Looking for PG279Q replacemennt/upgrade

[darnn]

Good evening fellow forum users,


during Christmas my beloved Asus PG279Q has been physically damaged and according to certified local asus repair center, it's better to buy new one, cost of repair will exceed value of curent unit. I wasn't planning this change , as I was very happy with its performance, so I am completelly out of touch with monitor market. I know that these days prices are crazy high but I will bite the bullet, I want to get it replaced within next 3 months or so, any longer time will drive me crazy


What monitor will be used for:
- games (mainly titles like WoW, Civ6, FS, Skyrim and Souls Games, occasionally fps and tps like Metro, Crysis Remastered etc.).

- movie nights with girlfriend


My current PC

- i7 7700k
- 16 GB of RAM
- GTX 1080


My future build will come in around 1.5-2 years from now and probably will consist of new Ryzen 7 cpu and GTX 3080 or whatever will be around that performance range in fall of 2023. I understand that choosing more future proof display will hurt my gaming experience in short term, but as you can see my PC is due to be upgraded anyway, so I want someting that will last me at least next 4-6 years .


The big questions are

- IPS or TN?
- stay with 2k or go 4k?
- Ultrawide or normal ratio?
- Current unit is 27'' , new one would be probably 32-34''



My current budget would be between 700-900 €, but if there is something REALLY worth adding more money,, then I can go above 1k €. But it would have to be outstanding monitor as much as my PG was back then in 2017. What would you suggest for me?


PS excuse me my english, im not a native speaker

 

[AlienALX]

Stay with 2k. 4k will destroy your GPU.

I don't like Ultrawide, as it steps away from conformity and depends on games to properly support it. Also, if the height is decent (1440) then the resolution will end up close to 4k.

I have this.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/ASUS-90LM03S0-B01170-Percent-FreeSync-AuraSync/dp/B077831TBZ

The curve is a nice novelty (just as much or more so than UW, yet doesn't need support) and I am very happy with it. If you are sticking to 27" then go IPS.

Even with a 3080 4k is not guaranteed. I ran out of VRAM on a 2080Ti on FC6 at 1440p with the settings maxed and the 3080 has less of it.

There really isn't a point to 4k any more IMO, because to get the FPS you will need you will likely need to use DLSS any way. Even with a 3080, which will lower the resolution to meet the FPS.

 

[Dawelio]

As Alien pointed out, stay on 1440p. 4K is overrated and very heavy on your GPU.

In terms of monitors these days, TN has been like the panel for the highest refresh rate monitors out there, like all the pros used etc.

In recent years however, IPS has come a long way and is basically as fast as TN, but with much better colours etc.

Personally I would recommend LG's UltraSharp gaming monitors. They have come down in price a lot during the past years and they perform golden.

I have personally used an LG 27GN950 for a little over 2 years and I couldn't be happier. They have since released newer versions of this with higher refresh rates if that is anything meaningfull to you.

Like 144Hz is plenty today and many don't see any difference with anything higher, such as 165Hz. But that is for yourself to decide.

As Alien also mentioned above, ASUS ROG monitors are also praised well. Personally the small white power led in the bottom right would do my OCD in. The LG's doesn't have one and it's just an all black borders around the screen itself. Just a joy for me personally, if that is something that may irritate and go on your OCD.

 

[AlienALX]

Yeah I am with you on 144hz. My Razer monitor is 144 and the Strix I use at home is 165. TBH even by lowering details on PUBG I still cant max out the 165.

I literally hit the 140s, so I don't see the point in having more unless you are running 1080p and are hugely competitive in games. Which TBH on Esports (as I have found out) you are screwed no matter how many FPS you get if you are playing against Germans when the servers are in Germany. No matter how high the FPS I still get completely caught out with people with a lower ping rate. Even at 20ms I have to pre fire sometimes just to make sure I get some bullets in first.

I suppose on a LAN tournament it would be completely different, but yeah, playing over the internet it doesn't really give you much of an advantage. I have "been 4k" twice now and I would never bother again unless you are much more into watching BRs and movies etc. Then I could see a point to it given how close you sit, but other than that? 1440p is still the sweet spot.

 

[Dicehunter]

LG 32GP850-B, Fairly new'ish as it came out 6 months ago and an awesome monitor, I have one myself, When I was monitor shopping I set out a budget of around £800 for a really good monitor and eventually I landed on this, 1 of the best PC purchases I've made in a long time.

• 32"
• 1440P
• LG's Nano IPS - Makes colours pop
• 1Ms response time
• 165Hz with 180Hz OC
• G-Sync/Freesync
• Nice clean look.

You can get it for around €430 to €450 on Amazon, Anything better and you would be looking into 4K and that demands a better GPU plus a really good 4K monitor is around the 1000 Euro mark, Honestly not worth it right now.

https://www.amazon.de/-/en/UltraGea...b&qid=1641084402&sprefix=LG+32g,aps,70&sr=8-1

 

[darnn]

Oh I know you can run out of VRAM easily, I used to max out my 1080 in Shadow of Mordor and thats 2015 title or so



I hear you guys, 4k really seems to be too much hassle for premium price. I've seen few reviews with really amazing IPS panels and tech seems to be advanced enough that for my eye 1-2 MS IPS panel will be more than enough. My PG had 4 ms and I never really noticed it.


Curved Strix looks nice, but is not available atm in stores that I buy parts from. Also, it's 2017 model I believe - is there big gap in tech in compare to some 2020-21 models? Those LG monitors looks so nice though, that devil inside me says Buy one now for cheap and add another next year Now, I used to run everything at 144HZ refresh rate, to not push too much hardware inside because I didn't really see any difference between 144 and 165. Will there be bigger difference between 144 and 180? And even more important question - to be future proof, would 240 make any difference? I've seen Samsung Odyssey G7 32 inches for 580 euro today . There was also version with more bright screen for 620 €. How would it compare to LG monitors?


I'm thinking about 240HZ only because like I mentioned, I want him to be futureproof. I dont have anywhere to check 240 hz monitors vs regular ones to see if I can tell the difference , and if experience is much better. I've been to media markt last week, but their LCD shelf was a joke .



Also - as I remember, 27" used to be sweetspot for sitting next to display because eyes were able to see everything at once. Is 32" alot bigger? Can you still see everything without turning head around while gaming?

 

[KingNosser]

I have this one and I find it rather nice the stand is really top tier run it with a 2nd 1080p 28" for streams when gaming.

iiyama Red Eagle G-MASTER GB3266QSU 31.5" QHD VA

I think i paid £345 but you might be able to get it cheaper now but it's a decent monitor it's 144hz freesync premium.

 

[Dawelio]

Curved Strix looks nice, but is not available atm in stores that I buy parts from. Also, it's 2017 model I believe - is there big gap in tech in compare to some 2020-21 models? Those LG monitors looks so nice though, that devil inside me says Buy one now for cheap and add another next year Now, I used to run everything at 144HZ refresh rate, to not push too much hardware inside because I didn't really see any difference between 144 and 165. Will there be bigger difference between 144 and 180? And even more important question - to be future proof, would 240 make any difference? I've seen Samsung Odyssey G7 32 inches for 580 euro today . There was also version with more bright screen for 620 €. How would it compare to LG monitors?

I'm thinking about 240HZ only because like I mentioned, I want him to be futureproof. I dont have anywhere to check 240 hz monitors vs regular ones to see if I can tell the difference , and if experience is much better. I've been to media markt last week, but their LCD shelf was a joke .

Also - as I remember, 27" used to be sweetspot for sitting next to display because eyes were able to see everything at once. Is 32" alot bigger? Can you still see everything without turning head around while gaming?

In all honesty, even my 144Hz is ”futureproof”. No matter which one you go for, 144, 165, 180 or 240Hz, all of them are ”futureproof”. What you need to think about is first what game(s) and resolution you plan on getting and secondly, what graphics card to combine that with?.

Since if you go 1440p 240Hz, but with an 1080, you won’t be anywhere near those 240fps that is needed to actually fully utilize that 240Hz refresh rate. Hence you are paying for a feature that might sound nice and look good on paper, but in reality that you could’ve just taken those extra cash and throw them in the nearest lake to you basically.

If you would go 1440p but 144Hz and an 3080, then you’d be utilizing your hardware a lot more efficiently and hence getting your moneys worth. That panel will still be good for a few good years, since most GPUs these days aren’t capable of running most game titles at 144fps, at higher settings, consistently anyway.

 

[KingNosser]

With my 6800XT I avg around 120fps at max settings on most games it's more when I use DXR I can see my frames drop off depends on the game as to how low they go i'd say Metro Exodus and Cyberpunk 2077 are the two games i get hit hardest by fps wise.

So unless you want to play on low for some reason your not generally see 144 as often as you'd like let alone going to 240hz

In general 144hz is a good spot to be in as most games your see them fps it's only in the most demanding games your more likely to see 60fps sometimes lower with DXR.

Thou saying that there are plenty of games i get full 144hz one of the newer titles Back4Blood is no issue just depends on how much power you really need, but unless you have a time machine for a far newer card your not going to be future proof with some of the titles coming out from here, they are going to get a lot more demanding now.

 

[AlienALX]

Also - as I remember, 27" used to be sweetspot for sitting next to display because eyes were able to see everything at once. Is 32" alot bigger? Can you still see everything without turning head around while gaming?

It's bigger, that's for sure. However, that is where the curve comes in.

Yes, it's not a new model. However it is VA, which has its strengths and weaknesses. So does IPS though, so they are both about the same with everything considered. I like my IPS Razer (don't buy one of those, I got my 144hz model for under half price !) it's really nice, but then so is the Asus 32. It's nice having both (I am spoiled haha).

There are a couple of other versions of the same 1500R panel (that's the curve tightness). Asus do a TUF model for much cheaper and IIRC Samsung do one too that uses the same panel.

I have quite a deep desk at around 90cm. Its a proper office desk.

So that is I guess where the tight curve comes in. Some are 1600R and 1700R which tbh is not enough IMO. I don't have any problems from my seated position.

It's not for every one, but it's definitely worth considering. Mostly because it's a gimmick that actually does add to the experience and you don't need to rely on software, drivers or support.

 

[dazbobaby]

Personally I'd avoid ultrawides, they are a little niche, while most game support them, especially these days, some don't and look seriously weird.
Unless you consume a lot of movies. Then ultrawides really come into their own. No bars at all on a 2.35:1 - ALL MOVIE. It's quite a surprise how good movies look without black bars.


Just remember 16:9 (normal widescreen) movies have bars at the sides instead of top/bottom, so another compromise.



4K HDR looks stunning, but with a 1080 you'd be compromising a lot of fidelity, especially on newer games. I would never go back to anything less than 4K HDR now, but I have a capable PC and a PS5.
That being said, I started 4K gaming on a 1070, so it can be done.

 

[Warchild]

As mentioned above, widescreen UWHD etc are an acquired taste. However depends on which you get. I will never be able to go back to a smaller screen now after having mine. ITs a little outdated now, but was top of the leaderboard once.

I believe there is a widescreen .exe file that fixes almost all problems in most games even when game devs dont support it. Used it well for Fallout4. And for me (where I differ) is that I prefer FPS over resolution so I would take 165 FPS and 1440p over 4K at 60fps any day.

 

[KingNosser]

I've not regretted my 1440p 31.5" most all games at max settings i get over 100fps with a few DXR games being more 60fps the obvious ones, but visually i find it to be fine and i really like HDR. I feel HDR is more important than 4k but i guess if you have both then it'll look nicer. Like warchild told me back when i was looking 1440p is a healthy balance between the two, give it a few gens of GPU's and i dare say we could upgrade and be as happy.