The ABSOLUTE best gaming monitor

[dashavingo]

I'm in the market for a new monitor. I run a high-end system (I work in Medicine: in an ER all week--- escapism is a good investment for my mental health in my business).

Anyway, go to three different review sites (Tom's Hardware, PC Gamer, etc) and get three different opinions. My only mandatory features would be G-Sync, a refresh rate of 144+, and 4K resolution,--- and while I'm not interested in a wide-body monitor, a screen size of 40-43 or so would be good.

Just wondering if there's a product that's head and shoulders above the competition. OLED, HDR and such sound enticing, but I've never experienced them. I have liked Asus Monitors in the past, but am not beholden to any brand. Not saying this to brag but to inform: my rig runs a 4090 with a high end intel processsor and 32mb of DDR5, so no problems on that side.

Would welcome your opinions! So many choices out there and nothing appears the obvious one.

Thanks-

d.

[dashavingo]

Agree with CIREX on the 4k. As many of you mentioned, there's some cool new possibilities on the horizon and maybe wait for those before buying... Seems OLED tech isn't quite there yet for one. Although I may have this wrong. Just want a 40-42 inch OLED monitor with 4k and a refresh rate of 144 or more. Is that so wrong?

[Peter]

HI,

I own the two best monitors ever made, the Asus PG32UQX mini led and the PG42UQ oled. When I talk about the PG42UQ, keep in mind that I have V4 firmware installed and this seems to have sorted any issues with early adopters of this monitor. Both monitors have no firmware level issues for me. They work as any other monitor would, which is one big reason to avoid oled tvs as monitors.

Firstly, if you have a nice high end 4090 rig, then pairing it with a glossy finished TV is just revolting, something a normie would do after listening to a shilling youtuber.

Both have top tier build quality, are factory calibrated and look great on the table while off. Of course, both are native 10bit panels. If you know your settings, you can have these beauties up and running in minutes with an accurate D65 white point, gamma at 2.2 and brightness and contrast at 120 nits. Set to full range RGB, 10bit colour, and full 4:4:4 chroma and you'll be bathing in visual splendour. However, this is the just the starting point and from there you can colour and brighten the picture to your liking. This is important, because if you start from crap, you'll end up with more crap. Sorry, I don't do HDR, as I'm over it, but the PG42UQ gives you all the benefits of oled. However, the PG32UQX is the unrivalled king of HDR with its 1400 nit brightness. It's quit something to behold.

Both screens are matte finished. This is a win-win situation because, in the evening with dim or no lighting, there is no visual difference between the two. Daytime sun light and bright lighting destroy the picture quality of a glossy screen. Lol, you ALWAYS get a double image, the displayed image and the reflected image. Glossy oled screens have their place, but they are rubbish with any kind of bright light. Most gamers are basement and dungeon dwellers so glossy TVs suits them just fine. In a bright daytime environment, matte finish has enormous benefits. As I said, it's a win-win situation.

The main weakness of the PG32UQX, is the blooming that occurs around the 1152 independent dimming zones. The zone count, however, is more than sufficient for most games and is the highest in lcd monitors. The difficulty the PG42UQX is with games like Outlast 2 which show the PG32UQX at its weakest. Response time is a little slower, but still ok. Otherwise, I think the PG32UQX is the better monitor, as it has a much higher pixel density, much more colour volume, much more nits, and is an ultimate gsync certified monitor. From a practical point of view, the PG32UQX is far more robust and will not burn in. If you want supreme all round carefree gaming, then this could be the one for you.

The main weakness of the PG42UQ is the lack of brightness. Oled simply has not got the sufficient brightness to overcome a bright room. Oh lord, combine this with a glossy oled and the oled is next to useless. You'll burn the screen if you try to overcome this. The other weakness is the lack of colour volume as the white sub pixel dilutes the colour. The PG32UQX simply dominates the PG42UQ in colour volume. I'd also say the PG32UQX destroys any oled in a brightly lit room. I have a sun roof in my room so I know what I'm talking about.

Both monitors are beautifully made and engineered (and I'm not just saying this, they really are) These two are probably the absolute best available now. I suppose I'll recommend the PG42UQ to you, because it's cheaper, firmware issues have been resolved, and despite the lack of colour volume and nit brightness, I can't deny just how beautiful the picture quality is under perfect conditions, which is not going to differ from a glossy coated screen.

However, I'd recommend the PG32UQX if your room is sun light during the day and brightly lit during the evening. An oled can't deal with these conditions and you'll mostly lose all the advantages of oled. Obviously a matte finish helps a lot for regular use outside of gaming. Also, the PG32UQX is so expensive and rare and is one of the greatest LCD monitors ever made that there is a certain kudos in owning it.

I swap between the two monitors when ever I feel like it. When I crave more nits and colour, I go back to the PG32UQX. Something like AC Origins looks breathtaking on it. However, when I play dark games, like Resident Evil, Outlast I go for the PG42UQ.

These are some thoughts, if you have any other questions, let me know.

