Having a hard time deciding on Monitor

[CrAsHnBuRnXp]

I am really having a hard time deciding what kind of monitor i should get. I am torn between 4k and 21:9 ultra wide. For 21:9, im looking at the Acer Predator x34. Not sure about the 4k yet.

My main concern with the Acer type monitor is native support. Sure some games that dont support it can be hacked but I dont want to spend $1200+ on something that is going to looks stretched or have black bars in a cutscene. To me, that just defeats the purpose.

I mostly play WoW, but I am now playing GoW4 (PC) Rocket League, DOOM, and thats actually really it right now. 99% of my time goes into WoW though.

Im at a loss on what I should go. My decision would be so much easier if I had a 21:9 monitor to play with (3440x1440) and a 4k monitor to compare it with to see what i liked better.

What do you guys think? Id like to hear from both sides of the fence. The monitor I choose will have Gsync regardless.

My other question is if I do go 4k, will I still be good on my 6500k? Currently running stock.

 

[qubit]

Sure some games that dont support it can be hacked but I dont want to spend $1200+ on something that is going to looks stretched or have black bars in a cutscene. To me, that just defeats the purpose.

Depends how the cutscene has been made. If it's like CoD, where the game engine renders it in realtime, then it should adjust automatically to the aspect ratio and resolution. However, if it's actually just playing a movie, then you'll get black bars or stretching.

What kind of games do you play? Apparently, the ultrawides are better for racing games.

Your CPU is gonna remain good, because the high res taxes the graphics card much more than the CPU, which may not even be hit at all, depending on the exact scenario.

 

[CrAsHnBuRnXp]

Depends how the cutscene has been made. If it's like CoD, where the game engine renders it in realtime, then it should adjust automatically to the aspect ratio and resolution. However, if it's actually just playing a movie, then you'll get black bars or stretching.

What kind of games do you play? Apparently, the ultrawides are better for racing games.

Your CPU is gonna remain good, because the high res taxes the graphics card much more than the CPU, which may not even be hit at all, depending on the exact scenario.

I mostly play WoW, but I am not playing GoW4 (PC) Rocket League, DOOM, and thats actually really it right now. 99% of my time goes into WoW though.

Im also interested to know if anyone can help me out here, if both GoW Ultimate Edition that was released for PC in March of this year as well as the newly released GoW 4 support 3440x1440 resolution.

 

[d265f2785]

With 4k you can run games at 1080p (if your hw can't handle 4k) and each rendered pixel should map to 4 pixels on your 4k display so there should be no blurring or other artefacts caused by running at a non native resolution.

 

[Komshija]

I wouldn't go on 4K monitor with i5 and GTX980. For that resolution it would be wise to have more powerful CPU and significantly more powerful GPU (2 x RX480 8GB or 2 x GTX1070) if you want smooth 50-60 FPS gaming.

 

[CrAsHnBuRnXp]

I wouldn't go on 4K monitor with i5 and GTX980. For that resolution it would be wise to have more powerful CPU and significantly more powerful GPU (2 x RX480 8GB or 2 x GTX1070) if you want smooth 50-60 FPS gaming.

Depending on the price, I plan on getting a 1080Ti.

 

[yogurt_21]

I wouldn't go on 4K monitor with i5 and GTX980. For that resolution it would be wise to have more powerful CPU and significantly more powerful GPU (2 x RX480 8GB or 2 x GTX1070) if you want smooth 50-60 FPS gaming.

sorry but that's not good advice. You keep a monitor far longer than you do regular components. It is actually a very good idea to get a better monitor first and then work on bringing up the rest of the rig. A 4k monitor with a 980 can easily run an intensive game at 1080P while still allowing less intensive ones at 4k. But even with 1080 Ti SLI you can't make a 1080P or 1600P monitor display 4k. Not to mention in 2-3 years the monitor will be working like a champ and he will have upgraded to a gpu that can handle 4K even in intensive games.

 

[Komshija]

sorry but that's not good advice. You keep a monitor far longer than you do regular components. It is actually a very good idea to get a better monitor first and then work on bringing up the rest of the rig. A 4k monitor with a 980 can easily run an intensive game at 1080P while still allowing less intensive ones at 4k. But even with 1080 Ti SLI you can't make a 1080P or 1600P monitor display 4k. Not to mention in 2-3 years the monitor will be working like a champ and he will have upgraded to a gpu that can handle 4K even in intensive games.

There's no sense buying 4K monitor to run it at 1080p resolution. At current prices, 4K monitors are still too expensive. Today, 1080p monitors are dominant, covering vast majority of the market and will remain so for at least few more years until 4k monitors drop prices to acceptable levels for the average consumers.

