Another best 1440p 144hz thread

Cherry Dude

Weaksauce
Joined
Sep 1, 2016
Messages
127
So I have been having extreme difficulties on deciding my new display. New computer is with the Asus ROG STRIX 1080 so naturally the display should be able to use some of the goodness it provides.

My first love was the Asus ROG SWIFT PG279Q, but I have no desire to join the lottery that they currently are a part of. For some reason the same amount of problems seems to go for most of the 1440p 144 Hz IPS monitors.
The latest I have been looking at is the Dell S2716DG (The A03 mind you), which of course is a TN panel.

Would I like the great colours that IPS provide? Sure, but not at the cost of problems with dead pixels and bleed. I have heard good things about the new TN panels, and in comparison to my old IPS with major damage and affected colours, anything really would be an improvement.

Usage: mainly gaming, and I do some photo and video editing for a profit, but I am in no way a professional.


Any thoughts or recommendations on what could be just the right monitor for me?
 

Armenius

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
29,728
The TN panel in the Dell is pretty high quality. They use the same panel in the PG278Q. Admittedly the panel had some teething issues in its first production runs, but those have long since been sorted out. AUO's AHVA panels are still a panel lottery, unfortunately.

As far as color reproduction goes, there won't be much of a difference compared to an 8-bit IPS panel with comparable sRGB coverage. An IPS may only look better because of the pixel matrix allowing more light to pass through. For video and photo editing, just be sure to look at the panel head-on to avoid gamma shift.

What do you think about 21:9 panels? Both the PG348Q and X34 use an LG AH-IPS panel that is pretty high quality, but the cost reflects this. They are 3440x1440 and most are overclockable to 100 Hz.
 

Cherry Dude

Weaksauce
Joined
Sep 1, 2016
Messages
127
The TN panel in the Dell is pretty high quality. They use the same panel in the PG278Q. Admittedly the panel had some teething issues in its first production runs, but those have long since been sorted out. AUO's AHVA panels are still a panel lottery, unfortunately.

As far as color reproduction goes, there won't be much of a difference compared to an 8-bit IPS panel with comparable sRGB coverage. An IPS may only look better because of the pixel matrix allowing more light to pass through. For video and photo editing, just be sure to look at the panel head-on to avoid gamma shift.

What do you think about 21:9 panels? Both the PG348Q and X34 use an LG AH-IPS panel that is pretty high quality, but the cost reflects this. They are 3440x1440 and most are overclockable to 100 Hz.

"Not much of a difference" is just sweet music to my ears.

Unfortunately 21:9 is not really my thing, might be a bit old school but 16:9 is perfect for me.
Sounds like the Dell might be the way to go, or perhaps the PG278Q as you mentioned - any thought on these two pitted against each other?
 
Last edited:

Cherry Dude

Weaksauce
Joined
Sep 1, 2016
Messages
127
IPS is overated I will never buy another IPS ever again

My wallet will appriciate that.

I recently switched from 27" PLS to the S2716DG and I am very happy.
Gaming Monitor - 1440P 144Hz vs 4K 60Hz / G-Sync worth it? / Which specific monitors are best?

First time I've had a TN as my primary display since 2008.

I notice the slight color shift when changing my slouch position, but when I'm focused playing games, I don't notice it at all.

Well that sounds completely acceptable, again my correct monitor is a Dell 2290WA (pre-2010 era) 60 Hz 1060p with senere damage, I feel pretty confident any other monitor will blow my mind.
 

Armenius

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
29,728
"Not much of a difference" is just sweet music to my ears.

Unfortunately 21:9 is not really my thing, might be a bit old school but 16:9 is perfect for me.
Sounds like the Dell might be the way to go, or perhaps the PG278Q as you mentioned - any thought on these two pitted against each other?
The Dell has a Dell warranty and customer service to back it up. It is also cheaper than the PG278Q. The only thing the PG278Q probably has over the S2716DG is the stand and OSD, but that is subjective.
 

Decibel

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 10, 2000
Messages
3,838
Best price I'm seeing on the S2716DG right now is $520. But they have been below $500 several times since their introduction. Most recently $450 at Best Buy.

Yeah, and Dell over Asus support everyday and twice on Sunday.
 

dchobaby

Weaksauce
Joined
Aug 16, 2016
Messages
71
i'm in the same boat. i think the PG279Q is worth the panel lottery, if it even is that much of a lottery anymore.
 

