How often do you upgrade your main display?

T

TangledThornz

Gawd
Joined
Jun 12, 2018
Messages
1,005
My 7 year old ACER Predator XB252Q monitor died while I was on vacation this week and replaced it with ASUS TUF VG259QM. Both are 24in size at 1080p with a 40hz higher refresh to 280hz for the Asus from 240hz with the ACER so it was kinda of a side grade as I didn't want to go higher res as my current rig can't support it at an acceptable FPS.

The ASUS is my fifth display since I purchased my first PC back in 1999 so on average its a new display every five years for me. I was content with sticking with the ACER monitor till it died tbh but it made me think how often gamers here upgrade their main display?
 
if you arent a professional player you might want to re-assess your idea of "acceptable fps when youre over 200+ at 1080p and go up a res or two...
not often. since 98ish ive had 2-3 crts, then a lcd, then a plasma, now a 4k uled.
 
Not very often.
1724442250208.png
 
Azrak said:
Not very often.
View attachment 674767
Click to expand...
Same.

Maybe every 5-7 years? I try to put as much time into researching monitor purchases as possible for obvious reasons. Before GPU prices went full on retarded my monitor purchase was usually the biggest. That and like cases, it's going to hang around for several builds so it had better be solid.
 
pendragon1 said:
if you arent a professional player you might want to re-assess your idea of "acceptable fps when youre over 200+ at 1080p and go up a res or two...
not often. since 98ish ive had 2-3 crts, then a lcd, then a plasma, now a 4k uled.
Click to expand...

I'm not getting that high FPS on modern games like Cyberpunk 2077 with my old af RTX 2060. Someday I'll go 4k.
 
Not that often, basically it takes some specific monitor tech to get me to upgrade. HDMI 2.1 was the last feature that made me get a new monitor (I wanted to take full advantage of my PS5).
 
I think I've upgraded 7 times since 1997, so every 4 years on average? LCD technology moved pretty quickly in the 2010s.
  1. Unknown (Hitachi?) 19" 1280x960 100 Hz CRT (1998-1999)
  2. SUN Microsystems GDM-5010PT 21" 1600x1200 85 Hz CRT (Trinitron tube) (2002-2003)
  3. Samsung SyncMaster 204T 20" 1600x1200 75 Hz TFT (2007)
  4. ASUS VG248QE 24" 1920x1080 144 Hz TN (2013)
  5. ASUS PG278Q 27" 2560x1440 144 Hz TN (2015)
  6. ASUS PG27UQ 27" 3840x2160 144 HZ IPS (2018)
  7. LG C3 48" 3840x2160 120 Hz WOLED (2023)
 
Depends on what I'm after. Technically speaking, since owning my FW900, nothing's truly been an upgrade (dawns flame suit).

My next monitor will probably be an OLED with BFI or something. My current gaming monitor is the Viewsonic XG2431. Still the best BFI monitor you could purchase. I tend to go after things with certain features I want.
 
SeymourGore said:
Not that often, basically it takes some specific monitor tech to get me to upgrade. HDMI 2.1 was the last feature that made me get a new monitor (I wanted to take full advantage of my PS5).
Click to expand...
hdmi 2.1 on my tv made me upgrade my gpu. i kinda got that one backwards... ;)
 
2014 LG 21:9 25" Flat (bought this to see if I would like the 21:9 aspect ratio)
cubicle-updated.jpg

2015 LG 21:9 34" Flat
IMG_0705.JPG

2017 Dell 21:9 34" Curved
IMG_1672.JPG

2021 Alienware 21:9 34" Curved
IMG_0832.JPEG

2023 Alienware 21:9 34" Curved QD-OLED.
IMG_6984.JPG
 
SeymourGore said:
Not that often, basically it takes some specific monitor tech to get me to upgrade. HDMI 2.1 was the last feature that made me get a new monitor (I wanted to take full advantage of my PS5).
Click to expand...
(y)

The Long answer:

I don´t remeber the years but the thought process is still very clear.

The goal always was to watch movies and have a big screen feeling of cinemas in a (big) desk environment.

So 32 inch, with the nose close to the screen, was how i started. 32inch / 16 by 9 / TN-panel
But since movies run 21 by 9 screen size the upper and lower black bar seemed like wasted screen real estate.

