The Best GAMING Monitor at this moment

Joined
Jul 9, 2014
Messages
12
What is the best GAMING monitor at this moment?

I am looking to buy another monitor currently I have the QNIX 2710 1440p oc @100Hz, Price does not matter to me.

What is your opinion?

-Benq xl2420T
I have this monitor a while ago and sold it for the qnix and this is(xl2420t) the best FPS gaming experience ever imo, it delivers a very smooth gaming experience and I think the size for this type of game is just RIGHT, I play cod competitively(not anymore) and I think the 27' is just a little bit too big. I think that even the ROG swift comes out is not gonna make my head turn because of the size for an FPS game (mainly cod,counter strike,hl). The only thing that is bad about this monitor is the colour is just simply TERRIBLE because its TN panel and I know that.

-QNIX 2710
I am currently using this monitor and to be honest it is the best bang for bucks at this time imo. it is only £210 (incl shipping, tax) I am lucky enough that I dont have any backlight bleed, dead or stuck pixel. There is PLS glow on every corner but that is to be expected anyway. It delivers a very good picture quality (it blows xl2420t out of the water) and is very smooth gaming experience BUT for FPS gaming, I think it still not as good as the xl2420t, sometimes other player see me before I see them! I cannot shoot them quick enough! but for single player, campagin fps I think its perfect. the cons of this monitor are that the build quality is very cheap, it makes my entire set up looks cheap with its gloss black and cheap stands and some minor input lag.

-LG 34UM95
I am looking into this atm, The price of this monitor is INSANE, it cost as much as a 60 inch TV AND it needs a lot of horse power to drive it, I have the R9 290X and it struggles to push every settings to ultra at 1440p! I think if I want to play games on this monitor I would need to crossfire my R9 290X, even If I crossfire my 290x I will only get 60Hz!. as far as i know it has issues with games compatibility as well due to its odd aspect ratio
 
I also have the QX2710, mine will go to 120Hz without problem. It's probably the best gaming monitor I have had so far.

I did try the 34UM95 recently though. While I loved the size and screen quality, the input lag was too much for me. Compared to my QX2710, there was a substantial difference.

I am also going to try out the FG2421 even though it's a smaller size and lower resolution.

As for ROG Swift - well, it's not even out yet and who knows when it will be released in the US. I was holding out for it, but the constant delays have me looking elsewhere.

Who knows, maybe the FG2421 will be the one but I have a hunch that my QX2710 will still reign supreme.
 
I also have the QX2710, mine will go to 120Hz without problem. It's probably the best gaming monitor I have had so far.

I did try the 34UM95 recently though. While I loved the size and screen quality, the input lag was too much for me. Compared to my QX2710, there was a substantial difference.

I am also going to try out the FG2421 even though it's a smaller size and lower resolution.

As for ROG Swift - well, it's not even out yet and who knows when it will be released in the US. I was holding out for it, but the constant delays have me looking elsewhere.

Who knows, maybe the FG2421 will be the one but I have a hunch that my QX2710 will still reign supreme.

I agree that 34um95 was lovely though, I don't know about the input lag, but the fact that I will be paying £800 I expect it to be perfect (120Hz, low input lag). Also some games just don't run on 21:9 aspect ratio.
 
I agree that 34um95 was lovely though, I don't know about the input lag, but the fact that I will be paying £800 I expect it to be perfect (120Hz, low input lag). Also some games just don't run on 21:9 aspect ratio.

I bought the 34UM95 knowing that it wasn't designed as a high-end gaming monitor. If I did less gaming and more productivity I would have kept it in a heartbeat. I just wanted to see it first hand. I tell you, after using it for a few days it was really tough going back to my QX2710's smaller screen. The 34UM95 fills your vision and makes games very immersive.

Unfortunately the input lag was just too noticeable for me. If they come out with a monitor that size with either G-Sync or Freesync and improved gaming capabilities, I'm there.
 
