• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.
  • The forums have been upgraded with support for dark mode. By default it will follow the setting on your system/browser. You may override it by scrolling to the end of the page and clicking the gears icon.

In search for the "perfect" monitor...

Liberte

Liberte

Joined
Feb 24, 2024
Messages
35 (0.07/day)
There is no perfect monitor just yet, that much i know. But what are the best options right now and the near future?

My current rog gaming monitor isn't bad but not the greatest either.
I'm still using the ROG PG279Q back from 2016.
In short, 2560x1440p, 165Hz, Gysnc, IPS, 8bit panel depth, 24bit colors, responsetime 5ms, power 90W.
Here are the full specs if you are curious, https://www.displayspecifications.com/en/model/b8a2229

The PG279Q supports ULMB with max 120Hz, ultra-low-motion-blur looks very good in my opinion due to it's nature drawing the world very clear even during movement.
The downside is this doesn't work combined with gsync and anything above 120Hz, using ULMB also modifies the brightness and color apperance.
I switched back to gsync because the colors with ulmb looked washed out, similar to a grey filter.
Playing videogames also looks bad on this monitor, atleast during motion the scene appears very un-sharp / blurry. And this with 165Hz.
So much for the current situation.

What i would like to see with a new monitor:
2k or 4k resolution, 240 or 360Hz, Gsync or Gsync-Compatible, 10Bit panel depth, 24bit colors, responstime <1ms, optimized power consumption.
I didn't mention the panel type because i can't make up my mind on this, i see alot of new monitors using OLED or similar panels, well.. burn-in is not something i want.
When it comes to the panel what's important for me is good colors quality and fast response times (low input lag).
As for responstime, it's bad marketing advertising monitors with 1ms GTG (grey to grey) because the true value that matters for me is the MPRT (moving picture response time).
Not sure if HDR is realistic combined with the above specs but you can surely let me know your thoughts. Is HDR important for color quality? If so which certification?
One last thing, if you are going to recommend monitors with massive fans on the back, just don't..
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Check out the FV43U from Gigabyte.
 
Mandolo said:
There is no perfect monitor just yet, that much i know. But what are the best options right now and the near future?
Click to expand...
And there never will be a perfect monitor. And much for that is your second sentence - the best options for you may not be for the next person.

The best monitor is the one YOU like best.
 
About as good as it gets right now, if you're wallet can take it:
www.rtings.com

Dell Alienware AW3225QF Review

The Dell AW3225QF is a premium 4k 240Hz QD-OLED gaming monitor. It competes with a number of other 32-inch QD-OLEDs, such as the MSI MPG 322URX QD-OLED, the Giga...
www.rtings.com www.rtings.com
 
A lot of people don't like curved monitors.
 
About that <1ms response time… If you really, really want that, then you have no option but going OLED. No LCD panel that currently exists will do sub-millisecond response on all transitions, not without hyper aggressive overdrive that will render the screen unusable in practice. Or, you know, through BFI like what your Asus has with ULMB. But that comes with its own drawbacks. Do note that even with OLED you will get sample and hold blur. Again, unless BFI is involved.
And you mentioned MPRT without seemingly understanding it fully. Sub 1ms MPRT is inherently almost impossible. It will require either above 1000hz refreshes, or running VERY high framerates on a very fast panel with aggressive BFI.
 
Mandolo said:
There is no perfect monitor just yet, that much i know. But what are the best options right now and the near future?

My current rog gaming monitor isn't bad but not the greatest either.
I'm still using the ROG PG279Q back from 2016.
In short, 2560x1440p, 165Hz, Gysnc, IPS, 8bit panel depth, 24bit colors, responsetime 5ms, power 90W.
Here are the full specs if you are curious, https://www.displayspecifications.com/en/model/b8a2229

The PG279Q supports ULMB with max 120Hz, ultra-low-motion-blur looks very good in my opinion due to it's nature drawing the world very clear even during movement.
The downside is this doesn't work combined with gsync and anything above 120Hz, using ULMB also modifies the brightness and color apperance.
I switched back to gsync because the colors with ulmb looked washed out, similar to a grey filter.
Playing videogames also looks bad on this monitor, atleast during motion the scene appears very un-sharp / blurry. And this with 165Hz.
So much for the current situation.

