I need help choosing a new monitor(s)

Lately I've been getting pretty frustrated with using a single 27 inch 1080p monitor at home. At work I have three 27 inch 1080p monitors, and my productivity is just so much better! There's a lot I'm looking for in a new monitor(s), and I am struggling to find the right brand, size, resolution, etc.

Here's what I'm looking for:

1st: I want a lot of screen real estate. I've been doing a lot of work in Visual Studio and some web stuff, and I'm tired of swapping between tabs.

2nd: I want to game on it! Lately it's been a lot of Overwatch, but I hope to play Destiny 2 in at least 1440, if not 4K. I've got the system to handle 4K at 60 FPS I'm pretty sure. (1080Ti, 7700K, etc.). Overall though, it'll be less multiplayer and more single player.

Ultimately my usage will be 60 % CS work, 40 % games. Pains me to say that, but that's how it'll be.

For awhile I was really digging the idea of the LG 43UD79, but I just don't think I'll be able to play Overwatch on a screen that large on my normal sized desk just doesn't seem feasible to me. But that screen split just seems soo good!

Then I took a look at the 32 inch Samsung Monitor family. That three year warranty sounds great! There's a few options there, but after reading reviews around here, it sounds like they have some backlight issues, and the panels aren't the best, but that brings me to my biggest question.

If I've been using older 1080p monitors that aren't anything special for the last five years, isn't any new 4K or 1440P monitor going to be just spectacular?

It will be an upgrade for sure. But since you are a coder in case you want a single monitor forget about 1440p and go 32 inch 4k. Difference on fonts is day and night. You could also go for an ultrawide 34 inch 1440p since they don't come in anything bigger this will give you more desktop space but fonts won't look that good. I use a 32 inch at work, it replaced 2 24 inch 1920x1080 monitors and I don't miss the space side to side (since I hate turning my head around by that much) but couldn't ever go back to 1080p vertical space anymore... Or you could get 2 27 4k monitors if you don't want a single monitor setup LG has some with very good price in case you don't care about color gamut...

your minimal desktop space should be 3440x1440, with 4k and multi monitor as alternatives.

Currently the best partner of a 1080Ti is a 35" 34x14 Gsync. There are a handful of models to choose from , prices on the $950-$1300 range.

4k and gaming rarely fit on the same sentence, unless you are willing to wait for the 4k 120hz kits from zysworks like i am.

Have patience —there’s far better stuff coming

https://www.pcworld.com/article/297...splays-make-pc-games-super-smooth.html?page=2

If the OP's going to be doing coding more than gaming, I'd definitely go for a 32" display over 27". VS is DPI aware and lets you adjust font sizes in small increments. The extra height of the 32" will allow an extra 10-15 lines of code/etc on screen at once; and that's a big win.

The Acer Predator XB321HK is the only 32" 4k gsync panel (not sure what's out for Freesync), and while 27" 4k 144hz HDR panels are projected to be out early next year (if the production date for panels doesn't slip again), for 32" AUO's next panel will only be 60hz HDR. Their 144hz HDR 32" panel is still projected a year out. Just HDR on the 32's a much smaller upgrade since PC title support is still rare; and the extensive production difficulties behind the delayed launches supports the parts of the rumor mill that have predicted them being stupidly expensive at $1500-2500 for the 27" and more for the 32".

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/news_archive/38.htm#auo_roadmap_oct17

DanNeely said:

VS is DPI aware and lets you adjust font sizes in small increments

Click to expand...

Even so, the effective desktop real state is biigger and better to read at 35" 34x14 than at 32" 4k. In other words: he wil be able to read more lines of code on the 35"

geok1ng said:

Even so, the effective desktop real state is biigger and better to read at 35" 34x14 than at 32" 4k. In other words: he wil be able to read more lines of code on the 35"

Click to expand...

35" 3440x1440 is 13.5" tall. That's a quarter inch taller than a 27" 4k display, but is 2.25" shorter than a 32" 4k. The ultra-wide is 4.5" wider; but even on a conventional 24" screen lines long enough to need horizontal scroll should be very much the exception because breaking complex statements into sub-components either via line breaks or intermediate variables makes the code more readable.

The only way you could potentially match or exceed the number of lines of code readable on an ultrawide would be if you moved the bottom panels of the UI into the sidebar area. But that's not going to work unless you make the sidebar at least a third of the screen wide (at which point you've got massive space wasted from the designed to be narrow sidebar panels) because many of the ones that default to the bottom show long lines of text and either horizontal scroll or require mouse overs to see enough to be useful if made too narrow (something easily testable using VS on a laptop screen).

