Monitor upgrade

Hey guys!

I'm looking to get a new screen and I'm sort of in a spot where I can't make up my mind anymore. I think I've reached the point of reading too many reviews :D

Current setup is a 1440p@60hz IPS 27" with i5 4690k and a GTX 980. Target is to play DCS and an FPS that's name ends in "offensive"

Key features that I look for:

- 27" / 1440p / 144hz

- blur reduction (i.e. ULMB/DyAc) - this is mostly for FPS

- although I have no experience I strongly believe G-Sync would be vital to an improved DCS experience

- fast response time - again for PFS

There are a few candidates I have:

1) ASUS PG278QR

2) ASUS PG279Q

3) BenQ XL2735

4) DELL S2716DG

5) ACER XB271HU

I also made a post on reddit with a little more details, I'll try not to make a wall of text here: https://redd.it/6v44li

Here I'll try to be more DCS oriented. I have a few questions that will be difficult to find answers for elsewhere.

a) User experience with any of the models mentioned (or other worthy alternatives) is greatly appreciated.

b) How big is the disparity between 8 bit color quality TN panels and IPS in DCS?

c) Is there any drawback of using a TN panel with TrackIR? I suspect there could be substantianl gamma or color shift when tilting/moving your head.

On the TN vs IPS debate I have a weird experience overall. I used 19" TN 5:4 for many years and it was flawless. Particularly in DCS it was a lot easier to spot certain things (like missile trails for instance), although this could easily be an artifact of the changed smoke trails.

d) How well does G-Sync work with DCS? I'm typically in the range of 30-80 frames depending on whether I'm on the ground or not. I suppose it could be a huge difference.

e) Severe ghosting of AHVA IPS panels of this type. Is this true?

Get a widescreen monitor. Something like ACER x34. Added peripherial view makes a real diifference in DCS. Plus its IPS, 100hz and has G-sync - which is one of those things that you never want to go back once you get used to it.

21:9 is not an option for me because I need it for FPS types too, not only DCS :)

Although I'm sure it looks real good. I have a buddy who owns something similar and he told me it's sick!

Interestingly enough, in my own experience, the screen area seems to be inversely proportional to it's usefulness. After switching to 16:9 I always felt it was much easier to focus on things on a 5:4 than anything wide screen.

Little bit off topic, but - think twice. After getting a VR myself I regret about any money invested in my monitors.

21:9 is not an option for me because I need it for FPS types too, not only DCS :)

...

IMO, it's rather opposite, widescreen is also great for FPS. Lets you to see more. After a while 16:9 feels like a tunnel vision.

Up to you though :)

As for other questions:

- TN should not be an issue for TIR. You're in front of the monitor and viewing angles are not large enough to get affected by the problem.

- G-sync, works fine with jumping FPS rate. That's one of it's strongest advantage over V-Sync. Plus obviously no input lag which is a no-go for FPS - since you play it but also makes a head movement with TIR much more responsive.

- personally if I would by a quality monitor with TN I would go with 8 bit panel. From reviews it seems to make a difference. Though I don't have direct experience as I've went for IPS

- IPS is great but don't take me for an IPS maniac :). Quality TN has it's advantages but the color reproduction of IPS makes a big difference. Obviously IPS comes with it's issues like back-light bled but unless running a poor panel it shouldn't be noticeable in every day use. I don't have any issues with ghosting.

From those you've listed I would go for PG278QR or if you can spend more for IPS PG279Q.

After reading tons of reviews I almost bought the PG278Q, then changed my mind to squeeze the wallet more for some extra cash and get PG279Q due to its IPS. Then decided to make my wallet cry and got Acer X34. I'm really happy that I did that :)

I have the PG278Q, very good monitor, any 144hz g-sync monitor is good though...

as for VR... yeah it depends on how you play DCS, and how good your eyesight is, the better your eyesight, the worse VR looks, and the more effective you want to be in combat, the more pixels you need, in other words, while VR gives you the whole depth perception, and good head tracking, it's like looking through these, except all pixely, with low framerate like 50 fps max, with low graphics settings, no matter how good of a computer you have.

I have the PG278Q, very good monitor, any 144hz g-sync monitor is good though...

 

as for VR... yeah it depends on how you play DCS, and how good your eyesight is, the better your eyesight, the worse VR looks, and the more effective you want to be in combat, the more pixels you need, in other words, while VR gives you the whole depth perception, and good head tracking, it's like looking through these, except all pixely, with low framerate like 50 fps max, with low graphics settings, no matter how good of a computer you have.

I have the older PG278Q too, love this monitor, I did consider going larger and 4K. Very happy with this purchase for DCS or anything you do that requires smooth quick response.

It's a very good perfect balance at the moment with 1440P G Synced 144Hz, GTX 1070 and CPU @ 5GHz.

I was trying one of the driving sims the other day and this setup is magic in those too. :thumbup:

It comes down to what your after I guess, I do get the large 4K thing some go for, if your after quick smooth speed for FPS too, then this setup is probably the way to go, I would not go back to a standard monitor now.

.

IMO, it's rather opposite, widescreen is also great for FPS. Lets you to see more. After a while 16:9 feels like a tunnel vision.