What i would like to see with a new monitor:
2k or 4k resolution, 240 or 360Hz, Gsync or Gsync-Compatible, 10Bit panel depth, 24bit colors, responstime <1ms, optimized power consumption.
I didn't mention the panel type because i can't make up my mind on this, i see alot of new monitors using OLED or similar panels, well.. burn-in is not something i want.
When it comes to the panel what's important for me is good colors quality and fast response times (low input lag).
As for responstime, it's bad marketing advertising monitors with 1ms GTG (grey to grey) because none of us uses a monitor with a grey to grey colorspace.
The true value that matters for me is the MPRT (moving picture response time).
Not sure if HDR is realistic combined with the above specs but you can surely let me know your thoughts. Is HDR important for color quality? If so which certification?
One last thing, if you are going to recommend monitors with massive fans on the back, just don't..
Click to expand...
Perfect doesn't exist and never will.

However, the current best monitors are one of two types, MiniLED with high resolution (4K120+/UW 1440p) or OLED.

The OLEDs offer superior picture quality and response times, borderline perfect motion clarity and latency. You can pick between 360 Hz 1440p or 240 Hz 4K. The only downsides are low peak brightness at 100% ABL, risk of burn in after 3-5 years, cost.

1080p is not worth looking at even for esports, 360 Hz 1440p OLED outperforms a 500 Hz TN panel in clarity.

HDR isn't worth the name unless it's an OLED monitor or a top tier MiniLED with 1000+ zones, still worse than OLED though.

Look at Optimum on YouTube for monitor reviews.

Nothing has real <1ms response time except OLED.
 
dgianstefani said:
Perfect doesn't exist and never will.

However, the current best monitors are one of two types, MiniLED with high resolution (4K120+/UW 1440p) or OLED.

The OLEDs offer superior picture quality and response times, borderline perfect motion clarity and latency. You can pick between 360 Hz 1440p or 240 Hz 4K. The only downsides are low peak brightness at 100% ABL, risk of burn in after 3-5 years, cost.

1080p is not worth looking at even for esports, 360 Hz 1440p OLED outperforms a 500 Hz TN panel in clarity.

HDR isn't worth the name unless it's an OLED monitor or a top tier MiniLED with 1000+ zones, still worse than OLED though.

Look at Optimum on YouTube for monitor reviews.

Nothing has real <1ms response time except OLED.
Click to expand...
4K as far as i know compared to 2k requires a significantly stronger gpu, that could be a reason to go for 2k for me.
You certainly make it sound like OLED is the superior choice against microled, ips, tn, va...
But the downsides... how many weeks/months useage will it take before the OLED runs only at 80% peak brightness?
How long will it take before there is permanent burn-in?
Paying a crazy amount of money for a toptier monitor and then after only 2-3 years experiencing burn-in sounds like something i want to avoid.
It may be that OLED is superior, but if it has permanent damage after only 2-3 years that sounds like a waste of money.
Pixelrefresh sounds like another annoying sideeffect.

These are the 3 monitors i'm interested in, but there may be better options out there, or some that are being to released in the near future.
Dell Alienware AW3225QF https://www.rtings.com/monitor/reviews/dell/alienware-aw3225qf
ASUS ROG Swift OLED PG27AQDM https://www.rtings.com/monitor/reviews/asus/rog-swift-oled-pg27aqdm
ASUS ROG Swift OLED PG32UCDM (not yet tested on rtings)

Looking at this https://www.rtings.com/monitor/tests/motion/motion-blur-and-response-time
Is it me or does the alienware outperform asusrog?

TechAltar has a great video about display panels, https://yewtu.be/watch?v=TyUA1OmXMXA

My problem is i can't make up my mind on which monitor is a wise choice.
As good as OLED sounds, having burnin after a short time isn't worth the insane price, neither is lower peak brightness after a short time.
So do i get an OLED or another panel?...

Bill_Bright said:
And there never will be a perfect monitor. And much for that is your second sentence - the best options for you may not be for the next person.

The best monitor is the one YOU like best.
Click to expand...
That's why i came here asking for advice...
 
Mandolo said:
4K as far as i know compared to 2k requires a significantly stronger gpu, that could be a reason to go for 2k for me.
You certainly make it sound like OLED is the superior choice against microled, ips, tn, va...
But the downsides... how many weeks/months useage will it take before the OLED runs only at 80% peak brightness?
How long will it take before there is permanent burn-in?
Paying a crazy amount of money for a toptier monitor and then after only 2-3 years experiencing burn-in sounds like something i want to avoid.
It may be that OLED is superior, but if it has permanent damage after only 2-3 years that sounds like a waste of money.
Pixelrefresh sounds like another annoying sideeffect.

