4K Monitors: Acer XB321HK 32" vs Acer XB281HK 28"

[Francisè von Spitroast]

I'm not sure what to get. I want to get a monitor with GSync and 4K but I'm not sure whether 1ms or 4ms is really all that different, and I'm not sure if 4 more inches is worth another $400. If anyone could give me tips and give me your thoughts on what you think is worth it that would be greatly appreciated.

I'm only buying it from this website
Acer XB281HK 28" 4K 1MS: https://www.ple.com.au/Products/621974/Acer-Predator-XB281HK-28-G-SYNC-2-4K-1MS-LED-Gaming-Monitor

Acer XB321HK 32" 4K 4MS: https://www.ple.com.au/Products/625640/Acer-Predator-XB321HK-32-G-SYNC-4K-4MS-IPS-LED-Gaming-Monitor

Just extra info in case you want it. I'm using a GTX1060 and will be playing newest games at either lowest settings 60fps or just playing them at 1080p, doesn't bother me. I mostly play older games anyway so 4K will very much be worth it still for me.
Thanks in advance!

EDIT: Bonus question, I realize Freesync monitors would open my range up by quite a bit. Is Freesync compatible with Nvidia graphics cards? Would I miss out on any bonuses? If it is compatible, what do you recommend if not GSync monitors?

[𝕙.𝕓𝕒𝕣𝕜𝕒𝕤]

As I already said yesterday you miss the fact that an IPS panel has much better color reproduction compared to a TN panel and is more expensive in general. TN panels have typically a shorter reaction time compared to IPS thats why competitive gamers prefer TN.
32" compared to 28" seems no big difference in numbers but in reality it's huge. It's around 30% in screen size 2,823:2,161[cm²]= 1.3063
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Display_size
If you own a Nvidia card it's G-Sync or nothing as G-Sync is a proprietary technology working only with Nvidia GPUs with Nvidia charging license fees and Freesync is a technology developed by AMD without licensing costs. Of course you can hook up a Nvidia GPU to a Freesync monitor but as long as Nvidia refuses to support the technology on a driver basis you'll see no advantage.

[Francisè von Spitroast]

İlk olarak h.barkas tarafından gönderildi:

As I already said yesterday you miss the fact that an IPS panel has much better color reproduction compared to a TN panel and is more expensive in general. TN panels have typically a shorter reaction time compared to IPS thats why competitive gamers prefer TN.
32" compared to 28" seems no big difference in numbers but in reality it's huge. It's around 30% in screen size 2,823:2,161[cm²]= 1.3063
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Display_size
If you own a Nvidia card it's G-Sync or nothing as G-Sync is a proprietary technology working only with Nvidia GPUs with Nvidia charging license fees and Freesync is a technology developed by AMD without licensing costs. Of course you can hook up a Nvidia GPU to a Freesync monitor but as long as Nvidia refuses to support the technology on a driver basis you'll see no advantage.

I haven't missed that fact actually, and that's why both monitors are IPS. I'm not a competitive gamer and I do just fine on Counter-Strike with the monitor I have, but I usually single-player games so that's not important.

[[☥] - CJ -]

a 1060 6GB can handle most games at max or near max settings up to 1440p, so i doubt you'll have to play any at Low. but 1440p is basically what ur looking at when it comes to larger Gsync monitors or 1080p for the smaller ones.

If you can get a Gsync monitor in your size and price range, go for it.

And 4K for a GTX 1060 is out of the question, not playing on the native res would be pointless and it wouldnt look as good, so id pass on those.

[Francisè von Spitroast]

İlk olarak ☥ - CJ - tarafından gönderildi:

a 1060 6GB can handle most games at max or near max settings up to 1440p, so i doubt you'll have to play any at Low. but 1440p is basically what ur looking at when it comes to larger Gsync monitors or 1080p for the smaller ones.

If you can get a Gsync monitor in your size and price range, go for it.

And 4K for a GTX 1060 is out of the question, not playing on the native res would be pointless and it wouldnt look as good, so id pass on those.

Apparently 1080p looks even better than a native 1080p monitor, and 1440p doesn't look so bad. But yeah, I play older games anyway so it will run those fine at 4K.

Plus, you can play GTA V at 4K 60fps steady without drops nor at event he absolute lowest.

[Bad 💀 Motha]

Most old game will not support res above 1080p; just because those are allowed options in your OS because of hardware, does not mean 100% that those will show up as available options in a game. If you just playing older stuff; just get a cheap HDTV.

GTX 1060 is not going to do 4K/60 FPS; I can assure you of that.
That is more for 1440p and less. To which it can barely do 1440p/60 FPS in most games.

[Francisè von Spitroast]

İlk olarak Bad-Motha tarafından gönderildi:

Most old game will not support res above 1080p; just because those are allowed options in your OS because of hardware, does not mean 100% that those will show up as available options in a game. If you just playing older stuff; just get a cheap HDTV.

GTX 1060 is not going to do 4K/60 FPS; I can assure you of that.
That is more for 1440p and less. To which it can barely do 1440p/60 FPS in most games.

They do actually. You can always use NGlide for ultra old stuff which can do 8K, but for late 90's stuff with real 3D graphics there are always patches for these things by the community. I know which ones do and don't work because even at 1080p I always have to find fixes.
I know the GTX1060 won't do 4K the majority of the time, but sometimes it can at 60fps if some games are configured right. It would be rare, but GTA V is one of those games that will.

[Bad 💀 Motha]

Yea by turning everything down in the game, sure.
Why want to do that.

[Francisè von Spitroast]

İlk olarak Bad-Motha tarafından gönderildi:

Yea by turning everything down in the game, sure.
Why want to do that.

4x the pixels or a few extra fancy effects. I'd rather the pixels.

[[☥] - CJ -]

bud

You basically lose the prettiness of 4K by lowering the settings
and by not playing at native resolution you lose some prettiness also

[Francisè von Spitroast]

İlk olarak ☥ - CJ - tarafından gönderildi:

bud

You basically lose the prettiness of 4K by lowering the settings
and by not playing at native resolution you lose some prettiness also

Well no, apparently like I said before, 1080p looks better on 4K than a native 1080p. Also unless I lower the textures I don't see how you got that.

[[☥] - CJ -]

k then, spend/waste your money however you wish
good luck

[Francisè von Spitroast]

İlk olarak ☥ - CJ - tarafından gönderildi:

k then, spend/waste your money however you wish
good luck

Don't know why you're being so salty, but cheers.

[Arvaos]

4K is primarily good in gaming for draw distance and it removes the need for anti-aliasing. In an open world game, medium settings at 4K can look better then 1080p in ultra.

If you are buying a 4K monitor, I recommend that you buy one that is 35". Certain titles will run at 4K on a single 1060 and if you buy the right monitor, they will look amazing in 4K.

Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain will run well at 4K on a single 1060 and that game is photorealistic in certain areas.

[Lord Flashheart]

They seem very nice monitors.
What types of games do you prefer?
If it is shooters then maybe consider a higher refresh rate/lower resolution.
If you like to play prettier games then a 4k montor seems a nice choice.

I wish there was a 32 inch 4k 144 hz IPS gsync monitor and a GPU to run everything at 144 Hz. Sadly no comination exists.

[[☥] - CJ -]

not being salty, just giving an opinion that spending that much on a 4K monitor with no intention of playing games at native resolution and at low settings just for it to be playable on said monitor is a waste of money.

Just go for a 1440p monitor and you'll be good to go with not having to lower any graphic settings much.

but again, thats my opinion.

you dont have too many games that youd have to lower the res or the settings for though