So i welcomed the ultrawides in my life.
32 inch ultrawide wasn´t satisfactory since the height is ja joke if you want to display/review more than a few blocks of text. But switching to IPS gave me colour i did not know i missed using the TN panel.
34 inch was acceptable.
38 inch with Gsync seemed a good idea at first. But the fan will, at some point in the future, activate your rage mode and i am really happy living in a country where firearms access is heavily restricted. Otherwise the monitor would have visted a shooting rage.
No monitor or TV has the right to be noisy!
So what now? 40 inch does not seem like a real uprade and 48 inch is TV territory.

Ultrawide ... is was nice.
Especially since almost 99% of 16/9 Content is filmed in a manner that it still looks good if blown up to 21/9.
Any video camera worth a damn has guidelines for 21/9 if you look though it so you know to keep the important stuff inside that line. Just to be on the safe side IF the content ever gets blown up in size.
Check out your favorite late night talk show hosts show (that is recorded in 16/9) and see how the framing still looks perfectly acceptable in 21/9.

But ... IF the goal is still to recreate a cinematic feeling going only wide is not he answer. Ask any girlfriend.

So as a windows user who needs a monitor which has an RGB matrix since any other matrix is too much for windows to handle properly, i´ve waited for a few years for the first 50 inch/4K/120Hrz/4.4.4./VA panel.

And Samsung was the first to get there and still is the only one in that 50 inch size segment who makes a good TV that can be properly used as a 4.4.4. monitor.
I´ve burnt up my first one after 2.1 years due to heavy use and its 120Hrz tech beeing new? Just out of warranty.

Trying out an ADS 55 inch Samsung one i almost pucked after 8 hours of work due to the ADS panel displaying text not as clear as VA and somtimes with mini-blobs of other colours.
Up close an ADS panel looks somebody used and r (then) g (then) b strip and layed down a footballfield with it and shrunk it to TV size.
That´s why speckles of wrong colour are shown in plain coloured Text sometimes since the Text only strafes the r and g but not not the b (for example).

A 55 inch monitor was too big anyways, my neck told me.
So back to a new 50inch VA windows compatible 144Hz TV/monitor that runs 120Hz since turquoise leaves a nastsy trail at 144Hz. Turquoises switching frequency is somply too slow for 144hrz.

Due to work and watercooling i bought
a 32 inch second LG Screen with deskarm
a 34 inch ultrawide just for diangnostic readouts on top with a wallarm from ergotron. IF you get that arm cheap it is a very solid investment.

Next?

Well we are at the maximum what hdmi 2.1 can deliver:

4K/ HDR/ 120Hz/ 4.4.4./ 10bit / possibly full dynamic range

So next would be clearly the new displayport 2.0.
For the possibilities of 8K and/or 480 Hz with all the bells and whistles active.

In my case that means i´d have to give up my TV AND hdmi 2.1 4090.

If my new TV burns up let´s see what new displayport 2.0 GPU and 50inch monitor combo is out there.
The good ones will have the new gsync chip that needs no fan anymore...
 
Last edited:
Not really much. Only twice between 2000-2009 for the home rig
1st monitor I had was a refurb 19" CRT Mitsubishi Diamond Pro 900u, 1600x1200. 2000 to 2006?
Wow, selling for 1k
Then to dual 19" LCDs 900p till 2009 when I had my Q6600 PC.

Now I just got dual IPS LGs 32" 1440 for my new home system I'm I plan on building.
 
Last edited:
I only upgraded my display once. When Nvidia released the g sync DIY upgrade kit for the ASUS VG248QE.
 
I usually upgrade when my monitor starts having issues or if there's some new technology out that I simply can't pass up. Right now I have a 49" Samsung Odyssey OLED G9 that I can't see replacing for a very long time. I honestly love this monitor every single time I turn it on.
 
Back in CRT days I had 14" color VGA display with mandatory polaroid filter - which I did stop using when tube used up its juices and become uncomfortably dark with it. It was used for few years. Then 15" CRT was big improvement and it was used for quite a few years also.

Then I had various 17" CRTs which my brother kept bringing from his day job at computer store. He would replace such monitor from time to time simply because he didn't actually buy it. Then I had 19" monitor for a while which I would replace with 21" Trinitron IBM P275 - and it was glorious. I would also get 17" MVA panel and used them at the same time - LCD for text and CRT for everything from games to videos and photos. It would be used for some time until I got 24" S-PVA - which I didn't particularly like so I replaced it with 23" c-PVA panels which was atrocious so would be replaced with 24" A-MVA and it was also atrocious. I would also get 37" 1024x720 plasma display which I loved. Each LCD here would be few months. That 24" S-PVA was used for more than a year.