These are the 3 monitors i'm interested in, but there may be better options out there, or some that are being to released in the near future.
Dell Alienware AW3225QF https://www.rtings.com/monitor/reviews/dell/alienware-aw3225qf
ASUS ROG Swift OLED PG27AQDM https://www.rtings.com/monitor/reviews/asus/rog-swift-oled-pg27aqdm
ASUS ROG Swift OLED PG32UCDM (not yet tested on rtings)

Looking at this https://www.rtings.com/monitor/tests/motion/motion-blur-and-response-time
Is it me or does the alienware outperform asusrog?

TechAltar has a great video about display panels, https://yewtu.be/watch?v=TyUA1OmXMXA

My problem is i can't make up my mind on which monitor is a wise choice.
As good as OLED sounds, having burnin after a short time isn't worth the insane price, neither is lower peak brightness after a short time.
So do i get an OLED or another panel?...


That's why i came here asking for advice...
Click to expand...
You won't have burn in after a short time. Modern panels have three year warranties and mitigations, and even then many people don't report issues on panels even older than that.

I'm using a phone with a six year old OLED panel with zero burn in.
 
dgianstefani said:
You won't have burn in after a short time. Modern panels have three year warranties and mitigations, and even then many people don't report issues on panels even older than that.

I'm using a phone with a six year old OLED panel with zero burn in.
Click to expand...
I consider having burnin when the warranty runs out (3 years) a short time. Especially for a massive pricetag the product must have longterm support, if i'm unlucky and have burnin after 3 years when the warranty is gone this would be nothing but frustrating and waste of money.
Also from my understanding burn in happens if the same image is displayed for a long time, or if for example a game with similar looking frames is played for a long time, but that's what i do play videogames from the start to the end without any disruption inbetween, so do i have to be worried i don't know.
You didn't say anythign to the brightness reduction, i saw reviews where people claimed their OLED reduced to 80% peak brightness after only a few months.
 
Mandolo said:
My problem is i can't make up my mind on which monitor is a wise choice.
As good as OLED sounds, having burnin after a short time isn't worth the insane price, neither is lower peak brightness after a short time.
So do i get an OLED or another panel?...
Click to expand...
It is a bit of a pickle. I was looking for a really good 34" WQHD monitor with an IPS panel. The couple that rated well, had short warranties (1 yr). I do not like VA panels. IPS generally are terrible for HDR and many have problems with reflections - but otherwise can be very good. I'd have liked a higher refresh rate as well - but at $800, the 144Hz of my AW3423DWF is going to have to do. That was already more than I wanted to spend by $200. I'm also stuck with being a long time Dell fan - always have had great support and reliability. Asus, Corsair and a couple other brands have 3/4 years warranties, but cost as much or more than Dell.

So, as @dgianstefani said, no perfect monitors exist. I think the mini/micro LEDs could match or best OLED in the future.
 
Gotta wait until next cycle. No DP 2.1 4K 240Hz monitors exist yet. Only way to run 240hz without* DP 2.1 is with chroma down sample. 4:2:0 looks gross.
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
Mandolo said:
4K as far as i know compared to 2k requires a significantly stronger gpu, that could be a reason to go for 2k for me.
You certainly make it sound like OLED is the superior choice against microled, ips, tn, va...
But the downsides... how many weeks/months useage will it take before the OLED runs only at 80% peak brightness?
How long will it take before there is permanent burn-in?
Paying a crazy amount of money for a toptier monitor and then after only 2-3 years experiencing burn-in sounds like something i want to avoid.
It may be that OLED is superior, but if it has permanent damage after only 2-3 years that sounds like a waste of money.
Pixelrefresh sounds like another annoying sideeffect.

These are the 3 monitors i'm interested in, but there may be better options out there, or some that are being to released in the near future.
Dell Alienware AW3225QF https://www.rtings.com/monitor/reviews/dell/alienware-aw3225qf
ASUS ROG Swift OLED PG27AQDM https://www.rtings.com/monitor/reviews/asus/rog-swift-oled-pg27aqdm
ASUS ROG Swift OLED PG32UCDM (not yet tested on rtings)

Looking at this https://www.rtings.com/monitor/tests/motion/motion-blur-and-response-time
Is it me or does the alienware outperform asusrog?

