1920 x 1200 PC Monitors

Hey everyone, I'm close my new buying my new custom PC: intel i5 CPU, 16GB RAM, GTX680 single config.

With the above info in mind, which 1920 x 1200 monitors would be best for gaming.
Also, if you own a 2560 x 1440/1600 for gaming, would you recommend it? Is there any input lag noticeable, etc.?

I have a Hanns-g 28" 1920x1200 monitor.
It's nice and fast, and my only issue is the backlight is so bright i needed to turn the brightness down to the lowest.

After spending as much as I did building a new machine, it didn't make a lot of sense to skimp on the actual display. I went with a Asus PB278Q. 27" IPS @ 2560x1440 (Note that this requires a DVI-D cable or Display port cable and not the standard DVI-I cable)

Unless you have a very good setup with one of the newest graphics cards, I would skip the 2560x1440 though and get a 24" IPS like the ASUS PA248Q

Either way, I have zero input lag on my PB278Q. My only regret is I can't afford to get two more of them and 2 more graphics cards to go overboard with.

*edit* just looked again at what you said you had. The GTX680 will definitely be enough to run the game at max settings on a 27" at 2560x1440.

If you got the money, then by all means go for the 2560x1440 one. I've got a 1920x1200 26 inch Asus one and, really, the only reason I won't be going for a higher res. one in the very near future is because I can't afford it, lol. This monitor I'm using is pretty nice still, but yeah, if I could, I'd definitely go for a higher resolution one. No real reason not to besides money.

BTW, there's a really nice deal right now on Newegg if you wanna go for it (and are in NA): http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...2E16824236294R

80,000,000:1 lolI love how they inflate the contrast to these unrealistic numbers.

Doki, I should ask that after reading personal reviews on the PB278Q, have you experienced any kind of backlight bleeding from any of the corners of the monitor? It seems some people have noticed this.

No defect of any kind in my screen. I will say it took me a bit of trial and error to get my system to accept that I had it plugged in via Display port. It was recognized immediately and worked flawlessly via DVD-D, however my understanding of Display port is that it offers a higher color range/better picture, so I wanted to get that working. Can't say my non-A/V dork eyes noticed a difference either way. I did spend some time looking for the flaws mentioned, and tweaks for color settings stuff, but overall it's pretty much perfect out of the box.

The screen has been out for a little while now, so it might be complaints from the earliest adopters. Also keep in mind when reading reviews that it really does seem like for almost any product out there you have 3 complaint reviews for every 1 positive review.

I spent a long time both online and in-store at Best Buy and Tiger Direct looking for screens before deciding on the Asus. It was either the Asus or a comparable Dell screen that cost WAY more for basically the same features.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Doki

No defect of any kind in my screen. I will say it took me a bit of trial and error to get my system to accept that I had it plugged in via Display port. It was recognized immediately and worked flawlessly via DVD-D, however my understanding of Display port is that it offers a higher color range/better picture, so I wanted to get that working. Can't say my non-A/V dork eyes noticed a difference either way. I did spend some time looking for the flaws mentioned, and tweaks for color settings stuff, but overall it's pretty much perfect out of the box.

The screen has been out for a little while now, so it might be complaints from the earliest adopters. Also keep in mind when reading reviews that it really does seem like for almost any product out there you have 3 complaint reviews for every 1 positive review.

I spent a long time both online and in-store at Best Buy and Tiger Direct looking for screens before deciding on the Asus. It was either the Asus or a comparable Dell screen that cost WAY more for basically the same features.

---

Thank you very much for your help Doki :) I was already contemplating this monitor and reading reviews essentially scared me away from it, but I'll take your word and give it a go for it.

Thanks to the other two also, now that I have some options to work with should I have a change of heart.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AmandaHuggenkiss

I have a Hanns-g 28" 1920x1200 monitor.
It's nice and fast, and my only issue is the backlight is so bright i needed to turn the brightness down to the lowest.

---

I think we have the same screen. I remember the first morning after buying it, booting up my PC with a blank black desktop background and then opening google. I could feel the liquid on my eyes turning to steam.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Junpei

I think we have the same screen. I remember the first morning after buying it, booting up my PC with a blank black desktop background and then opening google. I could feel the liquid on my eyes turning to steam.

---

I can't tell, is this a bad thing? ._.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AmandaHuggenkiss

I have a Hanns-g 28" 1920x1200 monitor.
It's nice and fast, and my only issue is the backlight is so bright i needed to turn the brightness down to the lowest.

---

I have two of these they are great.

I also have two Samsung 23" 2048 x 1152 (2343bwx) and they are quite nice as well but I absolutely prefer 16:10 for gaming and almost everything on my PC. 16:9 is too squashed and only good for movies.

Hmm, my monitor's a little on the older side now, but it rocks. It's an HP LP2475w 1920x1200 IPS monitor. The colors are amazing and I've yet to see anything negative show up while gaming.

I recommend Dell's ultra sharp series, Asus also has a Professional IPS series, but when they were first at market they had issues with BL bleed and some dead pixels, can't comment as to how they are now. As for the 2560x1440 idea, I wouldn't recommend it for a single 680, you would need to go SLI if you want a decent frame rate at high settings.