(Viewsonic has an equivalent model that Jayztwocents used on his channel for a long time, which is worth checking out)

[Freqsync]

40 inch monitor allows for a 3-6 foot range and to have it tilt so looking up at might be useful if have slide under tables or a pull out keyboard/mouse tray.

You won't really notice from top end to bottom end in truth since the lag time is now something else entirely and pixel count definitely won't matter.

Bare minimums 120Hz Monitor over Television unless prefer sound through speakers over headphones.

Do mock up of where will sit/hang/sunk from. Where ports you prefer to connect back/side/under.
Ranges of cables tower on floor on desk inside desk inside another room through the wall.
general panels for television will not change resolution no matter what app or driver service you use have to be special tool from manufacturer to provide that service some say can be down through remote yet finding that information is possible behind a paywall that might not even have it.

Gaming mode type TV provide specific port for specific hertz yet the resolution also might not change.

really going Westinghouse so barebones is standard at that size. When you begin to go LG for bezel or Samsung for 8k or find yourself going roku just because it has the televisions shows off chance you stop playing games instead of a smart tv that syncs your home to its surround sound and voice prints encodes itself to the coffee maker might be just a bit to futuristic.


The best is the one you can break and feel great about.

Absolute might begin with ELF-SR2 Spatial Reality 27-inch Display yet a small hovering orb/sphere (magnetic pads) astro globe projecting on ceilings like a portable planetarium myght disagree

[Amuro0079]

Peter の投稿を引用：

HI,

I own the two best monitors ever made, the Asus PG32UQX mini led and the PG42UQ oled. When I talk about the PG42UQ, keep in mind that I have V4 firmware installed and this seems to have sorted any issues with early adopters of this monitor. Both monitors have no firmware level issues for me. They work as any other monitor would, which is one big reason to avoid oled tvs as monitors.

Firstly, if you have a nice high end 4090 rig, then pairing it with a glossy finished TV is just revolting, something a normie would do after listening to a shilling youtuber.

Both have top tier build quality, are factory calibrated and look great on the table while off. Of course, both are native 10bit panels. If you know your settings, you can have these beauties up and running in minutes with an accurate D65 white point, gamma at 2.2 and brightness and contrast at 120 nits. Set to full range RGB, 10bit colour, and full 4:4:4 chroma and you'll be bathing in visual splendour. However, this is the just the starting point and from there you can colour and brighten the picture to your liking. This is important, because if you start from crap, you'll end up with more crap. Sorry, I don't do HDR, as I'm over it, but the PG42UQ gives you all the benefits of oled. However, the PG32UQX is the unrivalled king of HDR with its 1400 nit brightness. It's quit something to behold.

Both screens are matte finished. This is a win-win situation because, in the evening with dim or no lighting, there is no visual difference between the two. Daytime sun light and bright lighting destroy the picture quality of a glossy screen. Lol, you ALWAYS get a double image, the displayed image and the reflected image. Glossy oled screens have their place, but they are rubbish with any kind of bright light. Most gamers are basement and dungeon dwellers so glossy TVs suits them just fine. In a bright daytime environment, matte finish has enormous benefits. As I said, it's a win-win situation.

The main weakness of the PG32UQX, is the blooming that occurs around the 1152 independent dimming zones. The zone count, however, is more than sufficient for most games and is the highest in lcd monitors. The difficulty the PG42UQX is with games like Outlast 2 which show the PG32UQX at its weakest. Response time is a little slower, but still ok. Otherwise, I think the PG32UQX is the better monitor, as it has a much higher pixel density, much more colour volume, much more nits, and is an ultimate gsync certified monitor. From a practical point of view, the PG32UQX is far more robust and will not burn in. If you want supreme all round carefree gaming, then this could be the one for you.

The main weakness of the PG42UQ is the lack of brightness. Oled simply has not got the sufficient brightness to overcome a bright room. Oh lord, combine this with a glossy oled and the oled is next to useless. You'll burn the screen if you try to overcome this. The other weakness is the lack of colour volume as the white sub pixel dilutes the colour. The PG32UQX simply dominates the PG42UQ in colour volume. I'd also say the PG32UQX destroys any oled in a brightly lit room. I have a sun roof in my room so I know what I'm talking about.

Both monitors are beautifully made and engineered (and I'm not just saying this, they really are) These two are probably the absolute best available now. I suppose I'll recommend the PG42UQ to you, because it's cheaper, firmware issues have been resolved, and despite the lack of colour volume and nit brightness, I can't deny just how beautiful the picture quality is under perfect conditions, which is not going to differ from a glossy coated screen.

However, I'd recommend the PG32UQX if your room is sun light during the day and brightly lit during the evening. An oled can't deal with these conditions and you'll mostly lose all the advantages of oled. Obviously a matte finish helps a lot for regular use outside of gaming. Also, the PG32UQX is so expensive and rare and is one of the greatest LCD monitors ever made that there is a certain kudos in owning it.

I swap between the two monitors when ever I feel like it. When I crave more nits and colour, I go back to the PG32UQX. Something like AC Origins looks breathtaking on it. However, when I play dark games, like Resident Evil, Outlast I go for the PG42UQ.

