Our top gaming monitor picks include models across 1080p, 1440p, 4K, ultrawide, HDR, and esports categories offering comprehensive shopping advice based on our extensive in-house testing.
The Best Gaming Monitors - Mid 2023 Update
- Thread starter Scorpus
- Start date
brucek
Posts: 1,738 +2,715
Re: Alienware vs. Samsung OLED super wides: not sure if this is still true, but I thought an earlier article implied that Alienware provided a multiyear warranty against burn in while Samsung did not. Maybe that varies by region too. Anyway, for anyone where that is a difference, I'd imagine that is a significant factor.
Agreed. Why anyone would spend an extra $300 for the Samsung - with no burn-in warranty - is foolish.
Also, the statement that the Samsung is "a better-looking monitor with no active cooling" is subjective. I find the Alienware design more attractive, personally, and the Samsung offers no swivel capability unlike the AW. And Samsung's choice to go with all mini-ports? YUK
I have never heard these "noisy" fans in my AW3423DW (and a 175Hz panel btw), but regardless, frankly I am glad it has some active cooling. Between that and the burn-in warranty, the AW seems like the much smarter choice if longevity is of any concern (which it should be). And since reviewers keep insisting that this type of monitor is unsuitable for any sort of creative/productivity tasks, I find the assertion that the Samsung is slightly more-well calibrated seems like a moot point. Will I notice it while gaming? NO - since I can never know what color the game devs intended, anyway. 99% is close enough.
Last edited:
hwertz
Posts: 522 +276
I really haven't figured out what the advantage is, at all, of running these 100hz+ screens -- if you had a VR setup using shutters then you'd want it, 144hz to get 72hz to each eye.. but when you're sitting there looking at the screen? I don't know. I kind of feel like some of this is a gamer's equivalent of the audiophile stuff, instead of carrying on about warmth and brightness and depth of the sound, they can go on about the crispness, vividness, how fluid the motion is, and shaving 1ms off the response time.
That said, if my monitor croaks, $149 is not a bad price for a monitor, it's not like I'm going to not buy it because it's 144hz.
That said, if my monitor croaks, $149 is not a bad price for a monitor, it's not like I'm going to not buy it because it's 144hz.
Also Alienware has a DF model instead on DW that is even cheaper without the fans.
Actually, the DWF does have a cooling fan (I just verified that on Dell's site). The price is lower because there is no Gsync module, and the panel runs at 165Hz where as the the DW runs at 175Hz.
Regardless, I've had my DW for nearly a year and have never heard any fan noise. I have normal, good hearing too! Maybe the noise varies by each unit, or the people who claim to hear it keep their monitors set a lot brighter than I do...
godrilla
Posts: 1,369 +897
FYI
Alienware AW3423DWF 34" 3440x1400 QD-OLED Gaming Monitor
$899.99 + FREE SHIPPING
$1,099.99 Save: $200.00 (18%)
Coupon: AWOLED10
https://deals.dell.com/en-us/produc...f Davis, LLC&dclid=CNbPoMq_pf8CFQYKaAgd8OUDLA
Alienware AW3423DWF 34" 3440x1400 QD-OLED Gaming Monitor
$899.99 + FREE SHIPPING
$1,099.99 Save: $200.00 (18%)
Coupon: AWOLED10
https://deals.dell.com/en-us/produc...f Davis, LLC&dclid=CNbPoMq_pf8CFQYKaAgd8OUDLA
m3tavision
Posts: 1,440 +1,223
Been gaming with the same core group of RL friends, for almost 25 years now. On & off between many different games and genres... (Battlefield-ARMA-COD-EQ-EVE-StarCitizen-FORZA-ETC).
Many of our pilots have their own simulators and tricked out Gaming rooms, so we always getting a cross-section of hardware & monitors... but 5 of my friends all rocking 3840x1600 Monitors. I am also looking to upgrade my 6 year old 3440x1440 to the newer 38" for my main Gaming rig. Something about that size just hits right. (Dell's AW3821DW & LG's 38GN950-B... <-- can't decide... was holding out for a newer 2024 model w/QD-OLED. )
I already have the 42" OLED ROG PG42UQ (120hz) on my other rig...and the newer 4k Ultrawide is a very interesting format for most of us... but there is not a GPU capable of sustained frames, for or worthy of competitive play.
everything is baby steps... I wish raster would catch up.