Cherry Dude

Weaksauce
Joined
Sep 1, 2016
Messages
127
i'm in the same boat. i think the PG279Q is worth the panel lottery, if it even is that much of a lottery anymore.

I completely understand your thoughts dchobaby. I recently had the oppertunity to buy one on sale - it was produced in may, so fairly new, but still unacceptle panel :-(
S2716DG is on the way to me now, so hopefully I'm going to enjoy it immensly, in the time it takes to sort out the IPS panel issues.
 

dchobaby

Weaksauce
Joined
Aug 16, 2016
Messages
71
I completely understand your thoughts dchobaby. I recently had the oppertunity to buy one on sale - it was produced in may, so fairly new, but still unacceptle panel :-(
S2716DG is on the way to me now, so hopefully I'm going to enjoy it immensly, in the time it takes to sort out the IPS panel issues.

wow that's a bummer. im very interested in knowing how you find the dell compared to the asus!
 

Cherry Dude

Weaksauce
Joined
Sep 1, 2016
Messages
127
Well I have now had the Dell S2716DG (Rev. A03) for two days. This one goes out to dchobaby.

Let me start off by saying that the following micro-review is completely subjective.

TL;DR: Pretty damn nice monitor.


General

Got the box back home: unpack, snip arm on, screw on foot, ready to go! Easy peasy.
It has a somewhat minimalistic aesthetically pleasing design i really like, all raise/lower/pivot/turning is smooth and hassle free. The buttons are kind of hidden as they are pleced underneath the screen - it takes a little getting used to, but then again how often are you going to need them. Plus it fits perfectly with the rest of the design.
Again this is purely my personal experience and preferences, 27 inch is huge and takes some getting used to - but in a good way.

Colors

For some reason the colors seemed a little off, almost washed out if you will, especially the desktop icons such as chrome with red, yellow, green and blue in it. But then again I have a fondness for Disney colors i.e. very vibrant, so it might not have been so "bad" after all. Anyways I adjusted settings and used ICC file from www.tftcentral.co.uk and that did help a bit. However, I still wanted more vibrant and crisp colors, so after a little (lot) tweaking I have to say they are pretty good now.
Bear in mind this was only in regard to the desktop. I fired up The Witcher 3 and got a shock at first as the menu looked like not-so-nice - luckily it was just the gamma settings that was way off, as they were set according to my old monitor. Did some other games after that, and again very good colors here.
I also tested a few movies and I have to admit that surprised me quite a bit, as 1) some of the lower resolutions scaled up to 1440p is obviously a little bad, but thank god for higher resolution then, and 2) fantastic colors! Depending on the source material of course, but I am very impressed how good it actually looks.

Hz

As I am still waiting for new components to arrive I only have a GTX 580, that means I have not had the opportunity to play around with 144 Hz and Gsync. I do however run it at 85 Hz, and I tried loading up Modern Warfare 2 (as I knew it was probably the only game I could run with a high framerate) and although it is just 85 Hz, the difference was awesome. Sooo smooth and pleasing, a whole new experience.

Viewing angles

I almost forgot this point. Sure if you are in some odd positions, e.g. standing up and looking straight down at the screen as I am sure we all do all the time, there can be some minor issues with viewing angels, but for me it seems nigh impossible to have issues with them when you sit in front of the monitor – of course, this does not exclude people sitting at nose length from the screen.
Just remember to position it correctly. I was so exciting playing around with it, that it was only on day two I noticed the downright ridiculous way I had placed it. After correct positioning, I noted an “improvement” in the evenness of brightness across the screen (I barely noticed it as nonuniform before), and the positioning generally made everything fall right in to place with all the last miniscule details.


Come to think of it, you were really after the comparison between the Dell and Asus dchobaby. Well sure the Asus was nice, but having seen them both it just seems straight up silly considering it. The considerably higher cost, all the issues i.e. the apparently unavoidable bleed vs none of it.
Taking all my skill and being exceptional nitpicky, the IPS panel might give a little more "crispness" that is in the few places of the screen where there are no issues - but it seems like such a small fraction that it does not really matter. And if you go there, then everything can always be better and improved.

Well that was my novel for the day, cheerio!
 
Last edited:

dchobaby

Weaksauce
Joined
Aug 16, 2016
Messages
71
thanks for the follow-up! so are you more happy with the dell's colors than asus after calibration? sure seems like the dell is a great value but am curious on your thoughts if cost wasn't a consideration and both monitors were heads up against each other.

thanks, again!
 