These are some thoughts, if you have any other questions, let me know.

(Viewsonic has an equivalent model that Jayztwocents used on his channel for a long time, which is worth checking out)

I picked up a INNOCN 32M2V 4K 144hz minLED with 1152 dimming zones 3 weeks ago for $500 after vouchers. The PG32UQX is $1,025 after vouchers, and only comes with HDMI 2.0 ports which is a deal breaker for me since I also have a PS5. I really love the 32M2V, amazing HDR performance. It also features full bandwidth HDMI 2.1 ports, not those fake ones on a lot of gaming monitors.

Anyways, I think 32" is the perfect size for me, anything larger is just too big even tough my desk is 80 cm deep. I'd be looking at those 32" QD-OLED monitors coming out next year, but my gut feeling tells me that OLED Is not ready yet, text fringing and potential burn-in is still gonna be a concern for those of us who don't like to baby our monitors.

[Peter]

Amuro0079 の投稿を引用：

I picked up a INNOCN 32M2V 4K 144hz minLED with 1152 dimming zones 3 weeks ago for $500 after vouchers. The PG32UQX is $1,025 after vouchers, and only comes with HDMI 2.0 ports which is a deal breaker for me since I also have a PS5. I really love the 32M2V, amazing HDR performance. It also features full bandwidth HDMI 2.1 ports, not those fake ones on a lot of gaming monitors.

Anyways, I think 32" is the perfect size for me, anything larger is just too big even tough my desk is 80 cm deep. I'd be looking at those 32" QD-OLED monitors coming out next year, but my gut feeling tells me that OLED Is not ready yet, text fringing and potential burn-in is still gonna be a concern for those of us who don't like to baby our monitors.

If it's using the same panel as the PG32UQX, then that is a very nice buy indeed. I think 32 inch is the sweet spot for 4k because of the great pixel density. I'm a total pc guy so display port 1.4 is the only essential requirement. The PG42UQ has full 48gb bandwidth HDMI 2.1 but it's wasted on me.

QD OLED looks promising for colour performance but high end IPS, with a proper RGB layout, still rules. The colours on the 32M2V seem extremely good and would be better than the PG42UQ. Either way, I can definitely say the colours are glorious on the PG32UQX.

[Rod]

The names OLED, Glossy OLED. 007

[rigomrtsfx2001]

many say the omen is good but others all ways break there on button not knowing you dont have to push rage the button to make it turn on .........you can have that come on when you turn on the pc LOL

[Rod]

The £660 amazon AW3423DWF deal was a stonker. If you missed it you missed the best deal for the whole year. Its bro the AW3423DW is one of the top 5 best monitors. Tip, All the top 5 are oleds.


All you lose is gsync and 10hz, For £660! And the natural ultrawide FOV is better than a tiny 16.9 40". Whats the point enlarging a tiny little box which is why 21.9 is the best for gaming. So it stands to reason then the absoloute best is an OLED and an ultrawide.

[Amuro0079]

Rod の投稿を引用：

The £660 amazon AW3423DWF deal was a stonker. If you missed it you missed the best deal for the whole year. Its bro the AW3423DW is one of the top 5 best monitors. Tip, All the top 5 are oleds.


All you lose is gsync and 10hz, For £660! And the natural ultrawide FOV is better than a tiny 16.9 40". Whats the point enlarging a tiny little box which is why 21.9 is the best for gaming. So it stands to reason then the absoloute best is an OLED and an ultrawide.

No way I'm gonna downgrade from 4K to a 1440p ultrawide, if it's 5120 x 2160 I might consider.

[Crawl]

Rod の投稿を引用：

The £660 amazon AW3423DWF deal was a stonker. If you missed it you missed the best deal for the whole year. Its bro the AW3423DW is one of the top 5 best monitors. Tip, All the top 5 are oleds.


All you lose is gsync and 10hz, For £660! And the natural ultrawide FOV is better than a tiny 16.9 40". Whats the point enlarging a tiny little box which is why 21.9 is the best for gaming. So it stands to reason then the absoloute best is an OLED and an ultrawide.

You do realize that if you have say a 43" 16:9 4K you can run it in 21:9 1440p and essentially have a 34" ultra wide you'll just have black bars at the top and bottom of the screen. Its silly to pay the wide screen premium for a lesser screen when you can get a 4K display that is far more flexible and likely cheaper.

[C1REX]

Rod の投稿を引用：

The £660 amazon AW3423DWF deal was a stonker. If you missed it you missed the best deal for the whole year. Its bro the AW3423DW is one of the top 5 best monitors. Tip, All the top 5 are oleds.


All you lose is gsync and 10hz, For £660! And the natural ultrawide FOV is better than a tiny 16.9 40". Whats the point enlarging a tiny little box which is why 21.9 is the best for gaming. So it stands to reason then the absoloute best is an OLED and an ultrawide.

It's still available on dell.com for £660.
Big OLED TVs have ultra wide and super ultrawide option. You get black bars but if it's a 50' ish screen it's still big enough.