32" 4k is 137 PPI.
Based on my first hand experience with the U2515H, a 25" 2560x1440 IPS at 117 PPI, I will be very generous and assume a young user with better than 20/20 vision can code on a 32" screen at 117 PPI. I am yet to see a review of the U2515H rate it as a comfortable reading at native resolution, things only get worst for the 32" monitor because one sits further away from a 32" than they do from a 25" one. So effective desktop real state on a 4k 32" is at best 15% less than native, ~ 3264x1836. good look finding a scaling method to output readable text at non-integer scaling at such high PPI. Best case scenario it will be tiny blurry text, much worst than the U2515H, which at least renders at 117 PPI at native resolution and no scaling blur.

Compare that to 3440x1440 106 PPI and on quickly realizes that effective vertical real state on a 32" 4k is not so good when compared against a 35" 34x14 screen.

That stuff only matters if you;re stuck using applications that aren't DPI aware and don't allow the user to change font sizes. If you can do those getting whatever text height you want and having it be legible is easy regardless of what the underlying DPI of the panel is.

The OP said he uses Visual Studio which is DPI aware. You can run the monitor at native resolution with whatever scaling factor you want and then use the font size and text editor zoom function (not sure why they have both) to adjust the font size to whatever height you want.

Outside of VS, the latest version of Eclipse seems to be DPI aware and lets you change font sizes so you can get whatever text size you prefer without having to worry about screen resolution and DPI scaling settings. As for text editors used with penguin stack apps, the two I have installed Github Atom and VS Code are both ultimately powered from Chrome and Chrome's rendering engine is DPI aware.

I went cheap last Black Friday with a Samsung 40" HDTV to use as a dev/gaming monitor driven by a 1080, replacing a 3 screen mixed 27"/24" setup under Windows 10.

I like it much better after some adjustment period. I do tend to adjust the windows scaling depending on what I am doing, bouncing from 175% for not really paying attention web browsing, down to 100% or 125% if I am coding/debugging and trying to maximize real estate.

For 4k gaming, I turn off Anti-Aliasing and sometimes tweak down some of the eye candy to keep frame rates up. Will probably upgrade to 1080Ti at some point to gain back a few fps.

The biggest change is the vertical screen real estate gain - good in some ways because I can see more code at once, harder because I have to look farther from top to bottom of screen.

I like it enough that I will probably add another one for the other computer if there are any good deals this year.

ors said:

It will be an upgrade for sure. But since you are a coder in case you want a single monitor forget about 1440p and go 32 inch 4k. Difference on fonts is day and night. You could also go for an ultrawide 34 inch 1440p since they don't come in anything bigger this will give you more desktop space but fonts won't look that good. I use a 32 inch at work, it replaced 2 24 inch 1920x1080 monitors and I don't miss the space side to side (since I hate turning my head around by that much) but couldn't ever go back to 1080p vertical space anymore... Or you could get 2 27 4k monitors if you don't want a single monitor setup LG has some with very good price in case you don't care about color gamut...

Click to expand...

I'm not super set on a single monitor setup, but having nice looking fonts does seem valuable to me. Especially with how next semester is looking. I like the idea of the 32 inch 4K monitor, like that Acer that was mentioned, but 1,100 dollars for a single monitor is a bit cost prohibitive for a broke college student like myself lol. Is a monitor like this something that goes on a considerable sale over Black Friday?

DanNeely said:

If the OP's going to be doing coding more than gaming, I'd definitely go for a 32" display over 27". VS is DPI aware and lets you adjust font sizes in small increments. The extra height of the 32" will allow an extra 10-15 lines of code/etc on screen at once; and that's a big win.

The Acer Predator XB321HK is the only 32" 4k gsync panel (not sure what's out for Freesync), and while 27" 4k 144hz HDR panels are projected to be out early next year (if the production date for panels doesn't slip again), for 32" AUO's next panel will only be 60hz HDR. Their 144hz HDR 32" panel is still projected a year out. Just HDR on the 32's a much smaller upgrade since PC title support is still rare; and the extensive production difficulties behind the delayed launches supports the parts of the rumor mill that have predicted them being stupidly expensive at $1500-2500 for the 27" and more for the 32".

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/news_archive/38.htm#auo_roadmap_oct17

Click to expand...

I just don't think I can justify waiting for a 4K 144 Hz panel, especially at that price. Seems like a monitor of that caliber is catered to a Volta level card anyways right? Whatever that turns out to be. What about the CHG70 32 inch from Samsung? Yeah it's not 4K, and yeah it's not GSync, but that price is much easier to swallow then that Acer.

Checking on Camel Camel Camel doesn't show any dramatic sales last year.

If you're on a tight budget a non-Gsync display would probably be the way to go. You can get 32" 4k VA or TN models for under $500.

If you need Gsync dropping down to 27/28" would help too, Acer's 27" IPS 4k and 28 TN 4k displays are ~ $700/650.

1440p would save you more money still; and those would be even more likely to go on a black friday sale from someone.