Cherry Dude

Weaksauce
Joined
Sep 1, 2016
Messages
127
Well to be fair I have not seen them side by side, but by themselves, so I can't give a good answer - but based on that I still feel the Dell as the obvious choise, again with all the issues associated with the Asus.
If all Asus' shipped in perfect condition with zero bleed... Though call. In the end I think I would have trouble explaining exactly what I got more from the Asus with a straight face.
It is the value for money issue so to speak. Marginal gain for hefty additional cost.

Sorry for the vague answer when a hypothetical perfect Asus is involved.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Q-BZ
like this

Jay88

Weaksauce
Joined
Sep 10, 2016
Messages
82
My vote is the swift I just got a MG279Q which is below the swift had zero bleed.
 

Q-BZ

Fully [H]
Joined
Sep 28, 2007
Messages
19,436
S2417DG is in its own league....blows all 27" versions away

I guess I'm fudging on this just a little bit. I don't mind sticking with 24 to get the job done although I've been on 24 for 7 years. I really wouldn't mind going up a little bit in size along with the rest of the perks ideally.
 

Bexster

n00b
Joined
Dec 11, 2014
Messages
10
S2417DG is in its own league....blows all 27" versions away

thats a matter of oppinion - i would allways choose the 27" because i just like big screens, so imho the 27" version blows all other 24" monitors away..
 

Q-BZ

Fully [H]
Joined
Sep 28, 2007
Messages
19,436
thats a matter of oppinion - i would allways choose the 27" because i just like big screens, so imho the 27" version blows all other 24" monitors away..

l88 and Vega have torn through tons of monitors so I definitely respect their opinions as I continue to sit here on the fence.

I'm trying to gauge still how they are coming away with such lofty views on the 24 over even what I would think would be the dead equivalent of its own 27 inch brother.

On paper at least the Dells are absolutely identical monitors except for the size and I have a hard imagining that the little bit of difference on pixel pitch would make that much of a difference.

I've had a 24 inch for 7 years. I'd like to go up to at least a 27 ideally myself but I'm willing to consider this 24 inch Dell along with everything else.
 

Bexster

n00b
Joined
Dec 11, 2014
Messages
10
well, people should pick what people want, some people love the 24" inch version - the 24" has better dpi and higher Hz (165 vs. 144) - but i would still trade these two for a bigger screen, because in imho the tradeoff is small, but i can see how other people might feel differently.

i have a 144Hz 27" monitor and a 49" 4k 60Hz samsung - i must admit that - that 144Hz monitor get used less and less - i just prefer the big screen experience.

Actually i would only consider the 24" dell in a surround setup. and that would rock - but again, i like 'em big.
 

l88bastard

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
3,246
l88 and Vega have torn through tons of monitors so I definitely respect their opinions as I continue to sit here on the fence.

I'm trying to gauge still how they are coming away with such lofty views on the 24 over even what I would think would be the dead equivalent of its own 27 inch brother.

On paper at least the Dells are absolutely identical monitors except for the size and I have a hard imagining that the little bit of difference on pixel pitch would make that much of a difference.

I've had a 24 inch for 7 years. I'd like to go up to at least a 27 ideally myself but I'm willing to consider this 24 inch Dell along with everything else.


I like a big display, its actually my preference. That is why I have three Eizo FG2421s in portrait surround as their picture quality & motion clarity are fantasticalousciousness.

I had the original 27" TN rog swift and prefer this little dell over it, because TN panels have worse uniformity & color shift the bigger you go. I Also, bought that one 28" 4k TN panel when it first came out and immediately sent it back as it looked horrid to me. Long story short, I am not a fan of TN, but its very tolerable to me in this 24" form factor.

OLED > VA > TN > IPS
 
  • Like
Reactions: Q-BZ
like this

Q-BZ

Fully [H]
Joined
Sep 28, 2007
Messages
19,436
I like a big display, its actually my preference. That is why I have three Eizo FG2421s in portrait surround as their picture quality & motion clarity are fantasticalousciousness.

You're the kind of person I would have figured would have been all over 21:9 at this rate.


I had the original 27" TN rog swift and prefer this little dell over it, because TN panels have worse uniformity & color shift the bigger you go. I Also, bought that one 28" 4k TN panel when it first came out and immediately sent it back as it looked horrid to me. Long story short, I am not a fan of TN, but its very tolerable to me in this 24" form factor.

That makes sense. The smaller size helps cover up some of the weaknesses.



OLED > VA > TN > IPS


My NEC 2490wuxi with A-TW polarizer disagrees with this. ;)

I can't speak with as much comprehensiveness as you certainly but most of the TNs I've personally seen and used... I'd take a quality IPS (key word quality) over them any day of the week.

These newer 8 bit TNs are the first time I've ever even remotely considered going in this direction and that's with a lot of trepidation.
 
Last edited:

steal

2[H]4U
Joined
Apr 12, 2002
Messages
2,152
The fact that people are paying $600 for a TN panel in 2016 blows my fucking mind.
 

elvn

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
May 5, 2006
Messages
4,339
I guess if you mean the price I can understand it somewhat but I'd say it for both TN and IPS, and you have to consider that part of that premium is g-sync (and high hz) in some models, whether you consider the inclusion is overpriced or not, in either case.

The 8 bit TN swift is a good monitor, with good color, which has a very low response time which is not tied to the the refresh rate. This response time is unlike the high hz gaming ips monitor reviews I've seen where they are at a 5.x ms at 144fps-hz , then go to 8.x ms as the frame rate goes down to 60fps-hz. This can make a big difference since people buy 1440high versions and count on using g-sync, considering it a "fix" for playing at low frame rate graph ranges/bands. These graphs or bands of frame rate ranges are the reality of the actual frame rates surrounding a frame rate average.

Both TN and IPS have horrible black depth and contrast anyway.
The HDR premium standard is..
STANDARD 1: More than 1,000 nits peak brightness and less than 0.05nits black level. (LCD)
STANDARD 2: More than 540 nits brightness and less than 0.0005 nits black level. (OLED)

A good non HDR VA monitor with a ~3000:1 contrast ratio should get around .04nit black depth.
Popular IPS and TN gaming screens are sub 1000:1 contrast ratio around 0.12 nit to 0.14 nit.
So the black depth and detail in blacks on typical *VA* gaming monitors so far are at least 3x greater, conversely IPS and TN are at least 3x more pale. The poorer black depth is also exacerbated by screens not calibrated and tweaked exactly for the room lighting environment's exact contrast bias to your eyes+brain, and by varying room lighting conditions, as well as by direct light sources hitting the screen surface - so in real world use for most people the black depth is probably a lot worse.

Imo, if the next crop of gaming VA's is solid that would be the best for the next 3 - 5 yrs until OLED matures and is ubiquitous in gaming monitors. Hopefully by then any oled wrinkles will be worked out (fading, banding, response times, blur, etc.) and there will be variable frame rate, high hz, high rez (and maybe wide aspect) premium HDR OLED monitors perhaps with some kind of screen blanking tech to eliminate sample and hold blur, and at expensive yet not utterly extreme prices.
Hopefully VR will mature as well along the same lines, especially resolution increases.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Q-BZ
like this

Q-BZ

Fully [H]
Joined
Sep 28, 2007
Messages
19,436
Wait a minute. I thought we only had a few 8 bit TNs like that Swift. I wasn't aware there were any 10 bit...anythings for that matter.

I'll go a step further than Steal: It's amazing we're almost in the year 2017 and we stagnated and sat on ho-hum tech like LCD as long as we have.

I still miss CRT in some ways. I think they abandoned that tech way too quickly but that's water under the bridge now.
 

elvn

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
May 5, 2006
Messages
4,339
you are right, on both counts. (fixed prev post)

LCD sucks in general. I used to use a fw900 widescreen crt for reference so I know how bad lcd is.
Hopefully a good gaming VA will hold me over for those 3 - 5 yrs until oled's time is right for me.

As far as LCD gaming monitors go, the pg278Q is still a good panel and is well above typical TNs.

Asus ROG Swift PG278Q Review
The Asus ROG Swift PG278Q utilises a AU Optronics M270Q002 V0 TN Film panel which is capable of producing 16.77 million colours. This is achieved according to Asus' specs through a true 8-bit colour depth as opposed to Frame Rate Control (FRC) being needed. That is quite a rare thing in the TN Film panel market, and it is designed to be a premium grade TN Film panel, not like your normal TN Film offering.

aXXZjaD.png
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Q-BZ
like this
Top