I really wish all these freesync monitors would adopt 90hz as the new standard now that pixel response times have improved. Fast enough for high speed gaming, and compatible with 30hz content (75hz vsync is bad for youtube). I don't really need 165hz honestly, but 90 is a big step up from 60. I don't understand why it would cost anything extra at all to allow 90hz options... It took so long to go from 60 to 75, let's make 90hz a new standard. Is LG listening? They could be a brand that promises 90hz across every product <4k, it would make for unique branding.
I agree! 90Hz is good point for refresh. The monitor does not feel much faster after that and the 30HZ in the low end is possible with high end GPUs even in tricky situations. Of Course 32" start to be size where 4K becomes more viable, but this is low end model, so the resolution is just fine for that. 36" would be even better, so you don't need very high scaling factor to make text big enough for 4K. 32" 1440p does not need scaling at all. I use 150% scaling in 27" 1440p resolution monitor, I would prefer somewhat smaller scaling so this may be good for that.
75hz for IPS and freesync isn't that bad. Games do feel a lot more fluid with variable sync. If they went with a MVA or TN panel they could get to 90hz a lot easier. Since these are variable sync monitors I sort of wonder if it can't just be handled in software. Get a plugin that detects 30hz content and it'll drop the desktop to 60hz so you don't have to do weird pulldown.
75hz isn't bad from a speed perspective, but a compatibility one. Even when I play 60hz games for example there are a lot of 30fps cutscenes that don't work out properly at 75hz. 90hz would solve all my issues.
There are IPS displays that are 1440p 165Hz, 3440x1440 120Hz, 4K 144Hz.
Every display worth anything these days uses overdrive to hit respectable response times, even at a refresh rate of 60Hz, and IPS is no exception. Lower response times improve motion clarity and reduce smearing even if higher response times would still permit a frame to be drawn properly before the next refresh - letting response times float up means your image is almost never in its final form before the next refresh.
You have to love how they release these upgrades right after clearing their inventory on Black Friday. Here's hoping this kind of billion-color panel will expand to 29" ultrawide monitors, even if they're only 1080p.
SO thats £310-£340 in the UK ...whats the actual size , in feet and inchs , and the weight, in Pounds of this ?? I should be able to work it out as its a right angled triangle , hypotenuse = 32in ?? And the cost in Pounds Shillings and Pence LOL
For many, it's better having 1440p that you can play on casually, than a 4K you can't - or which has pixels that are too small to use effectively (so you have 1440p or even 1080p resolution). Bandwidth limitations may mean you can't have 4K HDR, but you *can* on 1440p. And I don't just mean display bandwidth - YouTube will gladly serve up 1440p, and I suspect other providers will too.
The issue for me would probably be the pixel pitch - I'd prefer to have it in a 27" format than 32" - that said, it's still 5% more dense than my current 1680x1050 Samsung 226BW.
This is not bright at ALL. 300 cdm is garbage. for a usable desktop monitor 400 is minimum, and 450-500 is great. (not talking about HDR junk, just normal desktop)
300cd/m is fine, in fact most people tend to adjust brightness to somewhere along the lines of 200cd/m and for accuracy that is also the region to be looking at.
If your screen is any room with a lot of light, 300cd/m is barely adequate. I have both a 300cd/m and a 500cd/m screen on this desk, the sun is currently shining through the window and the 300cd/m looks washed out as max brightness while the sun shines on it, with the 500cd/m looking good.
I skimped on my second monitor as was only going to use it for displaying text, I regret not making sure that it had a higher brightness.
This review is incorrect, i am using freesync with nvidia card, so gsync via freesync port which is now allowed for 10 and 20 series cards, using the displayport. In fact it doesnt work at all on hdmi as nvidia only allow gsync over dp. It does however let me enable gsync over hdmi but because its nvidia card it doesnt work on hdmi, so this means freesync is available on both hdmi and dp, manual says this also. When u turn gsync on on display it says not verified compatible but you just tick a box and it works perfectly!
Thank you for confirming, I feel like that is all anyone needs to know about these monitors. So using Display port, connect your geforce card, then enable free synch on the monitor then check the geforce control panel to check off gsynch adaptive ? Also, how is the input lag for gaming, noticeable ?
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
28 Comments
Back to Article
Alistair - Friday, December 14, 2018 - link
I really wish all these freesync monitors would adopt 90hz as the new standard now that pixel response times have improved. Fast enough for high speed gaming, and compatible with 30hz content (75hz vsync is bad for youtube). I don't really need 165hz honestly, but 90 is a big step up from 60. I don't understand why it would cost anything extra at all to allow 90hz options... It took so long to go from 60 to 75, let's make 90hz a new standard. Is LG listening? They could be a brand that promises 90hz across every product <4k, it would make for unique branding.haukionkannel - Friday, December 14, 2018 - link
I agree! 90Hz is good point for refresh. The monitor does not feel much faster after that and the 30HZ in the low end is possible with high end GPUs even in tricky situations.Of Course 32" start to be size where 4K becomes more viable, but this is low end model, so the resolution is just fine for that. 36" would be even better, so you don't need very high scaling factor to make text big enough for 4K. 32" 1440p does not need scaling at all. I use 150% scaling in 27" 1440p resolution monitor, I would prefer somewhat smaller scaling so this may be good for that.
