MSI really loves their 27" 1080p displays :cry:

I think 1500R is a good curvature.
Normal VA displays have a gamma shift issue at viewing angles higher than 10°. If you take notice of that, the horizontal breadth of a 27" display is enough to match with the 10° color washout at 1.7 meters distance with the display center.
1500R curve narrows that to 82cm.
1000R curve focuses this even more to 58cm, so I think VA can be counted along with IPS in the colour acuity club.

milewski1015MSI really loves their 27" 1080p displays :cry:

Tell me about it. Meanwhile you still have to pay through the damn nose for 2K (2560x1440).

"No pricing information was available at time of writing." AKA it's ultra expensive in case you were asking...

trparkyTell me about it. Meanwhile you still have to pay through the damn nose for 2K (2560x1440).

That's pretty accurate, but there is this $240 display...

VIOTEK GNV27DB 27-Inch Curved QHD Gaming Monitor
144Hz 2560x1440p 4.8ms (OD)
1500R Curvature, G-Sync-Ready FreeSync
DP, 3x HDMI, 3.5mm
3-Year Warranty + Zero-Tolerance Dead Pixel Policy (VESA)
picture in picture and picture by picture options

Overall the specs seems pretty good on the easier to look at specs at least relative to the cost. I think once they drop to $200 I might consider one curved 144Hz (2560x1440) isn't too bad and my 4K Vizio broke awhile back so I need a more serious replacement than my old 1080p Acer though with Nvidia Control Panel I was able to setup 2400 x1350 (1.25x native resolution) down scaling to 1080p on it which works surprisingly well. I adjusted the front porch to 16H x 4V and sync to 8H v 8V as well which just seemed to improve the look on it further. For something that cost me nothing happy with the results and has staved off my lust to replace it immediately even despite returning to a native resolution of 1080p from 4K. I defiantly miss the look of 4K, but at the same time don't miss the performance impact of it nor can I really justify getting a new 4K display right now.

I think I'd look more toward this sweet spot this time around and hopefully that display is flexible enough to do some custom down sampling as well at 1440p is my hopes that would sit me in between 2K and 4K around 3K and at a good refresh rate which is a really nice compromise anyway. I'd probably consider only doing a 12.5% down sample increase over 1440p though rather than a 25% improvement simply to negate the performance degradation that's more noticeable as you scale resolution higher on a aging GPU. It's defiantly easier doing down sampling at 1080p than it would be at 1440p so I'd adjust that part a bit and needs it less anyway given the diminishing returns in relation to viewing distance.

InVasMani"No pricing information was available at time of writing." AKA it's ultra expensive in case you were asking...

Reminds me of when I was in some clothing store in the ritzy part of town, they didn't have price tags. I figured that if you had to know the price, you couldn't afford it.

InVasManiThat's pretty accurate, but there is this $240 display...

I recently purchased this Acer monitor. It was about $400 for it. It was expensive but damn, it's beautiful. It's changed the way I work with Windows and my games. What few games that I do play look absolutely stunning on them. The first time I loaded them up took my breath away.

Another extremely low pixel density 27" 1080p curved monitor.

I called it out on the Asus VG27VQ(which is... exactly the same panel from the look of the specs) and I'll call it out here. It has the same pixel density as a 55' 4k TV, and you won't find many people sitting a few feet away from one of those. The only 27" monitors that should be curved are 1440p monitors that have sufficient pixel density to sit close to.

If you're close enough to this monitor for the curve to make a difference, the pixels are noticeable and if you sit a sufficient distance away to make the low pixel density irrelevant, then the curve is worthless.

EatingDirtAnother extremely low pixel density 27" 1080p curved monitor.

I called it out on the Asus VG27VQ(which is... exactly the same panel from the look of the specs) and I'll call it out here. It has the same pixel density as a 55' 4k TV, and you won't find many people sitting a few feet away from one of those. The only 27" monitors that should be curved are 1440p monitors that have sufficient pixel density to sit close to.

If you're close enough to this monitor for the curve to make a difference, the pixels are noticeable and if you sit a sufficient distance away to make the low pixel density irrelevant, then the curve is worthless.

Crap, I sit 60cm's away from a 24" 1080 screen and pixels aren't an issue. :kookoo:

Caring1Crap, I sit 60cm's away from a 24" 1080 screen and pixels aren't an issue. :kookoo:

I guess you didn't understand what I was saying. Your 24" 1080p screen has around 12.5% more pixel density than a 27" 1080p screen. 24" 1080p is around the maximum a curved monitor should be because of the pixel density and the relative distance you need to be for the curve to matter.

A quick comparison of pixel density sorted by PPI(pixels per inch):
65" 4k TV: 67.78
32" 1080p: 68.84 - Acer & AOC make a few of these awful things. Most 32" panels are 1440p+
55" 4k TV: 80.1
27" 1080p: 81.59
24" 1080p: 91.79
32" 1440p: 91.79
49" 1440p(UW): 108.54
27" 1440p: 108.79
38" 1600p(UW): 109.47
34" 1440p(UW): 109.68

As you can see, a typical monitor is around 91-109 ppi. Low pixel density of a monitor is an issue, because many people sit within 2ft(61cm) from them. The low pixel density of TV's aren't, because most people don't sit nearly that close.

Really, my main issue isn't with it being a 27" 1080p monitor because it still has somewhat acceptable pixel density(unlike the 32" 1080p monitors). My issue is with it being a 27" 1080p curved monitor. The curve simply doesn't make sense when combined with the pixel density.