32" G7 to a 27" IPS or?

shadow2761

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 11, 2016
Messages
455
Currently rocking a 32" Odyssey G7. Very fast and responsive monitor, I really love it. I mostly play PUBG, but when I enable VRR, it feels less responsive input wise and I experience tons of overshoot when looting inside buildings. So I disable VRR, and it feels great to use.

However, I feel 32" maybe a tad large for 1440p and contemplating to move to a 27" gaming screen. I have been eyeing the Gigabyte FI27Q-X, or the AW2721D, both of which rock a 240Hz IPS panels.

Purely for a competative gaming point, would people reccommend to move to a 27" screen? Does anyone have experience with the FI27Q-X compared to the Odyssey G7? Would it be a downgrade, the FI27Q-X looks to be extremly fast aswell as the G7 from reviewers. I don't want to comprise speed, because the G7 does indeed feel extremely responsive for past pace action, but feel i may have better experience from the higher ppi of a 27" screen. Not sure on this one though.

Thoughts anyone?
 

DarkSideA8

Gawd
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Messages
963
That monitor should be fast - the problem may lie in the GPU. If it's struggling with the resolution, screen size is not likely to be the issue. Ghosting and overshoot may also be tied to the VA panel tech

"Out of the three most common types of LCD monitor panels, ghosting is most noticeable on VA panels since they have the slowest response time. At the moment only the most expensive VA monitors (usually gaming ones) don’t show noticeable ghosting artifacts". https://levvvel.com/monitor-ghosting-fix/


Whether 32 is too large for 1440p is a totally different issue and highly subjective - you are getting roughly the same dpi as a 1080p at 24. Some competitive gamers feel like that's a good dpi - because they're looking frames only. I'm personally looking for 4k in this form factor - but the fast IPS panels are going to be hideously expensive.
 

UnknownSouljer

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 24, 2001
Messages
7,194
That monitor should be fast - the problem may lie in the GPU. If it's struggling with the resolution, screen size is not likely to be the issue. Ghosting and overshoot may also be tied to the VA panel tech

"Out of the three most common types of LCD monitor panels, ghosting is most noticeable on VA panels since they have the slowest response time. At the moment only the most expensive VA monitors (usually gaming ones) don’t show noticeable ghosting artifacts". https://levvvel.com/monitor-ghosting-fix/


Whether 32 is too large for 1440p is a totally different issue and highly subjective - you are getting roughly the same dpi as a 1080p at 24. Some competitive gamers feel like that's a good dpi - because they're looking frames only. I'm personally looking for 4k in this form factor - but the fast IPS panels are going to be hideously expensive.
That and there still haven't really been any 32" 4k high hz options available. We've more or less been waiting for at least 5 years for something, anything to drop, and they haven't.
There's only around 5 - 27" 4k 144hz displays and they're all based on the same panel.

As for the OP's question, it's super subjective. The reason why all these displays exist is because different people want/need different things. I'm personally waiting for the monitor that can do it all. 32" IPS, 4k, 120Hz+, full DCI-P3, and true 10-bit. I wouldn't mind Mini-LED or 2000+ LED FALD included either.
If I had to buy today, I'd only be looking at 27" 4k 144hz options.
 
Last edited:

Armenius

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
31,402
The PG32UQ comes out later this month. This is not the UQX, but a cheaper version without G-SYNC Ultimate and FALD.
 

DarkSideA8

Gawd
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Messages
963
The PG32UQ comes out later this month. This is not the UQX, but a cheaper version without G-SYNC Ultimate and FALD.
Any idea if it will hit the Box stores, like BB or just be online? (The Q is the one I'm really interested in, and hoping will be a good monitor... but not seeing any leaks / early reviews like we did with the UQX)
 

Armenius

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
31,402
Any idea if it will hit the Box stores, like BB or just be online? (The Q is the one I'm really interested in, and hoping will be a good monitor... but not seeing any leaks / early reviews like we did with the UQX)
You really can never know with ASUS. I generally look at their ROG forum because a rep will usually drop when they start shipping out on container ships. At that point it means 4-6 weeks for North America. My information came from a press release that I should find again. May 27 sticks out in my mind for some reason.
 