This is not really how it works tbh. While having more peripherial vision is not a bad thing necessarly, in this case it can easily distract you and you have a much wider FoV which makes it harder to focus. If you're not preaimed at the right spot chances are you won't make a flick across the screen before the other guy kills you. Most professionals use 4:3 with black bars or strech it across the screen, although in my opinion is mainly because of how muscle memory works. Some of these people played over a decade before 16:9 was a thing so it doesn't make sense to throw all that training out the window.

- TN should not be an issue for TIR. You're in front of the monitor and viewing angles are not large enough to get affected by the problem.

- G-sync, works fine with jumping FPS rate. That's one of it's strongest advantage over V-Sync. Plus obviously no input lag which is a no-go for FPS - since you play it but also makes a head movement with TIR much more responsive.

This is great to hear. AFAIK it's somehow possible to get rid of the input lag due to G-Sync in games where you can limit your frames, but I don't really know if it actually works. In any case I'll probably use ULMB in FPS. My biggest concern is if the brightness will be enough.

- personally if I would by a quality monitor with TN I would go with 8 bit panel. From reviews it seems to make a difference. Though I don't have direct experience as I've went for IPS

I think all my candidates are 8 bit, although I'm not 100% sure.

I'm a pretty avid anti VR person mostly because I don't beleive for a second that this is as harmless to your eye as looking at a standard screen. The shitty resolution and insane performance requirements don't make me a fan either.

Question to the 278Q owners: have you tried ULMB? It's probably pointless in DCS but I'm sure you play other games too. I wonder how bad the brightness loss is at normal day conditions.

21:9 is not an option for me because I need it for FPS types too, not only DCS :)

 

Although I'm sure it looks real good. I have a buddy who owns something similar and he told me it's sick!

 

Interestingly enough, in my own experience, the screen area seems to be inversely proportional to it's usefulness. After switching to 16:9 I always felt it was much easier to focus on things on a 5:4 than anything wide screen.

Welp, I'm out on being able to suggest anything then :( I'd suggest 34" Curved UW all day.

The ASUS ROG PG279Q is a great monitor though.

I have the older PG278Q too, love this monitor, I did consider going larger and 4K. Very happy with this purchase for DCS or anything you do that requires smooth quick response.

 

It's a very good perfect balance at the moment with 1440P G Synced 144Hz, GTX 1070 and CPU @ 5GHz.

 

I was trying one of the driving sims the other day and this setup is magic in those too. :thumbup:

 

It comes down to what your after I guess, I do get the large 4K thing some go for, if your after quick smooth speed for FPS too, then this setup is probably the way to go, I would not go back to a standard monitor now.

 

 

.

^ +1

Love my Gsyncer, best gaming device of the past years. Nothing had more impact on gameplay&joy than GSYNC in my world, across many games.

Paired with a fast CPU and GPU you are perfectly set :joystick:

Use that money for a Rift. Like above I have an Ultrawide Curved and would never go back to a normal widescreen.

Finally found a shop that provides full pixel warranty and also calibrates the thing. I think I'm going to go with the 278QR. One more question to the guys who own it: I've read about certain overheating issues. Do you have any experience with that?

Blaze, go VR bro...and just use your current monitor for FPS.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's the opposite of what I want. Besides, I'm not going to gamble my eyesight on some tech that's barely out for a few years.

That's the opposite of what I want. Besides' date=' I'm not going to gamble my eyesight on some tech that's barely out for a few years.[/quote']

 

it is an old tech :), it is called optics. You are just looking through a pair of lens at a source of light. Same thing as wearing glasses and looking at a monitor screen. I'm amazed that my eyes are actually not getting tired of VR, but 2-3 hours in front of a monitor - and they are itchy.

 

Obviously, if your focus is on "competitive air-to-air human vs human" combat - VR is not a right tool. TrackIR high res/density guy will see VR guy much sooner, not saying the TrackIR head turn rate is much more efficient (although very unrealistic too). Any other kind of combat - VR is a way to go.

it is an old tech :), it is called optics. You are just looking through a pair of lens at a source of light. Same thing as wearing glasses and looking at a monitor screen. I'm amazed that my eyes are actually not getting tired of VR, but 2-3 hours in front of a monitor - and they are itchy.

 

Obviously, if your focus is on "competitive air-to-air human vs human" combat - VR is not a right tool. TrackIR high res/density guy will see VR guy much sooner, not saying the TrackIR head turn rate is much more efficient (although very unrealistic too). Any other kind of combat - VR is a way to go.

FWIW, I track targets so much better in BFM with VR than I did with TrackIR (I constantly lost them with TrackIR). My SA is 100x better with VR, given it's essentially like being in the fight in real life...the only downside is I can't get tally on bandits as far out (due to lower res/clarity).

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Unfortunately ( or fortunately?) both PG278QRs had dead pixels and other issues that they had in store and they aren't even sure if they'll recieve any further ones at all, let alone within a reasonable timeframe.

Apparently there is a pretty much identical version from ACER, the XB271HUa. Luckily out of the 2 they had in store, one was pretty much perfect so I went in to check it in person and pulled the trigger on the deal. It'll be delivered on friday, can't wait. :)

#144hz master race :megalol: