Moving on up to QHD...

[Surfie]

Hi all,

Currently using a GTX 680 (I feel that I need an upgrade on this too - but we're coming to that), and looking to switch up from 1080p gaming.

In the process of my research, I've found two monitors which I feel are in my price point that (I think) would go nicely:

Benq 24"
AOC 32" with FreeSync

Now, lets talk about the video card situation: i'm patiently awaiting Vegas release, in the hopes that they will release at a price point where I can justify the upgrade - either to Vega or to a 1080Ti. (I.e. because Vega are cheap enough, or because nvidia drops the price due to the threat).

This is where the quandry comes in: if I get Vega, then the AOC becomes the better buy, however if I get 1080Ti, then I would think the BenQ would be better (sharper picture).

Have I just got this backwards? Am I missing something? Would my 680 handle QHD allowing me to wait longer, and rendering this whole question moot?

Cheers!

Surfie

 

[Kilbane]

Depending on what you play, the 680 will likely be massively under powered for 1440.

Take a look at my thread about going from 1080 to 1440 Here

Bare in mind that I was running a 970 then and that started to struggle. It wasn't until I upgraded to my 1070 that it really made sense.

 

[Excalabur50]

What you really need to do is decide which camp you want to ultimately go with first there is no point buying a monitor now and then deciding on the card to drive it
With Nvidia's practices ATM I'd say wait and see what Vega brings to the table and then get a nice freesync monitor to go with it and just sit on what you have for the time being IMHO

 

[AlienALX]

I would get the AOC regardless.

With Nvidia you can enable Adaptive Vsync globally which takes care of your active Vsync. Dice reckons he can tell the difference between adaptive and G-sync, well I couldn't.

24" is a little small for QHD IMO. It would be good for gaming, but not so much viewing things at their native size on a monitor so small.

 

[tolagarf]

Adaptive v-sync can be effective at both removing some tearing with 60 Hz screens, but also limit the input lag you normally would be exposed to with normal v-sync enabled. Not all games like adaptive v-sync though, so it's a hit & miss.

 

[AlienALX]

Adaptive v-sync can be effective at both removing some tearing with 60 Hz screens, but also limit the input lag you normally would be exposed to with normal v-sync enabled. Not all games like adaptive v-sync though, so it's a hit & miss.

You only get lag if your GPU is not up to the task. Buying the right GPU is very important.

980ti/1070/Fury/FuryX optimal, RX 480 8gb will just about scrape it. The incoming 580 should be better suited to 1440p, especially if it's faster than the 480.

 

[NeverBackDown]

24" is quite small for 1440...

 

[Tolemac]

As others have said 24" is quite small for 1440p you are better off going 27"

 

[19Deltasnafu]

That's a huge difference in monitors mate. I would not go with the 24, W10 upscaling of desktop is horrid. I'd just piece it out and we know that the AMD 2k GPU is on the way. The best monitor at the moment for budget friendly gaming is the Pixio PX277. It has the exact same panel as the Acer predator XB271HU but without Gsync and much cheaper. It's amazing. With the new Vega coming and this monitors 55 to 144hz freesync range it's perfect. No "B" grade panel or components either. I'd pick up the monitor and then save for the best Vega I could get. Hack you'll save $400 on the monitor over the Gsync Acer.

 

[prelepo]

To be honet I also woudn't go with the 24

 

[AngryGoldfish]

32" is nice and immersive, but pixel density will be no better than 1080p 24" whilst being more demanding. Also, 32" is so large that a TN panel might introduce ugly colour shifts with anything in the corner of the screen. I even notice it on a 27" panel when sitting as far back as I can before losing text visibility. 60Hz kinda sucks as well.

The 24" 1440p panel will be nice for photo editing, but not a particularly immersive experience while gaming. Small screen + IPS + 60Hz = not ideal. Daily activities will be a challenge as well. I sometimes even struggle with a 27" 1440p panel in Windows. I would not go any lower. It's one of the main reasons why I don't think 4k has been adopted yet. 4k has been the buzzword for years now, but we're still miles away from it being implemented properly.

I don't recommend either monitors to be honest. In my opinion we're still at an awkward point where unless you fork out another couple of hundred squid you're better off with a 1080p panel. I thought it would have changed by now, but all that's changed is we now have a few more options and prices have dropped slightly. We still struggle to find a nice all-round monitor at 1440p for £400 that doesn't compromise on anything critical.

1440p is not so amazing that I'd be willing to make a major compromise.