I did try the 34UM95 recently though. While I loved the size and screen quality, the input lag was too much for me. Compared to my QX2710, there was a substantial difference.
Unfortunately the input lag was just too noticeable for me. If they come out with a monitor that size with either G-Sync or Freesync and improved gaming capabilities, I'm there.
Did you do any measurements or is that just your impression? AnandTech measured the 34UM95 as having roughly half the input lag of the 2710. I'd be interested if you found differently and more specifically what makes you say so.
 
Did you do any measurements or is that just your impression? AnandTech measured the 34UM95 as having roughly half the input lag of the 2710. I'd be interested if you found differently and more specifically what makes you say so.
Considering the 2710 has essentially zero input lag, I find your post confusing.

Do you realize that Anandtech did not test the DP2710LED, but one of the crap multi input versions not mentioned in this thread?
 
I'm not sure how Anand did his tests but I can tell you I noticed the input lag immediately when using the 34um95. Don't get me wrong, it's not bad by any means. I am just used to the quickness of my qx2710. I'm sure the 120Hz of Qnix compared to the 60Hz of the LG was also a factor.

I'm sort of the odd man out here when it comes to the 34um95 though. If you read the long thread about it you will see a lot of people are happy with the display when playing games on it. Maybe I'm just sensitive to that.

Like I said though, the form-factor of the LG is awesome. I hope more monitors are made in 21:9 and they start supporting 120Hz and sync technologies like G-sync and Freesync.
 
I'm not sure how Anand did his tests but I can tell you I noticed the input lag immediately when using the 34um95. Don't get me wrong, it's not bad by any means. I am just used to the quickness of my qx2710. I'm sure the 120Hz of Qnix compared to the 60Hz of the LG was also a factor.

I'm sort of the odd man out here when it comes to the 34um95 though. If you read the long thread about it you will see a lot of people are happy with the display when playing games on it. Maybe I'm just sensitive to that.

Like I said though, the form-factor of the LG is awesome. I hope more monitors are made in 21:9 and they start supporting 120Hz and sync technologies like G-sync and Freesync.
Again, Anandtech did not test the single input QX2710 or DP2710LED, which has zero input lag.
 
To answer the question, sadly, the best monitor is the DP2710LED or the QX2710.

-Zero input lag
-up to 120Hz
-Outstanding colors
-Good view angles


I say sadly, because this is 2014, and the best monitor is still an LCD.
And the best monitor happens to be only $300 on ebay, yet people still pay double that for worse all around monitors.
 
1440p IPS/PLS with up to 120hz overclock:

Glossy Yamakasi Catleap for 420$ from Green-Sum

Matte (semi-glossy) Qnix QX2710 or X-Star DP2710

If I were to spend 1000$ on a multi-input, semi-glossy monitor, I would buy the glow free Eizo EV2736W (Info+Review Links) over the LG 34UM95.
 
Considering the 2710 has essentially zero input lag, I find your post confusing.

Do you realize that Anandtech did not test the DP2710LED, but one of the crap multi input versions not mentioned in this thread?
Again, Anandtech did not test the single input QX2710 or DP2710LED, which has zero input lag.
He didn't specify which version he had as far as I saw, and I wasn't aware there were multiple versions. No need to get snippy. :p Would you happen to have links to reviews for the single input version? I can't seem to find any.
I'm not sure how Anand did his tests but I can tell you I noticed the input lag immediately when using the 34um95. Don't get me wrong, it's not bad by any means. I am just used to the quickness of my qx2710. I'm sure the 120Hz of Qnix compared to the 60Hz of the LG was also a factor.
Thanks for the details. I imagine 120Hz has a lot to do with it. Which version of the 2710 do you have?
 
He didn't specify which version he had as far as I saw, and I wasn't aware there were multiple versions. No need to get snippy. :p Would you happen to have links to reviews for the single input version? I can't seem to find any.

Thanks for the details. I imagine 120Hz has a lot to do with it. Which version of the 2710 do you have?

Fear not, for you have summoned NCX, whom will be posting a link to his forum with his extensive reviews of the QX2710 in minutes, if not seconds.
 