TechAltar has a great video about display panels, https://yewtu.be/watch?v=TyUA1OmXMXA

My problem is i can't make up my mind on which monitor is a wise choice.
As good as OLED sounds, having burnin after a short time isn't worth the insane price, neither is lower peak brightness after a short time.
So do i get an OLED or another panel?...


That's why i came here asking for advice...
Click to expand...

rtings hasn't reviewed the new ASUS (gen2) QD-OLED panel yet. so you were comparing the first-gen Asus to the 2nd gen QD-OLED AW.

OP, you can check here for a full list of the new OLEDs out or coming out, with some comparison on major specs, price, release date, glossy/matte, flat/curved, etc.

From that list (which I've also been keeping an eye on with intent to upgrade this year), the QD-OLED ones I've really been looking at are the HP Omen Transcend 32, ASUS ROG Swift PG32UCDM, and the Gigabyte Aorus FO32U2P. Minus the Asus, the other two have DisplayPort 2.1, which is a future-thing for me as the 4090 does not have that. Those three are glossy (which other than in bright rooms has better picture), and they're flat, which I think I will prefer. The others to consider would be the ASUS and LG OLED panels. I have a new QD-OLED TV and I absolutely love the picture on it, so I'm leaning that way myself, but LG makes a really good panel too. I like the features on the Samsung G80SD, and there's a chance the pricing is comparatively decent, but they have notoriously bad QC and Customer Service for their monitors and it's a matte panel.

Asus I have mixed feelings on as their QC has been hit or miss the last few years and they charge an absolute premium for their products. I have no history with MSI, HP, or Gigabyte...so I'm kind of leery but trying to keep an open mind there. Dell/AW has generally made good monitors as far as I've read reviews/reports on...but this particular one has had some bugs. Maybe they'll sort them quickly, maybe they won't. I wouldn't buy any of them immediately. I have seen the MSI model that's currently available (and the cheapest so far) does NOT have firmware updates. The yet unreleased more expensive version will though...so take that for what it's worth I guess.
 
RUSerious said:
It exists today. From a post above from @Mandolo https://www.rtings.com/monitor/reviews/dell/alienware-aw3225qf
It also has a 3rd gen QD-OLED panel - with a more rectangular pixel layout that improves text quality.
Click to expand...
Alienware AW3225QF runs at 3840x2160 @240Hz but with Displayport 1.4 not 2.1, i think that's what @ir_cow ment?

Bobaganoosh said:
rtings hasn't reviewed the new ASUS (gen2) QD-OLED panel yet. so you were comparing the first-gen Asus to the 2nd gen QD-OLED AW.

OP, you can check here for a full list of the new OLEDs out or coming out, with some comparison on major specs, price, release date, glossy/matte, flat/curved, etc.

From that list (which I've also been keeping an eye on with intent to upgrade this year), the QD-OLED ones I've really been looking at are the HP Omen Transcend 32, ASUS ROG Swift PG32UCDM, and the Gigabyte Aorus FO32U2P. Minus the Asus, the other two have DisplayPort 2.1, which is a future-thing for me as the 4090 does not have that. Those three are glossy (which other than in bright rooms has better picture), and they're flat, which I think I will prefer. The others to consider would be the ASUS and LG OLED panels. I have a new QD-OLED TV and I absolutely love the picture on it, so I'm leaning that way myself, but LG makes a really good panel too. I like the features on the Samsung G80SD, and there's a chance the pricing is comparatively decent, but they have notoriously bad QC and Customer Service for their monitors and it's a matte panel.

Asus I have mixed feelings on as their QC has been hit or miss the last few years and they charge an absolute premium for their products. I have no history with MSI, HP, or Gigabyte...so I'm kind of leery but trying to keep an open mind there. Dell/AW has generally made good monitors as far as I've read reviews/reports on...but this particular one has had some bugs. Maybe they'll sort them quickly, maybe they won't. I wouldn't buy any of them immediately. I have seen the MSI model that's currently available (and the cheapest so far) does NOT have firmware updates. The yet unreleased more expensive version will though...so take that for what it's worth I guess.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the info! Much appreciated!!
What does the specs "screen" mean? Reffering to, glossy/matte/1700R, what are the differences between these specifications?

