安裝 Steam
登入
|
語言
簡體中文
日本語（日文）
한국어（韓文）
ไทย（泰文）
Български（保加利亞文）
Čeština（捷克文）
Dansk（丹麥文）
Deutsch（德文）
English（英文）
Español - España（西班牙文 - 西班牙）
Español - Latinoamérica（西班牙文 - 拉丁美洲）
Ελληνικά（希臘文）
Français（法文）
Italiano（義大利文）
Bahasa Indonesia（印尼語）
Magyar（匈牙利文）
Nederlands（荷蘭文）
Norsk（挪威文）
Polski（波蘭文）
Português（葡萄牙文 - 葡萄牙）
Português - Brasil（葡萄牙文 - 巴西）
Română（羅馬尼亞文）
Русский（俄文）
Suomi（芬蘭文）
Svenska（瑞典文）
Türkçe（土耳其文）
tiếng Việt（越南文）
Українська（烏克蘭文）
回報翻譯問題
此主題的作者已將一篇留言標為問題解答。
討論區規矩與守則
檢舉此篇文章
you can span and drag or winkey+shift+arrows to move to other displays
for gaming, stick to the 1080p display
running the accessory 1440p-4k or more is no extra work on the gpu
Not because of your current GPU but because whatever will be your next will also likely struggle with 165hz@1440p. This is realy demanding.
And even if for now you play LoL and CSGO and want high refresh for those games. I wouldn't bet that in the next years there might be no other competetive games catching your eyes.
I have a 1440p 165hz monitor but i run it at 100hz because my rtx3090 cannot do 165hz in many games, and when it can, it uses 400w to do so, which is ok in winter, but not so much in summer…
But with an rx 580 you should probably stick to 1080p.
set it to its highest refresh rate and let the hardware sync lower it to match the gpu output
Interesting... Even with a 3090 you struggle at 165hz/1440? What games is it struggling with out of curiosity?
You're not wrong, going to be upgrading my gpu in the future regardless and eventually cpu/mobo; but if even a 3090 is struggling with 1440p maybe now isn't the right time for it
Fair point although i haven't really been interested in any newer competitive games, just csgo/r6. Would a 24" 1080p monitor struggle with text clarity as much as i'm thinking it would? (sitting 3ft from desk)
curious what games and what you mean by struggling? my 2070 runs a 1440p 144hz and a 1080p 60hz and i get by pretty nice.
1080p to me even on a 24 inch is still an aliasing magnet, like jaggies are still vary.... there. 27 inch at 1440p is better, but not perfect.
Just most AAA games in general, not even the new ones either, although its probably because i refuse to go below Ultra settings. For me graphics is more important than framerate. 60hz sucks, but almost anything above 60hz is fine for me. Sometimes i cap framerate at 75hz to reduce the heat output and because 75hz is enough for me.
Edit: Also my 3090 has the worst coil whine that i have ever heard, which makes me not want to play at high fps. And that is why i can't wait to upgrade to rtx4080.
2. 24" 1080p has noticeably more jaggies than 21" because lower pixels per inch (ppi; pixel density)
3. I'd be wary of MSI branded monitors, they seem to have more quality related problems frequently than competitors like Acer and ASUS. Likely has to do with MSI's QA before the monitors get packed and shipped.
4. ALWAYS get reviews on sites like rtings before you go buy a monitor, not all panels are created equal. Some IPS panels have worse contrast, response times, etc. than other IPS panels.
Size, pixel density/ppi, panel type, panel brand, panel curvature (if applicable), contrast ratio, colour production, ergonomics, viewing angles, resolution... all of it matters and it makes a big difference. If you buy a cheap crap LED monitor, you're going to get a cheap crap LED monitor.
≤ 24 inch 1080p displays look considerably better 27+ inch 1080p displays because they have more pixels per inch on the actual panel, so there's less aliasing on the screen because the image is sharper, cleaner, as there's more pixels packed into each inch of the screen.
Same could be said about 27 inch 1440p vs 32 inch 1440p panels, though it's less noticeable than aforementioned 1080p options because there's 78% more pixels to work with, with a pretty marginal difference in panel size.
TN panels look washed out but they're typically the best for response times and support the highest refresh rates first.
VA panels have amazing visual quality in comparison, but terrible response times, polar opposite to TN.
IPS is in the dead center; good visuals, good response.
OLED panels are amazing, but they're expensive and their biggest issue is image burn-in when a still image is displayed for extended periods, but all of these panel types are capable of it, I have a VA panel in my possession that is extremely prone to burn-in.
VA panels have good viewing angles and contrast, which makes them great for curved displays. IPS and TN are meh.
Advertised response times are absolute BS, for the record, because MPRT, GtG, etc. only apply during a specific instance. GtG, for example, means grey-to-grey, meaning when the entire screen is just refreshing however many frames per second it's rated for with nothing but a single color or shade across every pixel, that's the rated response time. It doesn't apply to when a constantly changing image is displayed on the screen, so while your advertised response for many monitors is within 4ms, the actual response can range anywhere between about 5 and 12ms, if not higher, very few panels come anywhere close to being a true 1ms response time in any instance.
Thanks for the detailed reply, can't say i disagree with anything you said. Going to work on upgrading my build first and wait for monitor prices to drop.