Midwayman - Friday, December 14, 2018 - link
75hz for IPS and freesync isn't that bad. Games do feel a lot more fluid with variable sync. If they went with a MVA or TN panel they could get to 90hz a lot easier. Since these are variable sync monitors I sort of wonder if it can't just be handled in software. Get a plugin that detects 30hz content and it'll drop the desktop to 60hz so you don't have to do weird pulldown.Alistair - Friday, December 14, 2018 - link
75hz isn't bad from a speed perspective, but a compatibility one. Even when I play 60hz games for example there are a lot of 30fps cutscenes that don't work out properly at 75hz. 90hz would solve all my issues.xTRICKYxx - Tuesday, December 25, 2018 - link
Why not 180hz or 240hz? :)zamroni - Sunday, December 16, 2018 - link
It's ips limitation. You get better picture with ips but limited refresh rate. The 120 mhz gaming monitor uses tn panel.Alistair - Tuesday, December 18, 2018 - link
You can use overdrive (OD) to run any modern panel fast enough to hit 90hz.xTRICKYxx - Tuesday, December 25, 2018 - link
I have gotten to play with a few 75hz panels with 0 overclockability. Most 60hz panels I can eek out another 10hz or so.yasamoka - Thursday, December 20, 2018 - link
There are IPS displays that are 1440p 165Hz, 3440x1440 120Hz, 4K 144Hz.Every display worth anything these days uses overdrive to hit respectable response times, even at a refresh rate of 60Hz, and IPS is no exception. Lower response times improve motion clarity and reduce smearing even if higher response times would still permit a frame to be drawn properly before the next refresh - letting response times float up means your image is almost never in its final form before the next refresh.
euskalzabe - Friday, December 14, 2018 - link
You have to love how they release these upgrades right after clearing their inventory on Black Friday. Here's hoping this kind of billion-color panel will expand to 29" ultrawide monitors, even if they're only 1080p.bubblyboo - Friday, December 14, 2018 - link
"The monitor can display 1.07 billion colors (a rare feature in this class)"8 bit + FRC is quite common now.
Alistair - Friday, December 14, 2018 - link
not for cheap 1440p monitors, only for "cheap" 4k onesdromoxen - Saturday, December 15, 2018 - link
SO thats £310-£340 in the UK ...whats the actual size , in feet and inchs , and the weight, in Pounds of this ?? I should be able to work it out as its a right angled triangle , hypotenuse = 32in ??And the cost in Pounds Shillings and Pence LOL
timecop1818 - Saturday, December 15, 2018 - link
Not 4K? Yawn.GreenReaper - Saturday, December 15, 2018 - link
For many, it's better having 1440p that you can play on casually, than a 4K you can't - or which has pixels that are too small to use effectively (so you have 1440p or even 1080p resolution). Bandwidth limitations may mean you can't have 4K HDR, but you *can* on 1440p. And I don't just mean display bandwidth - YouTube will gladly serve up 1440p, and I suspect other providers will too.The issue for me would probably be the pixel pitch - I'd prefer to have it in a 27" format than 32" - that said, it's still 5% more dense than my current 1680x1050 Samsung 226BW.
Murloc - Sunday, December 16, 2018 - link
I just bought a similar 4K monitor from LG for 340$Rocket321 - Saturday, December 15, 2018 - link
I suspect these are going to sell like hotcakesAllan_Hundeboll - Sunday, December 16, 2018 - link
AOC q3279vwfd8 has very similar specs, but no VESA mount. Cost 230$saiga6360 - Saturday, December 15, 2018 - link
Nice features but you can probably buy an Acer display for $100 less now, just maybe not as bright.timecop1818 - Saturday, December 15, 2018 - link
This is not bright at ALL. 300 cdm is garbage. for a usable desktop monitor 400 is minimum, and 450-500 is great. (not talking about HDR junk, just normal desktop)Vayra - Monday, December 17, 2018 - link
300cd/m is fine, in fact most people tend to adjust brightness to somewhere along the lines of 200cd/m and for accuracy that is also the region to be looking at.RSAUser - Friday, December 21, 2018 - link
If your screen is any room with a lot of light, 300cd/m is barely adequate. I have both a 300cd/m and a 500cd/m screen on this desk, the sun is currently shining through the window and the 300cd/m looks washed out as max brightness while the sun shines on it, with the 500cd/m looking good.I skimped on my second monitor as was only going to use it for displaying text, I regret not making sure that it had a higher brightness.
JoeyJoJo123 - Thursday, December 20, 2018 - link
I always calibrate my monitors down to 120cd/m. Anything more than that is useless to me. Good for you if you want to blind yourself.RSAUser - Friday, December 21, 2018 - link
Assuming sarcastic? 120cd/m you're probably using it in a room with no lights/curtains drawn.greenmrt - Monday, December 17, 2018 - link
I want a 27" version of this to put beside my gaming monitor.johnkeo - Wednesday, December 19, 2018 - link
the price could have been lesser to buy, https://bit.ly/2RYyPpyDaver0280 - Saturday, July 27, 2019 - link
This review is incorrect, i am using freesync with nvidia card, so gsync via freesync port which is now allowed for 10 and 20 series cards, using the displayport. In fact it doesnt work at all on hdmi as nvidia only allow gsync over dp. It does however let me enable gsync over hdmi but because its nvidia card it doesnt work on hdmi, so this means freesync is available on both hdmi and dp, manual says this also. When u turn gsync on on display it says not verified compatible but you just tick a box and it works perfectly!Lyquidmetal - Friday, November 1, 2019 - link
Thank you for confirming, I feel like that is all anyone needs to know about these monitors.So using Display port, connect your geforce card, then enable free synch on the monitor
then check the geforce control panel to check off gsynch adaptive ?
Also, how is the input lag for gaming, noticeable ?