With such extremely fast technology development for 2-3 years we'll have 16k monitors for the price of current 4k monitors and 8k monitors for the price of current 1440p monitors, not to mention much more powerful hardware. Until then, 1080p monitors and his current hardware are more than enough for any task. Keep in mind that GTX 980 and i5 6600K will be able to push all future game at 50-60FPS with very high details @1080p for the next 4-5 years. Guaranteed.

For some games like WoW 21:9 monitor might have sense, but for everyday use (without gaming all the time) it doesn't.
I also think that i5 6600K would be a slight bottleneck for GTX 1080 Ti.

 

[Grings]

What do you guys think? Id like to hear from both sides of the fence. The monitor I choose will have Gsync regardless.

I am as on the fence as you, though i'm split between 4k or high refresh rate 1440p

and i wish you could get gsync AND freesync monitors, as someone pointed out, monitors usually outlast other hardware, and i may own 3-4 gpu's during a monitors lifetime, as a non-fanboy i may switch back and forth between both brands multiple times during its lifetime

 

[Liviu Cojocaru]

I have the Acer X34 and I bought it when I still had only a GTX970 OC in my system...it wasn't a good idea. I had to buy another 970 make an SLI config just to be able to play games at high details, some of the games were working on ultra as well like BF4 , GTA 5, Overwatch and NFS but Rainbowsix, The Division, The Witcher, Deus Ex MD and others I could not play on ultra so I've decided to go with a gtx1080.
So if you ask me I would say to upgrade your GPU first (wait until 1080Ti launches) and then decide on the monitor so you'll be able to play all the games that you want at Ultra settings or close to that.

Cheers

 

[PLAfiller]

I'd say the best start is your budget -at least for me. As soon as you know exactly how much cash you want/ can spare for a monitor it gets a LOT easier. Next things is cross this budget with features you want : resolution / Ultrawide or not/ 16:10 screen ratio / IPS/ certain reaction time in milliseconds. If money is no problem for you, I'd go 21:9 ultrawide with the highest resolution my money can buy on at least 29" .

 

[trog100]

most 24 inch desk top monitors are still running 1080.. my 5 inch smartphone also runs 1080.. however hard i try i cant make much sense of this.. he he

trog

 

[yogurt_21]

There's no sense buying 4K monitor to run it at 1080p resolution. At current prices, 4K monitors are still too expensive. Today, 1080p monitors are dominant, covering vast majority of the market and will remain so for at least few more years until 4k monitors drop prices to acceptable levels for the average consumers.

With such extremely fast technology development for 2-3 years we'll have 16k monitors for the price of current 4k monitors and 8k monitors for the price of current 1440p monitors, not to mention much more powerful hardware. Until then, 1080p monitors and his current hardware are more than enough for any task. Keep in mind that GTX 980 and i5 6600K will be able to push all future game at 50-60FPS with very high details @1080p for the next 4-5 years. Guaranteed.

For some games like WoW 21:9 monitor might have sense, but for everyday use (without gaming all the time) it doesn't.
I also think that i5 6600K would be a slight bottleneck for GTX 1080 Ti.

You're in la la land. We have never changed standards in 5 years, much less 2-3. 16k in 2019? We barely have any 4k content. You expect movie studios and etc to change that quickly? Your comment is not based in reality on any front really.

 

[Liviu Cojocaru]

You're in la la land. We have never changed standards in 5 years, much less 2-3. 16k in 2019? We barely have any 4k content. You expect movie studios and etc to change that quickly? Your comment is not based in reality on any front really.

I agree, technology is moving fast...but not that fast though, anyways I think that 4K content will be more pronounced in 2017-2018 and the hardware to support it properly will catch up and then we will probably see some decrease in prices.

 

[64K]

For gaming the 4K market is pretty small. According to the last Steam Hardware Survey I saw it was about 1 out of 1,400 with 4K monitors. It's still too expensive to buy enough GPU to handle 4K gaming for the vast majority of gamers but it's getting better.

8K gaming isn't feasible in the near future and 16K is indeed dreaming.

Edit: To put it in perspective a 1080p monitor is an average monitor today:
A 4K monitor is pushing the same pixels as 4 1080p monitors at the same time
A 8K monitor would be pushing as many pixels as 16 1080p monitors at the same time
A 16K monitor would be pushing as many pixels as 64 1080p monitors at the same time

 

[Liviu Cojocaru]

It's also good to point out that things are moving faster than it used to be 6-7 years ago and it would be safe to assume lots of people that are now on 1080p will migrate to 4K in a couple of years.

 

[Melvis]

Id personally go no higher then a 1440P Monitor with your system. I think 4k at this stage is a waste of money. My mate has a 4k $800 Monitor and it gives him nothing but grief in most of the games he plays including DOOM.

 

[Unter_Dog]

Id personally go no higher then a 1440P Monitor with your system. I think 4k at this stage is a waste of money. My mate has a 4k $800 Monitor and it gives him nothing but grief in most of the games he plays including DOOM.