Ugh, don't recommend the evolution II model. It has other issues, such as poor contrast, IIRC.

It's also more expensive.

Stick with the original QX2710 or DP2710LED.
 
In the past few years I have owned 3 models:
HP Zr30w, 30" 2560x1600 IPS@ 60Hz
Samsung S27A750D, 27" 1080p TN@ 120Hz
Overlord Tempest X270OC, 27" 1440p IPS@ 110Hz

Of the 3 the Overlord is the best all-around gaming monitor. Glossy IPS with high res and high refresh rate, it's fantastic. But will set you back $450-500.

At this point you are best off waiting to see the reviews and release of the ASUS ROG Swift PG278Q. It will be my next monitor if the matte screen and the TN panel aren't party poopers.
 
QNIX 2710 for the money and PQ. In terms of value its near impossible to beat. I have 3 and they all are humming along great.
 
34UM95 or 34UM94-P hands down

The 21:9 immersion for ALL games is way better experience than 120hz for just shooters.

/thread
 
Is this a bad choice? It's more costly than most QX2710, but I like the idea of Prime in case there is something wrong with it when it arrives. I also have $250 in Amazon gift cards.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00CAKD6LI/ref=ox_sc_act_title_4?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=A261JEZXVVD8S

I've already confirm with Amazon that this particular bin # will ship from US and has same return policy as any other Prime item.

I would also be buying a monoprice stand since I've read the QNIX stand leaves a lot to be desired.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B003L11FUY/ref=gno_cart_title_1?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=A2L77EE7U53NWQ
 
Last edited:
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
34UM95 or 34UM94-P hands down

The 21:9 immersion for ALL games is way better experience than 120hz for just shooters.

/thread
Alternatively, if FOV is all that matters, get 3x 120/144Hz monitors, and have an even wider field of view than the 34UM95 along with higher refresh rate for similar cost. You can't /thread with an answer like that.
 
34UM95 or 34UM94-P hands down

The 21:9 immersion for ALL games is way better experience than 120hz for just shooters.

/thread

Completely disagree. Any 60Hz screen, no matter the aspect ratio, resolution, or screen size will look like a blurry mess for the purpose of gaming as far as I am concerned. Who cares if the still image is pretty? As soon as you move on a 60Hz screen the image turns to crap. For all games, not just FPS, motion clarity matters as much as resolution IMO.
 
Last edited:
If gaming full immersion is important to you, shouldn't you be considering the Oculus Rift? It has got a really high FOV and the the best dev kit has that strobing effect (I think) with infinite contrast (amoled I believe).

http://www.mtbs3d.com/index.php?opt...perception-2-03-released&catid=169&Itemid=490

Wouldn't this be better fit than ultra widescreen gaming? I'm just trying to get people to think a little bit more before spending more than $800 on a gaming monitor.

If productivity is also important then, no, oculus rift sucks...
 
If gaming full immersion is important to you, shouldn't you be considering the Oculus Rift? It has got a really high FOV and the the best dev kit has that strobing effect (I think) with infinite contrast (amoled I believe).

http://www.mtbs3d.com/index.php?opt...perception-2-03-released&catid=169&Itemid=490

Wouldn't this be better fit than ultra widescreen gaming? I'm just trying to get people to think a little bit more before spending more than $800 on a gaming monitor.

If productivity is also important then, no, oculus rift sucks...
Pretty much no, because almost no mainstream titles support the Oculus (yet). The only 2 I know of are Hawken and TF2.

Don't get me wrong, the Oculus is AWESOME (I was one of the first Kickstarter backers and my DK2 should be here next week) but it's not ready for actual gaming yet. The resolution is too low and the game support is almost non-existent. It's still mostly tech demos and development work.
 
But how many games actually support ultrawide? And please, there are way more than 2 games that natively support the oculus rift, and there are also really good mods made for some games. I also posted a link to a 3d driver that enables it for others kind of like what Flawless Widescreen does for 21:9 screens. The resolution for dk2 is 1920x1080 cumulative, but with a high FoV. I'm sure you're not intentionally spreading fud, because while it's true the Oculus Rift isn't ready for prime time, but considering 21:9 gaming also not ready for prime time, I think Oculus Rift DK2 at a much cheaper price might be the better alternative if all you want is gaming.
 