Then came realization VA panels are trash and that sRGB panels are trash so I would get Dell U2410 which was... actually absolutely bloody amazing. sRGB emulation was mad poorly but colors on this thing was very nice. I would use it for longer time perhaps and not just few months but I found used LG W2420R which was RGB-LED monitor - and OMG this thing had amazing colors... and viewing angles thanks to A-TW polarizer. Sold U2410 for almost the same money I got RGB-LED for and used that LG for two years or maybe even three. I also got SONY GDM-FW900 in the meantime and used that for gaming for many years to come.

Then I found two HP DreamColor LP2480zx with the same RGB-LED panel so I got both of them and gave that LG model to my brother and overall I would use FW900 and "DreamColor"s as my setup for few years straight. I did get NEC 2090UXi which also had A-TW to act as monitor for text/internets as sRGB native monitors are better for subpixel rendered text. I would use it for two or three years and replace with 27" 4K monitor with 60Hz G-Sync and used that for 3 or 4 years while still using FW900 and DreamColor. FW900 for some games, G-Sync monitor for some other games and DreamColor for any videos/movies. I would not use FW900 for videos - only from time to time when I already played games on it. DreamColor has better colors overall - tough not always due to low contrast ratio but on average.

Then I replaced that 4K 60Hz G-Sync monitor for LG 27GP950 with 4K resolution at 160Hz, FreeSync and very nice colors and this is where things are at with monitors. It was before certain virus was released. Since then I got 48" WOLED monitor for big gaming to replace 42 inch 1080p plasma and very recently got 50 inch Pioneer Kuro plasma - and I actually use it as monitor in this very moment but yeah, as main computer monitor I use that LG 27GP950 and DreamColor... which currently is not connected but I do intend to connect it back.

SONY GDM-FW900 saw reduced usage ever since I got that 27GP950 as frankly I like image of that IPS much more - it has good enough contrast, response times and much nicer colors and GPU can usually push 4K at ~100fps and with VRR it gives excellent experience. On top of that I have 48 inch OLED with 138Hz refresh rate and workable HDR so using old CRT doesn't make much sense.

From here I don't really plan now to replace LG 27GP950 and only wait to see developments in OLED screens to replace mu current one. Probably will be QD-OLED panel as I am not the biggest fan of WOLED light spectrum. Maybe if there is normal RGB QD-OLED monitor that doesn't treat user as idiot and doesn't dim everything pointlessly and it will be proven that at luminance I typically use it doesn't experience serious burn-in I will replace 27GP950 - but then again with ambient light I don't see anything wrong with its black levels and colors are very good on it - not too muted and not too glowing to be distracting. I need not worry about burn-in on IPS at all so that's good. Also 240Hz is kinda pointless as I think anything above 100fps is good enough and really most games with my current setup wouldn't take advantage of 240Hz - maybe if I played them in 1080p integer scaled.

---
tl;dr
Depending on quality of display it would be used few months and sold up to few years - or for displays which are exceptional (in something) even more than decade and these displays I don't sell even if I decommission them from regular use.
 
jbltecnicspro said:
Depends on what I'm after. Technically speaking, since owning my FW900, nothing's truly been an upgrade (dawns flame suit).

My next monitor will probably be an OLED with BFI or something. My current gaming monitor is the Viewsonic XG2431. Still the best BFI monitor you could purchase. I tend to go after things with certain features I want.
Click to expand...

This.

FW900 as daily driver until OLED, because I needed a 4K's real estate for work. (Sought out an LG CX/C1 specifically so I could still at least have a little taste of that CRT style motion clarity.)
 
Update that all this display upgrade talk has got me thinking that I'll upgrade from my newly purchased ASUS TUF VG259QM next year. I also actually bought a second ASUS TUF VG259QM for my two children's shared gaming laptop as playing on a smaller laptop screen is bad for their eyes.

I'll probably upgrade to a 4K OLED next year when the Geforce 5 series is released and my VG259QM will be given to my daughter when we surprise her with her own gaming laptop for her 11th birthday :eek:

Just gotta research into 4K monitors next year, lol.
 
Way more often than I should :p. I tend to get myself a very nice monitor and say "I really won't want anything better for a long time," then see a shiny new toy and...
 
