• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.

Samiya

Alt Account
Banned
Nov 30, 2019
4,811
I was looking at monitors and it was cheaper for me to buy a LG C9 55 inch TV with all its features than a 27 inch 4K monitor with Freesync/G-sync, 120hz and HDR.

PC monitors are also incredibly thick and hefty, they look really crap compared to the slim TVs out there.
 

Cyanity

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,345
My roommate just put together a top-end 3080 system and isn't even topping 100fps at 1440p in a lot of games. 4k 120fps is still a pipe dream for most people.
 

Arulan

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,571
For anyone interested, this is what a 48" display looks like sitting ~48" away at a desktop. It's very doable, but you need to have some space. I don't think putting it on the desk is a good idea. Unless maybe you're tall enough (arm-level to eye-level) to overcome the on-desk height, and you happen to have a very deep desk.

371826_IMG_20200815_172828.jpg


382888_IMG_20200912_163032_1.jpg


As others have pointed out though, 4k120 isn't new for monitors. Not to mention there are other attractive options (Even higher refresh rates, Ultra-wide, etc.) or simply wanting 1440p120+ instead to prioritize performance even more.
 

Hummel003

Member
Mar 23, 2020
769
Yeah I've been thinking what a missed opportunity with consoles coming out to take advantage of it. PCs now probably could too.
Theres some that probably are 4K and 120Hz+ already, but theres nothing out right now that is HDMI 2.1, so 4K AND 120Hz simultaneously isn't an option. You could argue almost nothing could reach that, but with DLSS and consoles with checkerboarding.. possible we will see it.
The only one I've seen with HDMI 2.1 upcoming is some ASUS ROG monitor and it suspected to be around ÂŁ3k... which is ridiculous, it seems the Mini LED is what is justifying the price, which also means more local dimmin zones, but seems that doesn't even fully eliminate the halo effect, so wonder if it's worth it.
I'm going for the EVE Spectrum when it eventually releases, which will have HDMI 2.1, 4K, 120Hz, only issue I have with it is it only has DisplayHDR600 and like 12 local dimming zones?
I do have a monitor with 1000 nits now and more dimming zone and it already slightly bothers me, but got used to it over time. I may just try the global dimming option instead on Spectrum if it bothers me enough.

For me and I imagine many people though, where I game there is no room for a 40"+ TV, so monitors are literally the only choice, maybe it is niche but feels to be growing one at least with people I know, definitely feels monitor companies have lagged behind TVs for a while though. Not as good HDR (also Windows fault as a platform with how they handle it too), and they're priced crazy in comparison to similar TVs.
May i ask what monitor you have now that has 1000 nits?
 

SapientWolf

Member
Nov 6, 2017
6,565
I've given up on trying to find the one monitor to rule them all. I plan on rocking a high refresh rate 1440p ultrawide and using the HDTV if a game has a really good HDR implementation. I don't really miss the extra pixels from 4k in most games since they're going to the skybox.

4k/120hz monitors are out there but the market just isn't. Not at the prices they're charging. If I'm going to pay 4 figures for a display it better have OLED or something even better.
 

Hummel003

Member
Mar 23, 2020
769
I am in the same boat as the OP. I am also looking for a great monitor for my ps5 and it is nearly impossible to find one that ticks all the boxes.
The one that stands out to me is the acer predator x27 but its really expensive
 

OCD Guy

Member
Nov 2, 2017
985
I think the other issue is at the sort of price those monitors cost, you're verging on 48" oled territory price wise.

The CX gives you G-Sync, FreeSync Premium and VRR, plus you get the benefits to image quality an oled gives you.

I know not everyone wants a monitor that size, but the sizes of monitors people are putting on desks has gotten drastically larger these last few years.
 

Cats

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,929
Urgh, I wish we could just get mini OLED monitors, like 24inch with 4k,120,4:4:4 gsync. Then, due to the tiny size, make is cheap so I don't have to care about burn in at all and can just dump it and get another one ever two years.

Why is this so hard?

I don't want a huge 48" tv as my monitor. It just doesn't work me. I also don't want to spend 1.4k on something that I have to babysit or give in to the windows taskbar/mozilla window being permanently burned in.
 

OCD Guy

Member
Nov 2, 2017
985
Urgh, I wish we could just get mini OLED monitors, like 24inch with 4k,120,4:4:4 gsync. Then, due to the tiny size, make is cheap so I don't have to care about burn in at all and can just dump it and get another one ever two years.

Why is this so hard?