Many of our pilots have their own simulators and tricked out Gaming rooms, so we always getting a cross-section of hardware & monitors... but 5 of my friends all rocking 3840x1600 Monitors. I am also looking to upgrade my 6 year old 3440x1440 to the newer 38" for my main Gaming rig. Something about that size just hits right. (Dell's AW3821DW & LG's 38GN950-B... <-- can't decide... was holding out for a newer 2024 model w/QD-OLED. )
I already have the 42" OLED ROG PG42UQ (120hz) on my other rig...and the newer 4k Ultrawide is a very interesting format for most of us... but there is not a GPU capable of sustained frames, for or worthy of competitive play.
everything is baby steps... I wish raster would catch up.
I do not want an oled monitor. But I am very curious. If it is used 2-3 hours daily for normal stuff, including tasks where some parts of the screen are static, how long would it last?
3 years, 5?
A $900 2k monitor for three years seems like something that should cost less.
3 years, 5?
A $900 2k monitor for three years seems like something that should cost less.
It will last much longer than 5 years.
Burn-in is widely overhyped. Perhaps if you ran your display at full brightness for 24 hours straight with a static image, you might get image retention- which is temporary and not same as the permanent burn-in. Newer OLED monitors have many features to prevent this, like pixel shift and pixel/panel refresh.
People are basing their negative claims on rarely ever real-world scenarios and with the original OLEDs from 10 years ago. Burn-in is nearly impossible on new models under what 99.9% of people do on a daily basis. Does anyone NOT use a screensaver these days? That, with the other technologies I mentioned, almost guarantees burn-in is nothing to worry about.
Burn-in is widely overhyped. Perhaps if you ran your display at full brightness for 24 hours straight with a static image, you might get image retention- which is temporary and not same as the permanent burn-in. Newer OLED monitors have many features to prevent this, like pixel shift and pixel/panel refresh.
People are basing their negative claims on rarely ever real-world scenarios and with the original OLEDs from 10 years ago. Burn-in is nearly impossible on new models under what 99.9% of people do on a daily basis. Does anyone NOT use a screensaver these days? That, with the other technologies I mentioned, almost guarantees burn-in is nothing to worry about.
m3tavision
Posts: 1,440 +1,223
LTT did a comparison of different hz monitors with an intense FPS. They found that the extra high refresh reduced mouse lag to a very noticeable degree. As well, when zooming in and using a stop motion camera they also found that with a 60hz monitor you could actually see the target making slight jumps from frame to frame instead of smooth motion. And this did affect the target's hitbox.
Now with that said how much it'll affect a person's hit rate really varies. They had 3 players test, a pure casual, a top tier player, and one in the middle (Linus). While it benefited all three to a degree, only the top tier player saw massive gains in his hit rates, as well if I remember correctly he used a high refresh monitor on a regular basis.
The casual saw minimal improvements and actually took a bit of time to adjust to the higher refresh because his timing was more geared to the 60hz he used. Linus's improvement was noticeable, but he also said that it wasn't as pronounced as he was expecting it to be. He also found the improvements fell off with really high (144hz+) monitors
In the end while higher refresh is helpful to everyone it really depends on end use. It's almost mandatory if you play highly competitive multiplayer FPSs. Still helpful but less important for single player games that require targeting in some form. And most other games like RTSs while noticeable, isn't really a have to have item.
Soulburn74
Posts: 144 +78
As a recent LG C2 owner, I can confirm, that making the jump from an old warn out 1080p LED monitor, and an old 50 inch heavily burned in plasma to OLED:4K:120:HDR was quite jaw dropping! So good I bought two of them! (the 42 for the pc desk, and the 65 for the TV). Couldn't be happier. Strange isolated gripe as someone who lives in a studio apartment with 2 of these things: Turning off/on one with the remote, sometimes also turns off/on the other as well......
m3tavision
Posts: 1,440 +1,223
Having a fast screen (after 144Hz) is more about player MOVEMENT within the game. It's easier to traverse the game world, when u have more frequency interacting with the game world...
Easier to jump over a barrier, or make a running jump.... because every step (frame) is controlled by you... and a fast monitor allows u to feel those frames. Just spinning in a circle is much different at 60HZ than it is at 140Hz/frames.
Coincidentally, just standing there in FPS games.. you will see fast moving object at 144Hz+... but with a 60Hz u might not...
godrilla
Posts: 1,369 +897
m3tavision
Posts: 1,440 +1,223
Non-issue... nobody buys a plasma TV.
godrilla
Posts: 1,369 +897
It's true but I hear a lot of people comparing the good Ole days of the Plasma and believe that it is superior to anything that came after. This video is for those people who keep on bringing up Plasma.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
Weird wifi situation- learninmypc replied
-
AMD's gaming revenue plunges 48% and might not recover until 2025- Starfals replied