After all it might be worth waiting. Certainly as time goes on Displayport 2.1 will become the new standard and OLED will evolve further.
The Asus Rog Strix 4070 Ti Super with 16 GB vram also looks like an interesting gpu, i will have to buy a whole new pc not just the monitor so i have to make sure the components will work out together. I'm thinking it might be better to wait for the nvidia 50 series release as these gpus will most likely support displayport 2.1 and make use of GDDR7 vram. But how much time before the 50 series, another year, two years? Ahh...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mandolo said:
But how much time before the 50 series, another year, two years? Ahh...
Click to expand...
Supposedly Q4 of this year. But, we will just have to wait and see if the prognosticators are correct. Timing wise, for NV development, any time this summer or later makes sense anyway.

Edit- wish I had the 4070 TI-S, just for the extra 4GiB of DRAM. I've already had one game that could have used the extra memory, and that was on my old QHD monitor. My WQHD monitor is going to make it worse.
 
ir_cow said:
I meant to say without DP 2.1


Correct. Need dp 2.1 or your down sampling at 240hz.
Click to expand...
Could you elaborate on what "downsampling" means? If i have a monitor using DP 2.1 combined with a GPU supporting only DP 1.4 and the monitor running at 240Hz + the GPU being capable of rendering 240Hz/FPS, what exactly is the problem? The other way around, using a GPU with DP 2.1 and monitor with DP 1.4 wouldn't matter would it?

RUSerious said:
Supposedly Q4 of this year. But, we will just have to wait and see if the prognosticators are correct. Timing wise, for NV development, any time this summer or later makes sense anyway.

Edit- wish I had the 4070 TI-S, just for the extra 4GiB of DRAM. I've already had one game that could have used the extra memory, and that was on my old QHD monitor. My WQHD monitor is going to make it worse.
Click to expand...
Well.. nvidia must take the blame for messing up with vram!
The 4070Ti Super ticks many boxes for me, 16GB Vram, near the same performance as the 4080 but at a significantly lower price.
So why wait? Because 50series supporting DP 2.1 which the 40series does not, and GDDR7 + eventually PCIe 5.0.

Also, does it make sense considering 12bit monitors over 10bit or is that out of reach for the human eye, or say only matters for people working in the movie industry / photo/video editing?
Edit: another question just poped up in my mind. Why is it that 4K monitors generaly reffer to 3840x2160 pixel resolution rather than 4096x2160?

Could anyone "confirm" if this data is accurate?

Displayport 1.2 vs 1.4 stats.png

8bit vs 10bit.PNG
 
Last edited by a moderator:
DSC (Data Stream Compression) must be use for 240hz, which is where the problem lays. You want Chroma 4:4:4 aka full colors, you can't have it. I personally think DSC makes colors dull and ugly. This is why I only run my 1440P at 144hz instead of 165Hz.

Why buy a OLED if the colors will be TN panel level with DSC?
 
Another question, i never understod bus-width.
My current 1080Ti has a 352 memory interface. The 4070 Ti Super only 256. So what?
Also, is there still any concern over the new nvidia power connectors? 12VHPWR and will these be shipped wit hthe 50series?
 
ir_cow said:
DSC (Data Stream Compression) must be use for 240hz, which is where the problem lays. You want Chroma 4:4:4 aka full colors, you can't have it. I personally think DSC makes colors dull and ugly. This is why I only run my 1440P at 144hz instead of 165Hz.

Why buy a OLED if the colors will be TN panel level with DSC?
Click to expand...
Thanks! Damn, just did the math. 158Hz max on DP1.4(a) with 4:4:4. That s*cks - thanks for ruining my day ;). Well, 165Hz isn't worth the bump, but 144->240 would be. So I see the desire for some to wait. Thing I don't understand is that the current Chroma scheme is based around 8 bit color - how does it change for 10 bit? I'm not familiar with Chroma other than I know it exists and affects output quality.
 
@Mandolo that would be unrelated to the cable bandwidth.

But basically higher bus = more data throughput.
 
ir_cow said:
Correct. Need dp 2.1 or your down sampling at 240hz.
Click to expand...
I can’t wait to see how much of a shitshow 2.1 will turn out. There are 3 specs in terms of bandwidth and even those (UHBR) are optional for 2.1 devices. This is gonna be USB levels of bad.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top