I don't want a huge 48" tv as my monitor. It just doesn't work me. I also don't want to spend 1.4k on something that I have to babysit or give in to the windows taskbar/mozilla window being permanently burned in.

You can get a small oled monitor, but it's ridiculously priced.

It's the Asus PQ22UC. Granted it's a portable monitor aimed more at graphic design but still....

it's funny because I'm sure there were other manufacturers who announced gaming oled monitors, one was a 24inch but they seem to have been vapourware....
 

Deleted member 17092

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
20,360
As others have pointed out, HDMI is a secondary interface on PC/Monitors. DisplayPort is generally the better choice. I even used DVI-D for 1080p120 instead of HDMI back then.

I don't think that's really the case anymore. DP standards are slow as fuck to advance much less actually get put into actually products and don't support hdr and vrr simultaneously.
 

Instro

Member
Oct 25, 2017
15,000
For anyone interested, this is what a 48" display looks like sitting ~48" away at a desktop. It's very doable, but you need to have some space. I don't think putting it on the desk is a good idea. Unless maybe you're tall enough (arm-level to eye-level) to overcome the on-desk height, and you happen to have a very deep desk.

371826_IMG_20200815_172828.jpg


382888_IMG_20200912_163032_1.jpg


As others have pointed out though, 4k120 isn't new for monitors. Not to mention there are other attractive options (Even higher refresh rates, Ultra-wide, etc.) or simply wanting 1440p120+ instead to prioritize performance even more.
Nice setup. Out of curiosity, what desk is that? Been trying to shop around for a good desk lately.
 

Ra

Rap Genius
Moderator
Oct 27, 2017
12,198
Dark Space
That monitor is straight up double the price of a 55" LG CX OLED and it doesn't even have HDMI 2.1.

A 34" VA display without HDMI 2.1 should be priced closer to ÂŁ600 not 4 times that. There's no way to justify that price.

If you want a high end gaming display then a 4K TV is the only reasonably priced option at this point. Now we have OLED, HDMI 2.1, VRR, high refresh and sub 10ms input lag in TVs, overpriced gaming monitors just look terrible in comparison.

Doesn't even matter if you're worried about burn in either, as you can just buy a spare CX incase you get burn out for the same price as that monitor.

If you have no other option than a sub 48" display then you're going to either accept getting ripped off for technology that is already outdated (no HDMI 2.1 on a ÂŁ2.5k display is inexcusable) or just forget about HDR and accept the limitations of a none-FALD LCD.
Shopping for 1440p G-Sync monitors convinced me to buy the smallest TV that checks the same boxes. There just no way I'm going to justify (to myself) spending $1k+ on a monitor that's 27" when I could have a comparatively monstrous 48" OLED.

The high-end monitor game is for people who exist in a completely different bracket of economic gain than I do, and I can accept that.

Me, I'll be buying 2021's revision of the 48" LG CX, hoping the Gen 1 HDMI 2.1 irregularities are solved.
 

exodus

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,942
4k/120 monitors offer a tremendously bad value when you can get a CX48 for the same price and get a far superior display. If you have the means and space to wall mount a display around 4' from your sitting position at your desk, then I'd go that route. Only real downside is lack of portability in case you go to LANs and whatnot.
 

Arulan

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,571
Nice setup. Out of curiosity, what desk is that? Been trying to shop around for a good desk lately.

Products

Browse our full range of products from dressing tables to complete modern kitchens. Click here to find the right IKEA product for you. Browse online and in-store today!

It's two of these side-by-side. You can pick out any legs you like. You may want to pick up one of their cable management attachments too. I also did a linseed oil finish on mine.

I really like a simple wood top with (any) legs over the more traditional desks with drawers. When I replace these I'll probably go to a local woodshop to do something similar.
 

Instro

Member
Oct 25, 2017
15,000

Products

Browse our full range of products from dressing tables to complete modern kitchens. Click here to find the right IKEA product for you. Browse online and in-store today!

It's two of these side-by-side. You can pick out any legs you like. You may want to pick up one of their cable management attachments too. I also did a linseed oil finish on mine.

I really like a simple wood top with (any) legs over the more traditional desks with drawers. When I replace these I'll probably go to a local woodshop to do something similar.
Thanks! Yeah that's generally what I'm looking for. I have an older style desk with drawers and such, which made sense years ago, but I don't need the storage and it blocks my chair from being pushed in all he way. Those ikea options are up my alley.
 

Samiya

Alt Account
Banned
Nov 30, 2019
4,811
LG, please make a 38" OLED widescreen. 4:4:4 120hz 4k please.