Did you do any measurements or is that just your impression? AnandTech measured the 34UM95 as having roughly half the input lag of the 2710. I'd be interested if you found differently and more specifically what makes you say so.

The QX2710 that Anandtech reviewed is not the same monitor that all of us bought. The Anandtech model is the QX2710 DPMulti which has multiple inputs. That model drops frames and includes multiple inputs which causes huge input lag.

The QX2710T that we all own only has DL-DVI and has very low input lag at 100hz+ and doesn't drop frames.

More inputs = Bad.
 
The QX2710 that Anandtech reviewed is not the same monitor that all of us bought. The Anandtech model is the QX2710 DPMulti which has multiple inputs. That model drops frames and includes multiple inputs which causes huge input lag.

The QX2710T that we all own only has DL-DVI and has very low input lag at 100hz+ and doesn't drop frames.

More inputs = Bad.
I'm aware of that now, it was discussed earlier in the thread ;)
 
Is this a bad choice? It's more costly than most QX2710, but I like the idea of Prime in case there is something wrong with it when it arrives. I also have $250 in Amazon gift cards.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00CAKD6LI/ref=ox_sc_act_title_4?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=A261JEZXVVD8S

I've already confirm with Amazon that this particular bin # will ship from US and has same return policy as any other Prime item.

I would also be buying a monoprice stand since I've read the QNIX stand leaves a lot to be desired.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B003L11FUY/ref=gno_cart_title_1?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=A2L77EE7U53NWQ

Do not buy the Evolution II!!!! I already stated this in the thread. READ.
 
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
Do not buy the Evolution II!!!! I already stated this in the thread. READ.
Yes, I read. Thank you.

Edit: They are all Evo II on Amazon so I thought I'd ask. Calm down. For sure the only Prime one is Evo II.
 
Ugh, don't recommend the evolution II model. It has other issues, such as poor contrast, IIRC.

It's also more expensive.

Stick with the original QX2710 or DP2710LED.

Where do you find those? Looks like eBay is just the evolution 2 versions. Also, I'm gonna assume the matte version is not the one to get.
 
What is the best GAMING monitor at this moment?

I am looking to buy another monitor currently I have the QNIX 2710 1440p oc @100Hz, Price does not matter to me.

What is your opinion?

-Benq xl2420T
I have this monitor a while ago and sold it for the qnix and this is(xl2420t) the best FPS gaming experience ever imo, it delivers a very smooth gaming experience and I think the size for this type of game is just RIGHT, I play cod competitively(not anymore) and I think the 27' is just a little bit too big. I think that even the ROG swift comes out is not gonna make my head turn because of the size for an FPS game (mainly cod,counter strike,hl). The only thing that is bad about this monitor is the colour is just simply TERRIBLE because its TN panel and I know that.

Based on your opinion of the XL2420, the Eizo FG2421 is perfect for you.
Same size/resolution, also strobed with perfect motion clarity.
Unlike the XL2420, it also has great picture quality/best LCD contrast out there today.
 
Where do you find those? Looks like eBay is just the evolution 2 versions. Also, I'm gonna assume the matte version is not the one to get.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Matt-X-STAR...8190?pt=Computer_Monitors&hash=item4d0d1e678e

^^ that's the one you want
No, actually, you do want the matte version. If you get glossy, you risk getting a tempered glass display. BAD.

I might be wrong about evolution II. It might be the Evolution II SE is the one you don't want.

Just stick with the most basic model DP2710LED or QX2710 you can find, single input.

Maybe someone else can chime in on QX2710 vs Evo II vs Evo II SE
 
As an eBay Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
The SE editition is the one to avoid, the non SE EVO II is fine.
 
To answer the question, sadly, the best monitor is the DP2710LED or the QX2710.

