely noticeable on a good TN monitor.

I went from a 1080P 60hz to a 1080P 144hz gsync a few years back and i couldnt believe my eyes, the difference is absolutely massive.
Then about a year ago i went from said 1080P 144hz gsync to my current 1440P 144hz gsync and the difference was not as big as 60hz to 144hz.

I would go with 144hz before anything else every time even if your hardware forces you to drop from ultra settings.
Ultra is normally just bloatware post processing that actually makes some games look crap with blurriness etc anyways so your not missing much there.

TerrorFirmer

Having a 144hz monitor isn't necessarily about hitting 144fps, it's about getting a framerate way beyond the standard 60. Some games it's easier to do obviously, Overwatch is a good example of a mainstream and popular game. A 144hz setup that is aimed at the highest possible framerate generally speaking needs an excellent CPU as well as GPU.

CPU is nearly more important as graphical settings can be reduced to maintain framerate, CPU cannot so if your CPU cannot keep pace, no card in the world will change that. I have a 9600K + GTX1080Ti (same as RTX2080) and even that setup can only deliver around 90fps stable in a lot of games. I had a Ryzen 1700X before that and it was poor for 144hz as it spiked a lot more than the 9600K does now.

Other factors include RAM speed and configuration. In your case for best results, overclock that 9600K to 4.8Ghz or whatever, make sure you've got dual channel 3000mhz RAM at least, and stick games at low settings and keep increasing until you hit the CPU ceiling/sweet spot for you (running at low obviously tells you what the max framerate the CPU can deliver).

ED E

Buy 1440, you can downres to 1080 but you can't upres a 1080 panel to 1440 (not talking supersampling).

IMO 1440p is the perfect resolution for monitors in 22-27".

awec

IMO if you buy a 24" 1080p monitor you'll end up disappointed.

BloodBath

All the panels have upsides and downsides and the level of those vary from panel to panel.

TN offers the fastest response times and the least amount of ghosting in general but has the worst viewing angles and colour range. Still the best panels if you are ultra competitive in first person shooters.

VA has the best contrast levels, giving the best blacks and imo even better colours than IPS because of that contrast. While the range might not be as good as IPS the contrast more than makes up for it. VA suffer from ghosting the most but the newer panels are much better at this with minimal ghosting.

IPS generally have the best colour range and viewing angles but suffer from back light bleed and poor black/dark colour reproduction because of this bleed.

My personal favourite having tried all 3 is VA. There's lot's of other variables on top of that like the bit rate of the panel which will determine the colour range. The pixel density of the panel which is based on the size and resolution. Higher pixel density generally looks better. You don't really want to go above 24" at 1080p or 27" at 1440 without washing out your colours from low pixel density.

awec

I've never tried VA, but I definitely prefer IPS over TN. The problem is that low latency, high refresh, IPS monitors that are good for gaming are expensive (especially if you want gsync). I have one of the Acer Predators and it was very pricey when I got it.

I definitely wouldn't agree with whoever posted above that the difference between TN and IPS in terms of colour is barely noticable. It's quite distinct, especially if you aren't looking at the TN at the absolute perfect angle.

Venom

awec wrote: »

I've never tried VA, but I definitely prefer IPS over TN. The problem is that low latency, high refresh, IPS monitors that are good for gaming are expensive (especially if you want gsync). I have one of the Acer Predators and it was very pricey when I got it.

I definitely wouldn't agree with whoever posted above that the difference between TN and IPS in terms of colour is barely noticable. It's quite distinct, especially if you aren't looking at the TN at the absolute perfect angle.

I've never used an IPS monitor only TN and VA but wouldn't the IPS viewing angle thing be a moot point for gaming as it's not like anyone is going to not sit facing the centre of their monitor?

Agree with Awec. I know TN panels have come a long way but the colours are still not nearly as good as IPS one's. A good IPS one that is.

awec

Venom wrote: »

I've never used an IPS monitor only TN and VA but wouldn't the IPS viewing angle thing be a moot point for gaming as it's not like anyone is going to not sit facing the centre of their monitor?

On most TN monitors even being slightly off centre, or slightly at an angle, will cause a degredation in image quality. Depending on your monitor setup, especially with multiple monitors, it can be awkward to have them both positioned perfectly in your sight line.

For IPS you could literally look at it from close to 90 degrees and it looks the same.

But as I mentioned, there are downsides to IPS too, mainly that good gaming ones are expensive.

Shlippery

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Acer-VG270UPbmiipx-FreeSync-ZeroFrame-Speakers/dp/B07G9J35CQ/ref=sr_1_fkmrnull_3?keywords=acer+nitro+27+freesync&qid=1551955487&s=computers&sr=1-3-fkmrnull

I'd recommend above from my own experience so far...went from 24" 1080p IPS 60hz, to 27", 1440p, IPS, 144hz (and _essentially_ G-Sync compatible freesync)

Noticed a massive difference and it didn't break the bank in comparison to other monitors out there...

Dcully

I definitely wouldn't agree with whoever posted above that the difference between TN and IPS in terms of colour is barely noticable. It's quite distinct, especially if you aren't looking at the TN at the absolute perfect angle.

I have had TN panels that no matter what i tried the colours just did not get near an IPS, my current Dell does however unless my 2 yr old LG IPS is just **** ofcourse.


Colours look great on my Dell TN, this was recorded on my phone for the lols.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZWfPIlRTeU

will56

Shlippery wrote: »

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Acer-VG270UPbmiipx-FreeSync-ZeroFrame-Speakers/dp/B07G9J35CQ/ref=sr_1_fkmrnull_3?keywords=acer+nitro+27+freesync&qid=1551955487&s=computers&sr=1-3-fkmrnull

I'd recommend above from my own experience so far...went from 24" 1080p IPS 60hz, to 27", 1440p, IPS, 144hz (and _essentially_ G-Sync compatible freesync)

Noticed a massive difference and it didn't break the bank in comparison to other monitors out there...

Oooh, I now need this !!
I have a 27"1440p IPS screen but I would really like to move to 144hz

I'd be hard pushed to move away from IPS, I do some light photo editing and the difference between IPS and TN is very very noticeable

8builder

You wouldn't even notice a difference between 90 and 140 fps.
Also if you're still thinking its not worth it then get the monitor with g-sync or Freesync.

Anima

You would, of course, notice a 50fps difference

wotzgoingon

Anima wrote: »

You would, of course, notice a 50fps difference

You wouldn't not at that high a refresh rate. You would notice it if it was 10 and 60fps.

BloodBath

wotzgoingon wrote: »

You wouldn't not at that high a refresh rate. You would notice it if it was 10 and 60fps.

It's pretty subjective tbh. Some people will and do notice it, others don't.

K.O.Kiki

I can definitely feel & see a difference when Overwatch goes from 150 -> 90fps.
Happened in the latest patch. Also happened when the game randomly decided to put its resolution at 4K.

jme2010

Thanks lads, you saved me from the dreaded 1080p 60Hz TN panel graveyard!!!!!

I ordered this today, hope I chose the best need at the top end of my budget for a monitor

https://www.amazon.ca/gp/product/B079J59TV5/ref=ppx_od_dt_b_asin_title_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1