Agree fully. My 2 Cents, If you do buy 4k make sure to read reviews and check refresh and latency. My 4k's latency is noticeable in gaming no matter the setting so i game on my 1440P. Note my latency is compounded by SLI.

 

[CrAsHnBuRnXp]

I caved and bought the Acer x34 predator. I'll see how it goes tomorrow when I get it!

 

[Komshija]

You're in la la land. We have never changed standards in 5 years, much less 2-3. 16k in 2019? We barely have any 4k content. You expect movie studios and etc to change that quickly? Your comment is not based in reality on any front really.

Currently we have 8K prototypes, such as one from Sharp: https://www.monitornerds.com/sharp-120hz-8k-monitor/.
Samsung was working on 11k display for smartphones, as it was announced last year: http://www.extremetech.com/computin...-11k-screen-claims-it-can-create-3d-illusions Keep in mind that 8K TV's are already available.
If you consider VR which is gaining popularity (although still far from the mainstream) my statement does make sense. Maybe 16K monitors will not hit the markets in 2019., but it will likely become available around that time as some bulky prototype like current 8K Sharp. Considering all this, 8K's will be certainly available in in the near future and it wont take long after that for 16K. From my perspective it makes no sense to make 16K monitor even if it's 32+", but like every product they'll find their niche.
4K monitors are available from varoius manufacturers, but their prices are still too high for the average consumers. Current top-end hardware can follow-up 4K displays and for 2-3 years, top-end hardware will be able to follow-up 8K displays.

 

[PLAfiller]

Currently we have 8K prototypes, such as one from Sharp: https://www.monitornerds.com/sharp-120hz-8k-monitor/.
Samsung was working on 11k display for smartphones, as it was announced last year: http://www.extremetech.com/computin...-11k-screen-claims-it-can-create-3d-illusions Keep in mind that 8K TV's are already available.
If you consider VR which is gaining popularity (although still far from the mainstream) my statement does make sense. Maybe 16K monitors will not hit the markets in 2019., but it will likely become available around that time as some bulky prototype like current 8K Sharp. Considering all this, 8K's will be certainly available in in the near future and it wont take long after that for 16K. From my perspective it makes no sense to make 16K monitor even if it's 32+", but like every product they'll find their niche.
4K monitors are available from varoius manufacturers, but their prices are still too high for the average consumers. Current top-end hardware can follow-up 4K displays and for 2-3 years, top-end hardware will be able to follow-up 8K displays.

Reading your reply , you kinda confirm what he said, it looks to me. The law of innovation tells us, in order to have mass market success you need to capture early and late majority : That's like 68% of the market. Honestly, I don't see myself having an 8K monitor/TV during my lifetime. May be even 4K, but I am not sure. One prototype on 8K or 16K doesn't mean 68% of the people will buy it right out of the door. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to have a better resolution at my monitor, but it's just not going to be that fast in my eyes.

 

[Liviu Cojocaru]

I caved and bought the Acer x34 predator. I'll see how it goes tomorrow when I get it!

Congrats mate it is a truly amazing monitor I hope you'll enjoy it. I had a couple of issues with mine but it got fixed by Acer under warranty.

And you've done exactly as I did, everybody was telling me to wait but my mind was saying smth else )

 

[Komshija]

Reading your reply , you kinda confirm what he said, it looks to me. The law of innovation tells us, in order to have mass market success you need to capture early and late majority : That's like 68% of the market. Honestly, I don't see myself having an 8K monitor/TV during my lifetime. May be even 4K, but I am not sure. One prototype on 8K or 16K doesn't mean 68% of the people will buy it right out of the door. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to have a better resolution at my monitor, but it's just not going to be that fast in my eyes.

Well yes. Maybe he and you misunderstood me.
I wasn't talking about mass market success, since 4K monitors, 8K and 16K (when they appear) will certainly not grab much market share; at least not in the near future. 1080p monitors & TV's will remain dominant for a few more years.
Manufacturers know that they will not be able to sell 8K monitors and even 16K monitors for much higher prices than todays 4K monitors, because even enthusiasts (innovators on your picture) have their budget limits. Technology for 8K displays already exist, so it's a matter of time before manufacturers start rolling out 8K monitors, while 16K's prototypes will certainly appear soon after.

I caved and bought the Acer x34 predator. I'll see how it goes tomorrow when I get it!

I hope it will serve you well. Let us know how it works and whether your hardware is capable pushing latest games smoothly with highest details.

 

[Liviu Cojocaru]

I hope it will serve you well. Let us know how it works and whether your hardware is capable pushing latest games smoothly with highest details.

Trust me he won't be able to play smooth the latest games on the highest details

 

[yogurt_21]

I caved and bought the Acer x34 predator. I'll see how it goes tomorrow when I get it!

biggest con I see in reviews is price, that and it doesn't swivel (apparently gamers are lazy susan averse lol). at any rate you should enjoy it as most seem to love it.