DarkSideA8

Gawd
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Messages
963
You really can never know with ASUS. I generally look at their ROG forum because a rep will usually drop when they start shipping out on container ships. At that point it means 4-6 weeks for North America. My information came from a press release that I should find again. May 27 sticks out in my mind for some reason.
I'd be stoked if that were the case; best my google-fu can find is 'end of June'
 

shadow2761

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 11, 2016
Messages
455
The PG32UQ comes out later this month. This is not the UQX, but a cheaper version without G-SYNC Ultimate and FALD.

Thr PG32UQ is a different category to what I am interested in.

I want 240hz+, yes I can get that sort of fps on my rig when I play competitively @ 1440p.

PG32UQ is only 144Hz. And I doubt its going to feel as snappy and responsive as the 240Hz monitors available today.
 

DarkSideA8

Gawd
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Messages
963
Thr PG32UQ is a different category to what I am interested in.

I want 240hz+, yes I can get that sort of fps on my rig when I play competitively @ 1440p.

PG32UQ is only 144Hz. And I doubt its going to feel as snappy and responsive as the 240Hz monitors available today.
.
Heh - you do realize that most of us responding here are looking for 32 inch 4k at 144. If you want 1440, there's lots of options.

Also - LOTS of confirmation bias above 144. Most (read: almost all) cannot really perceive much benefit above that.
 

shadow2761

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 11, 2016
Messages
455
.
Heh - you do realize that most of us responding here are looking for 32 inch 4k at 144. If you want 1440, there's lots of options.

Also - LOTS of confirmation bias above 144. Most (read: almost all) cannot really perceive much benefit above that.

Fair enough, but I am an extremly sensitive gamer, I went from 120hz to 144hz and could percieve the difference, even though just slightly.

Then I went from 144 to 175 and yet again could feel a slight difference.

Then I went from 175 to 240 and could 100% feel the difference. And now that I have used 240hz for the past few months, I absolutely do not want to go backwards lol
 

RPGWiZaRD

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 24, 2009
Messages
1,217
Whether 32" or 27" is more preferable for 1440p is so highly subjective BUT the choices for 32" 144Hz+ options are rather limited right now. The G7 32" option is a GOOD option though if you can tolerate 1000R curve (I personally don't, I'm totally fine with 1800R, maybe also 1600R but not 1000R, especially when I want to use two screens on my table the 2nd one just has to be placed so far out so it looks a bit weird with 2x 32" displays (one heavily curved, one flat) beside each other. There's only one other 32" 1440p 240Hz option out there and that is the Acer "fast IPS" based one. However this one as well as the the 3-4 other 32" 1440p 160 - 180Hz options out there have one major flaw, they are oversaturated if using anything other than sRGB mode as they are widecolor gamut based on some standard more accompanied with professional imaging work and using other than sRGB mode the colorspace will look oversaturated with normal content and sRGB mode is locked heavily with adjustment options (for example brightness seems to be locked for instance). On the other hand we have quite a few newer 27" 1440p 144Hz+ options, many of which have superb money to performance ratio, basically monitors we would pay like 700-$800 a couple of years ago we can now have for like $400-500 and even better in some regards (VRR and improved overall response times etc.)

I'm personally waiting for FLAT monitor versions of the Samsung G7 which already have been announced but no idea about when they release yet. I'm primarily looking to 32" 1440p myself but might consider 27" if the alternatives are just that much better when it comes to panels but yea waiting for G7 flat versions seems most interesting for me personally right now. Currently using a Zowie 240Hz 24.5" 1080p monitor and having tried 27" 1440p I think I'm somewhat more closer to prefering the PPI of 24.5" 1080p but ideally I'd want 96 PPI or so though which doesn't exist.

The most interesting thing for me is that I love strobing personally, even if I have a 240Hz capable display I actually run it with 144Hz+strobing as already 144Hz with strobing provides SMOOTHER motion fluidness than 240Hz and no strobing and this particular display looks slightly better sticking to 144Hz+strobing vs 240Hz and no strobing so it's a win-win (contrast and sharpness mostly). Maybe the lower refresh rate also makes the brightness hit less severe as it doesn't have to refresh the screen so quickly which is also good. Currently using 37 brightness with strobing in a usually pretty bright room, without strobing it I'd be more at 25 or so. I think a lot of people just neglect strobing because of the brightness difference that strikes you hard when you turn on/off but once you turn brightness up a bit you're good.
 
Last edited:
Top