-Zero input lag
-up to 120Hz
-Outstanding colors
-Good view angles


I say sadly, because this is 2014, and the best monitor is still an LCD.
And the best monitor happens to be only $300 on ebay, yet people still pay double that for worse all around monitors.

Incorrect, both the DP2710LED and QX2710 have large bezel frames, only 27" and they're not 21:9 ratio. Best monitor out right now is the LG Commercial line 34UM94-P. 21:9 ratio, best rez, colors, and clarity there is, and it's input lag is only 18ms (reported by anandtech). Best monitor for productivity and gaming, hands down.

Oculus RIFT is not ready yet. I was at the latest E3 and waited in line to demo these. We viewed one demo and waited around and they let us see another one. One demo was this Mario Bros type lookin thing, other one was this space fighting simulation. It has head tracking, and the lag has been fixed, but it still has a really bad "screen door" effect due to the resolution not being high enough at each eye yet. Supposedly they're going for 4k to each eye, but then again that's then going to require massive vid card power to push that. Oculus is not ready yet and still too proprietary to be a consideration, not to mention you can't buy it ;) So, not sure why it's even being mentioned here for "best monitor"
 
Completely disagree. Any 60Hz screen, no matter the aspect ratio, resolution, or screen size will look like a blurry mess for the purpose of gaming as far as I am concerned. Who cares if the still image is pretty? As soon as you move on a 60Hz screen the image turns to crap. For all games, not just FPS, motion clarity matters as much as resolution IMO.

You can disagree all you like, free country, but you're overconditioned, over biased, and incorrect. As far as you're concerned. You're just another 120hz fanboy who acts like everything else is unplayable.
60hz (sometimes with vsync on) is absolutely fine and playable, smooth, fast, all good.

You're just conditioned to 120hz and the input lag those monitors have so you swear by it.

Your 120hz 16:9 is like a Ferrari with a smaller 16:9 windshield
60hz 21:9 is like a Corvette or Acura NSX with a wider 21:9 windshield

Both are fast, one is just faster. You act like the Ferrari is only fast and the Corvette/Acura is undrivable. I argue the Vette/Acura are the more fun experience due to being fast AND a wide view vantage point. All you have is speed.

Let me recap that so it sinks in:
1) You only have speed
2) I have plenty fast speed still -AND- 21:9 immersion <--- this equals more win

But doesn't matter, you'll retort claiming how I'm wrong and 120hz is the only thing playable and all else is crap. Then eventually you'll say 144hz is the only thing playable and 120hz is crap, etc. etc.

Remember that movies tend to run at 24-30fps. Console games run at 60fps, sometimes 30fps and nobody ever talks about movies and console games being choppy and unwatchable.

YOU'RE
JUST
CONDITIONED
TO
120hz

I have to keep correcting you 120hz fanboys.
 
Alternatively, if FOV is all that matters, get 3x 120/144Hz monitors, and have an even wider field of view than the 34UM95 along with higher refresh rate for similar cost. You can't /thread with an answer like that.

Yes I can because just simply giving an answer like "just get 3x 120/144hz monitors" isn't thought out before you posted that.

That's a 5760x1080 resolution (add another 300 pixels after bezel correction) and you're talking about 5960x1080 and you're attempting to push near 120fps to that?

120hz already means TN panels (ick), and with that resolution and trying to push near 120fps to see their benefit means either:
A) Turning down the game's eye candy to low which further worsens any decent graphics just for ultra important buttery smoothness
B) Running triple SLI GTX780TI's which means $2000+ in graphic card costs. Friend of mine already does this. He makes 200k a year and can afford his Triple SLI 780TI's to push 120fps to his triple 120hz 27" screens. I can't spend multiple thousands on this hobby.

So again, 34UM94-P is the best choice
 
Those last 3 posts...I can't even. Complains about fanboys, OH THE IRONY. (No one who plays competitive FPS games gives a flying fuck about "immersion")


Thanks NCX and okashira though, I think I might buy one of those the next time I have some spare money. Seems like the best deal for someone who enjoys FPS games but also others sometimes.
 
Back
Top