Another problem is desk space, don't go out and buy a $700 (300ish if you want to risk importing from Korea without warranty.) and put it on a small unsteady desk.

Had to look up the name of them again, but if you are feeling like taking a real leap of faith, some have gotten amazing results ordering a CATLEAP Q270 (27" IPS that has a 120hz refresh rate), only available in Korea. But it takes more seller research and luck than I care to deal with. They sell for the same price as the IPS monitors here that run at 60hz (usually through firmware upgrades and such). The better refresh rate would mean even less input delay issues, but again, I haven't experienced any on my Asus so meh.

and to the above poster: I run a single 2650x1440 on a GTX 680 with max settings and encounter no framerate issues at all, even with lots of craziness during FATEs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Doki

Had to look up the name of them again, but if you are feeling like taking a real leap of faith, some have gotten amazing results ordering a CATLEAP Q270 (27" IPS that has a 120hz refresh rate), only available in Korea. But it takes more seller research and luck than I care to deal with. They sell for the same price as the IPS monitors here that run at 60hz (usually through firmware upgrades and such). The better refresh rate would mean even less input delay issues, but again, I haven't experienced any on my Asus so meh.

and to the above poster: I run a single 2650x1440 on a GTX 680 with max settings and encounter no framerate issues at all, even with lots of craziness during FATEs.

---

I was talking more towards more intensive titles like BF3 and Crysis 3.

In my experience 1920x1200 screens seem to have a lot of bleedout around the edges plus there is not a lot of choice compaired to 1920x1024. Obviously the size is a great addition but its not the be all and end all, if your gaming on fps games as well as FFXIV then I would recommend a 24" 1920x1024 there is a lot of choice and prices can range from £150 - £400 UK pounds most have better colour/resolution ratio's and dark/light contrast seem to be generally better on 1920x1024 too.

You can always get a widescreen version of the 1920x1024 to make up for lost space.

I game on a Dell U2711 @ 2560x1440, if you plan to play at that resolution be prepared to drop some moneys on a graphics card or two for the latest games if you like high fps.

Just a heads up, there is no 1440p 120hz monitors out at the moment. (Unless you want a Catleap which is pricey)

I am waiting for 1440p 120hz to hit mainstream before I upgrade from 1080p 120hz

The problem with 1440 @ 120hz is you are doubling the tax on your graphics card. While my GTX680 handles everything maxed at 2650x1440 @60hz, I am betting it would start to choke with the faster refresh.

OP,

I play on an iMac 27inch and my Macbook Pro. :)

my iMac has 2560x1440 I believe (I'm at work can't check..but I'm positive that's right) and I enjoy it.

Of course, I push my monitor back a little so I'm not turning my head all the time to make sure everyone's alive, etc.

I like having all that screen space...it really helps when you have a lot of things going on (as far as UI goes) on your screen. I'm sure when we get to that point in ARR where we have all 3 command bars out...that could get cluttered on a smaller screen. But on my iMac..if the bars are similar in size to the bar in 1.0, you could almost even lay all three out along the bottom of the screen without even stacking them. But that might be confusing. But you get my point!

However, I don't have complete control of my iMac's brightness while in Windows mode. During darker hours I do find myself dimming it as far as it lets me. Then again, I do that with any screen because since I'm around a computer for work AND play...I'm trying not to strain my eyes.

I use a Dell U3011 myself. Of the different models using similar IPS panels, like the Apple Cinema or those Korean groups, it likely has the most input lag, but I hardly notice it if it's there.

But yeah, the extra resolution does give you more screen real estate, but if you're ONLY using it for gaming then you may want a 16:9 vs a 16:10, depends on what you really want.

Thanks for all the advise. I'm looking to maximise my experience with ARR as it will be the only program running on my new PC, I have a laptop and iPad for other general purposes.

I have 3 Hanns g 28" monitors at 1920x1200, and they look wonderful. I think the 680 can do nvidia surround with a single card as well, so with 3 you could hit 5760x1200. I would not want to tri-screen with 16:9 monitors, it is to short for it's width, but I have found 16:10 to be acceptable.

Also the hanns g can be found for $200 refurbished, 2 of mine are refurbs and have been completely problem free.

I doubt your monitor's input lag is gonna make or break this game.

Hiiiii Tsumugi! I miss bumping into you ! hope you are well and i hope to see you again soon

I know this doesn't answer your question but I'm all for eyefinity (3 monitors). I personally feel like it's the most immersive way to play any game. I really broadens your view, and I know in 1.0 the hud remained on the center screen allowing you to not have to turn your head whenever messages came up ect.
My signature is my example.

Aside from that I'd say wait on getting a higher pixel count monitor until 4k is more affordable. That's going to be crazy! I personally cant wait =D (or for the true nerds out there... 4k eyefinity... !!!!!! gawsh lol like what kinda quadfire, titan tower would that need?!?!)

Personally I don't care for the 2560x monitors.

But hanns g look great
http://i.imgur.com/T9FJY.jpg

I currently use a DoubleSight 2560x1600 monitor. I highly recommend 2560 if you have the funds to afford it, because almost all brands go for $1000+.

In a budget friendly setup, you could afford 1-2 1920 monitors for a lot less. I'm a big fan of the Dell UltraSharp U2212HM I was able to buy 3 on sale for less than $600.