Without knowing your budget it's hard to make more specific recommendations; other than waiting for next years superpanels being pointless since they'd blow your budget even more severely.

bradjac2 said:

I just don't think I can justify waiting for a 4K 144 Hz panel, especially at that price. Seems like a monitor of that caliber is catered to a Volta level card anyways right? Whatever that turns out to be. What about the CHG70 32 inch from Samsung? Yeah it's not 4K, and yeah it's not GSync, but that price is much easier to swallow then that Acer.

Click to expand...

Just looking at the specsheet it seems like a nice option; not one I have any personal familiarity with. And while not GSync the higher refresh rate means that turning on Vsync to avoid tearing will have a much smaller penalty, or if you leave it off the torn frames will be visible for less than half as long.

And 4k >60hz will probably need an 1180 or 2080 or whatever NVidia decides to call their next high end consumer card for most titles.

DanNeely said:

Checking on Camel Camel Camel doesn't show any dramatic sales last year.

If you're on a tight budget a non-Gsync display would probably be the way to go. You can get 32" 4k VA or TN models for under $500.

If you need Gsync dropping down to 27/28" would help too, Acer's 27" IPS 4k and 28 TN 4k displays are ~ $700/650.

1440p would save you more money still; and those would be even more likely to go on a black friday sale from someone.

Without knowing your budget it's hard to make more specific recommendations; other than waiting for next years superpanels being pointless since they'd blow your budget even more severely.

Click to expand...

My budget is 800 dollars or less to be specific. Thanks for the help!

Doc Doc said:

I do tend to adjust the windows scaling depending on what I am doing, bouncing from 175% for not really paying attention web browsing, down to 100% or 125% if I am coding/debugging and trying to maximize real estate.

Click to expand...

Thats 110PPI at 40", way less than 137 PPI of 32" 4k. The user feels the need to adjust windows scaling, something i have never heard a 35" user do with its 106 PPi.

bradjac2 said:

My budget is 800 dollars or less to be specific.

Click to expand...

Sorry to double Post, just saw your budget after finishing previous post.
I feel sad for you, because having a 1080Ti really begs for Gsync.
If you are willing to compromise. there are a few low cost Koreans 34" 3440x1440 VA Freesync displays at 100hz. I expect them to hover the $550-$800 price range. But i feel that it is too much money to sink on brandless hardware, when ~$300 more gives you Gsync 35" from better brands.

geok1ng said:

Thats 110PPI at 40", way less than 137 PPI of 32" 4k. The user feels the need to adjust windows scaling, something i have never heard a 35" user do with its 106 PPi.

Click to expand...

My eyes have had some bad things happen to them and the windows scaling is more about eye strain than PPI sharpness- I don't run at 100% normally because the small text is too much strain when looking from corner to corner when coding. I will crank it down when debugging to me see more context.

Games always run at 4k/100%.

geok1ng said:

Sorry to double Post, just saw your budget after finishing previous post.
I feel sad for you, because having a 1080Ti really begs for Gsync.
If you are willing to compromise. there are a few low cost Koreans 34" 3440x1440 VA Freesync displays at 100hz. I expect them to hover the $550-$800 price range. But i feel that it is too much money to sink on brandless hardware, when ~$300 more gives you Gsync 35" from better brands.

Click to expand...

I'd be leery about spending that much; less because it's no-name hardware than because the ship it to Korea at your own expense (with slowboat return shipping) warranty policies effectively mean you don't have one if something goes wrong.

At least these do have modern (DP, HDMI) inputs - unlike the cheap 2560x1440 DVI only panels from a few years ago - and should remain usable for as long as they're still functioning.

DanNeely said:

I'd be leery about spending that much; less because it's no-name hardware than because the ship it to Korea at your own expense (with slowboat return shipping) warranty policies effectively mean you don't have one if something goes wrong.

At least these do have modern (DP, HDMI) inputs - unlike the cheap 2560x1440 DVI only panels from a few years ago - and should remain usable for as long as they're still functioning.

Click to expand...

Well that leads us to the million dollar question then. If I have a 1080Ti, do I have to worry about screen tearing in 4K? Is GSync worth an extra 300 dollars? As a casual gamer mostly playing laid back singleplayer games these days, is screen tearing a concern? I mean I'll still be playing top of the line games at max settings (or as max as I can get them), but I don't need a competitive edge or anything!

I am yet to see the owner of a *sync system regret it.
And the resolution that needs *sync the most is 4k.

bradjac2 said:

Is a monitor like this something that goes on a considerable sale over Black Friday?

Click to expand...

Lowest I have seen (a Samsung PLS 32 inch 4k, don't recall the exact code now) where I stay (EU state) was around the 820 dollar mark. For work gsync is totally not worth it. For playing games maybe, but on a 60hz monitor I would tend to say no, not worth it. Higher refresh 4k monitors are coming next year, but they will be over the 1200 dollar mark for sure.