I need this. Especially something that looks slim and not so massive. All PC monitors these days look absolutely horrid and have really regressed in terms of thickness. 10 years ago I could get a super thin monitor with good color representation, while these days everything has huge massive stand, thick and bulky monitor depth, and less than ideal color representation.
 

FelixFFM

Member
Nov 7, 2017
345
That monitor is straight up double the price of a 55" LG CX OLED and it doesn't even have HDMI 2.1.

A 34" VA display without HDMI 2.1 should be priced closer to ÂŁ600 not 4 times that. There's no way to justify that price.

If you want a high end gaming display then a 4K TV is the only reasonably priced option at this point. Now we have OLED, HDMI 2.1, VRR, high refresh and sub 10ms input lag in TVs, overpriced gaming monitors just look terrible in comparison.

Doesn't even matter if you're worried about burn in either, as you can just buy a spare CX incase you get burn out for the same price as that monitor.

If you have no other option than a sub 48" display then you're going to either accept getting ripped off for technology that is already outdated (no HDMI 2.1 on a ÂŁ2.5k display is inexcusable) or just forget about HDR and accept the limitations of a none-FALD LCD.

I'm going to have to decide between one or the other but you're discounting that OLED has quite a few weaknesses for PC gaming. First, the VRR/Gsync implementation is inferior. The stuttering got fixed, but the lifted blacks/wrong gamma response is likely unfixable by firmware. Then you have burn-in. Which is not the either/or on/off thing you make it out to be. It limits you from using the TV as productivity/work monitor, which a gaming LCD monitor is perfectly capable of doing.

If you had a 48 inch LCD TV with FALD to compare it to, your point would be stronger.
 
Last edited:

nikasun :D

Member
Oct 30, 2017
3,164
For anyone interested, this is what a 48" display looks like sitting ~48" away at a desktop
That looks sooo cool! May I ask which dac/amp you got there?

I currently use a 27inch 240 monitor because I was able to play a lot of competitive games on the PC until recently. Now I am thinking of upgrading my setup to a 48 inch (but I think I want to wait for next year's model). Your speakers also look nice in the setup. I wanna go for something like this if possible https://www.dali-speakers.com/de/lautsprecher/oberon/oberon-on-wall/ on either side of the TV. I just need to find a way to use passive speakers with a PC.
 

Adamska

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
7,042
Wait a few years, I suppose. Honestly, I'm perfectly happy with my 24" 1080p display, as I can run games at 120FPS without needing new parts. Let the console handle the 4K stuff for now and down the road you'll be able to nab a 4K ready monitor and PC for much cheaper. Likely to have more options of size in a few years too.
 

grmlin

Member
Oct 25, 2017
10,276
Germany
Because this already exists and honestly it's better than a 4K/120hz option in almost every conceivable way.
Ultra wide/200hz/HDR1000nits/Gsync Ultimate...
more bang for your buck Performance wise out of your GPU, with similar pixel density to the eye.
That screen has 107dpi, that's what we used forever now. It's just wider. I use a LG Ultrawide for work with 167 dpi and that's the absolute minimum for a nice and sharp image when you sit in front of it.

But I also don't really feel a difference playing Ori for example in 4K@120 vs 4K@60 on my LG OLED, but that's just me
 

Shifty Capone

Member
Oct 27, 2017
620
Los Angeles
just use an ultrawide aspect ratio/resolution on the 48CX and voila, you have a 38" OLED widescreen with 4:4:4 120hz 4k.

If it was just about the aspect ratio I would have done that years ago.
I have an Oddysey G9 right now and love it. However, I really want an OLED that isn't 48" tall. It's just too big for a desk vertically in my opinion. Realistically I want the same size as the G9 (49" curved ultrawide), but that is a pipe dream and asking too much of an OLED right now. If LG made their 38" Ultrawide in an OLED I'd buy it right now.
 

Arulan

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,571
That looks sooo cool! May I ask which dac/amp you got there?

I currently use a 27inch 240 monitor because I was able to play a lot of competitive games on the PC until recently. Now I am thinking of upgrading my setup to a 48 inch (but I think I want to wait for next year's model). Your speakers also look nice in the setup. I wanna go for something like this if possible https://www.dali-speakers.com/de/lautsprecher/oberon/oberon-on-wall/ on either side of the TV. I just need to find a way to use passive speakers with a PC.
It's a RME ADI-2 DAC.

For passive speakers you just need a speaker amp fed from a DAC connected to your PC.
 

Iron Eddie

Banned
Nov 25, 2019
9,812
Content is holding things back. Until recently how many people were able to play games at 4K and 120fps and how many games support it?

