Our gaming monitor buying guide covers 1080p, 1440p, 4K, ultrawide and HDR models, with top recommendations in each category based on refresh rate, display size, and budget considerations.
The Best Gaming Monitors - Holidays 2023
- Thread starter Scorpus
- Start date
yRaz
Posts: 6,412 +9,488
I don't think I can ever use a 1080p display again. I remember 1920x1200 was nice at the time and those extra 120 vertical pixels did a ton for productivity. 1440p is nice but I really love 4k. I don't game at 4k but the screen real-estate that 4k gives you is is irreplaceable for productivity. If I could get 8k120 on a 55" display I would in a heartbeat.
FYI, to anyone thinking about using a TV as a monitor, 65" is too large, your neck will never forgive you. I find 55" to be perfect. That said, I'm looking at the LG c3OLED as my next display because my Samsung is dying and I think OLEDs have progressed to a point where burn in isn't a huge concern anymore. I paid $3800 for my Samsung 6 years ago. Back then OLEDs were still in the 5k range and at that price risking burn in wasn't worth it. At current OLED prices I'm willing to risk it.
FYI, to anyone thinking about using a TV as a monitor, 65" is too large, your neck will never forgive you. I find 55" to be perfect. That said, I'm looking at the LG c3OLED as my next display because my Samsung is dying and I think OLEDs have progressed to a point where burn in isn't a huge concern anymore. I paid $3800 for my Samsung 6 years ago. Back then OLEDs were still in the 5k range and at that price risking burn in wasn't worth it. At current OLED prices I'm willing to risk it.
The AW3423DWF monitor is a stellar choice, but its firmware ability is sort of a gimmick, offering "updates" that merely bring it close to the DW model's performance (full disclaimer, I own the DW model).
It costs more, but the DW's G-sync Ultimate module and somewhat superior HDR performance make the it better monitor - ignoring cost, of course. For me, G-sync Ultimate was worth the premium. It's just so smoooth and works flawlessly.
I would still opt for the DW today in hindsight.
It costs more, but the DW's G-sync Ultimate module and somewhat superior HDR performance make the it better monitor - ignoring cost, of course. For me, G-sync Ultimate was worth the premium. It's just so smoooth and works flawlessly.
I would still opt for the DW today in hindsight.
I could never get into curved displays. I did not get a curved TV when they were getting popular, and sold my curved monitor after I realized it is destructing. Maybe if it was one of those ultra ultra wide displays Samsung sells, but otherwise no. These kinda sound right on paper, but using one was not the experience I was hoping for.
Skjorn
Posts: 828 +696
You sold your monitor after you realized it was falling apart? That some top tier scum behavior.
No. I sold it because the curve felt really unnatural. Flats only for me now.
Curved TVs make no sense. You're sitting far away. Curved monitors should immerse you.
If you're buying a large monitor is it for the desktop real estate, or to be like that dork with the sore neck who sat in the front row at the cinema.
The reviewers and buyers disagree. G-Sync module benefits these days are so far and few that I would be surprised if anyone but professional reviewer would even notice the difference side-by-side.
It does however have many downsides. For example in Europe you cant even buy DW anymore as it's completely replaced by DWF - the superior version.
Also personally I like the DWF's black design much better than the DW's white that does not mix well with most setups people have.
Skjorn
Posts: 828 +696
Idk bout "superior"
There's some gsync compatible displays that cutoff below 60Hz. Some are even 80Hz.
The module goes from 1 to max. They have better tone mapping too. Also pretty sure the module model does gync with full hdr brightness support.
Freesync has a limited range. Gsync starts at 1Hz.
Freesync reduces tear. Gsync eliminates it.
The DWF model is capped at 120Hz natively for 10bit. The DW goes up to 144Hz.
The DWF is 165Hz; the DW is 175Hz. Not much of a difference, but still "superior".
I like the two-tone color, although I don't see the back of my monitor much. What I DO see is the nice glow from the RGB ring that illuminates the wall behind it. The DWF model has much less RGB lighting.
The biggest advantage, however, is that I have been enjoying this kick-*** monitor for 18 months... no DWF owner can claim that! But, both are great choices.
Last edited:
I’d say the Acer XV275K is a better recommendation for 4k 27” gamers. Yes it has several quirks but you get used to them (including the clunky monitor controls), and if you stick to hdr, you rarely encounter them. And if you want a true hdr 4K high dpi experience for <$550, it’s the only option out there. You’d be getting an inferior experience with the M27U.
Darkmatter
Posts: 44 +15
So, for the Asus ROG Swift PG27AQDM 21:9 ultra wide, it says that the monitor is 34" but we know that that is diagonally. Would the monitor have the same vertical size as a regular non-ultra wide monitor?
The curved stuff... ehhhh I dunno. It makes me nervous. lol
I sure wouldn't get one with an aggressive curve though.
The curved stuff... ehhhh I dunno. It makes me nervous. lol
I sure wouldn't get one with an aggressive curve though.
Skjorn
Posts: 828 +696
Yeah it's the same height as I think a 27in screen.
34in UW is 27in 16:9 widened. Idk what size 38in UW comes from.
I think that's how it goes I could be wrong.
Not everyone likes Ultrawide and 34" Ultrawide is mediocre for shooters and most competitive games, which is why no serious players and pros are using Ultrawide. They want 24-27 inch with 240 Hz minimum for laser focus. You can't have good focus on a wide screen with forced eye movement.
Plus still tons of games that don't support ultrawide well, even brand new ones, and videos are always stretched or has black bars.
If you actually play games that is playing well with ultrawide, why don't go 38" 3840x1600 or super wide 49" because 34" ultrawide is not really big as its the same height as 27 inch 16:9 - its still 1440p meaning image is not really sharp compared to actual 4K/UHD.
Last edited:
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
Ford is losing boatloads of money on every electric vehicle sold- DanteSmith replied