Now we are hearing about 8K, but how much content is there for it?
 

FelixFFM

Member
Nov 7, 2017
345
If it was just about the aspect ratio I would have done that years ago.
I have an Oddysey G9 right now and love it. However, I really want an OLED that isn't 48" tall. It's just too big for a desk vertically in my opinion. Realistically I want the same size as the G9 (49" curved ultrawide), but that is a pipe dream and asking too much of an OLED right now. If LG made their 38" Ultrawide in an OLED I'd buy it right now.
I mean sure, it's not going to look neat on a desk, but when playing a game, the experience is going to be almost identical.
I've got a ROG 348Q ultrawide monitor that needs upgrading. It's going to come down between the 48cx or the G9/PG35VQ for me. I don't think I'm ready to leave ultrawide behind. I could also just get both and have a 77CX as TV.
 

FelixFFM

Member
Nov 7, 2017
345
Content is holding things back. Until recently how many people were able to play games at 4K and 120fps and how many games support it?

Now we are hearing about 8K, but how much content is there for it?
OP has a point in that currently TVs cater more to 4k120hz gamers than PC monitors. Which is odd, because this type of content is basically just PC games plus the odd PS5/X1S game.
 

Arulan

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,571
Content is holding things back. Until recently how many people were able to play games at 4K and 120fps and how many games support it?

Now we are hearing about 8K, but how much content is there for it?
On PC? Most games support arbitrary resolutions and frame rates. People could play games at 4k120 or even 8k for years. The only limitation being performance (for modern titles) and bandwidth/hardware availability to actually display such resolutions.
 

Shifty Capone

Member
Oct 27, 2017
620
Los Angeles
I mean sure, it's not going to look neat on a desk, but when playing a game, the experience is going to be almost identical.
I've got a ROG 348Q ultrawide monitor that needs upgrading. It's going to come down between the 48cx or the G9/PG35VQ for me. I don't think I'm ready to leave ultrawide behind. I could also just get both and have a 77CX as TV.

You say it's identical when playing a game, but I tried it. I couldn't do it. It was just too tall so I returned the CX and kept the G9. I found I don't need to move my neck at all with a monitor even as wide as the G9. However, with the CX it was pretty constant looking up. A lot of that may have to so with the distance to the TV/Monitor though. At least for my case, it was barely too big. Wish it wasn't since man OLEDs look stunning.
 

Schlep

Member
Oct 29, 2017
1,771
Just got a new gaming PC after 10 years out of the game, and was kinda shocked by this as well. I decided to go with a 240hz 1080p monitor for the time being.
 

Asbsand

Banned
Oct 30, 2017
9,901
Denmark
Framerate is not a flip-switch. Every time you double it, you're asking for twice the horse-power to perform at the same level as when it was halved. Resolution is the same thing. It eats up VRAM and asks the system to render twice the 4 times the pixels as 1080p at 4K.

You cannot upgrade to "next-gen" on a fidelity level and also expect native 4K and 120fps. That is twice the upgrade to what a PS5 does, and that would be really expensive.

So either you get remasters that run really fast or you get new games that inevitably end up on a mostly stable 30fps with some resolution loss, because that's how it is when you have to repurpose the same 5-7 year old hardware for an entire generation while PC pushes ahead every year. PS4 was massively outdated by 2016, but at the same time we learned to optimize more. So we got the best out of its limitations, but if you pay close attention in games like 2018's God of War you'll notice how it's missing certain visual features that the PS4 GPU couldn't push, like subsurface scattering and other elements that add a sense of shader depth and wetness to skin. A lot of later PS4 games had very "coarse" skin and that's because you gotta cut some corners when you're deisgning for 5 year old hardware that was more mid-range than high-end at launch.

Same goes for the new consoles, so don't go out and buy 8K TVs or get ready for 120fps for your own sake, unless you're committed to a strong pc.
 

FelixFFM

Member
Nov 7, 2017
345
You say it's identical when playing a game, but I tried it. I couldn't do it. It was just too tall so I returned the CX and kept the G9. I found I don't need to move my neck at all with a monitor even as wide as the G9. However, with the CX it was pretty constant looking up. A lot of that may have to so with the distance to the TV/Monitor though. At least for my case, it was barely too big. Wish it wasn't since man OLEDs look stunning.
Did you actually try an ultrawide aspect ratio on the CX? The CX is 20cm wider than a 34inch ultrawide and actually narrower than an oddysey g9. With black bars, you'd be moving your head about the same or less than on an ultrawide monitor.