I don't upgrade my monitor on a set schedule. I upgrade if my existing monitor is showing signs of failure, there is new tech available, or if I simply want something bigger.

I stuck with my 21" Trinitron for as long as I possibly could, until it died. I probably had it at least 5 years at that point.
I got a 24" Samsung 245BW as my first Widescreen LCD. I also used this for about 5 years. It was great but being stuck at 60Hz and the semi-awkward 16:10 ratio made me want to move on.
I got a 27" Samsung S27A950D, which was my first 120Hz monitor, although it was only 1080p. I used this for about 7 years, as I felt that 120Hz was good enough, and the low resolution went well with the cards I was using at the time which were fairly VRam limited (3x GTX680 2GB in SLI).
I got a 32" Samsung C32HG70, which was my first Adaptive Sync monitor, and my first curved monitor. 1440P, 144Hz. I used it for about 5 years and would have kept using it longer but it had some issues which just bothered me, such as terrible HDR, backlight "flickering" when using Freesync, and a 48fps minimum for Freesync which was IMO too low.
I got a 38" Alienware AW3821DW, which is my first ultrawide, and my first monitor with a hardware G-Sync module (meaning no minimum FPS, etc). I'm still using this and enjoying it a lot.

So I guess my answer is 5-7 years, even though I didn't upgrade any of them simply because they were "old".
 
At least 5 years here it appears after looking at my past monitor purchases. Usually I buy only when something fails or newer tech looks a lot better or maybe for higher refresh rates. However once I'm at 120hz or more I hardly care anymore. Its more about image quality and panel tech.

I did just recently pick up a 27 in LG 240hz IPS panel on sale because I gave my cheap holdover monitor to my 11yo. He had a 10 year old Acer 60hz panel and now has a newer 180hz ips screen which he loves.

I really want to get in on something OLED or QD-OLED but can't really justify the cost this year. Maybe next year.
 
I don't really know if I can say I've "upgraded" my display recently as everything I bought over the last 5 years or so has felt more like "sidegrades". The last time I felt like I truly upgraded my display was back in 2018 when I got the Acer X27. The LG CX that I got afterwards felt like an upgrade in some ways but a downgrade in others so overall it felt more like a sidegrade and I used it alongside my X27 rather than having it as my one main display. I switched out the X27 last year for an InnoCN 32M2V which again was an upgrade in some ways but also a downgrade in others so yet another sidegrade to the X27. Same sidegrading story with switching out my LG CX for an MSI QD-OLED, the 240Hz was an upgrade but the worst HDR and raised blacks was a big downgrade. The Asus PG32UCDP is now currently my primary display and I'm not using it alongside anything else and I'm pretty much totally settled on this display until we get some crazy new OLED tech like tandem stacked blue PHOLEDs or something as I'm done with sidegrading my displays.
 
MistaSparkul said:
The Asus PG32UCDP is now currently my primary display and I'm not using it alongside anything else and I'm pretty much totally settled on this display until we get some crazy new OLED tech like tandem stacked blue PHOLEDs or something as I'm done with sidegrading my displays.
Click to expand...

The Asus PG32UCDP looks like what I'd get if I was going to buy a 4K today. But now you mentioned PHOLEDs so I may hold off after reading up on them, lol.
 
TangledThornz said:
The Asus PG32UCDP looks like what I'd get if I was going to buy a 4K today. But now you mentioned PHOLEDs so I may hold off after reading up on them, lol.
Click to expand...

Yeah I feel like OLED tech is just stuck until we get something like PHOLED or that tandem stack that Apple is using with their ipad pro lineup that can do 1600 nits peak and 1000 nits fullfield while having less burn in risk I believe. Without those, seems like OLED will just continue to struggle with burn in and in HDR performance with high APL scenes so no further OLEDs look worthy of an upgrade in my eyes until we get that breakthrough.
 
MistaSparkul said:
Yeah I feel like OLED tech is just stuck until we get something like PHOLED or that tandem stack that Apple is using with their ipad pro lineup that can do 1600 nits peak and 1000 nits fullfield while having less burn in risk I believe.
Click to expand...
The Apple tech interests me, but I wonder how good it really is at resisting burn-in. So far it looks like they are only putting it on iPads and those are designed to be more disposable. Same reason you can find 1000nit+ screens on phones: You don't use it as much as a desktop/laptop, and companies treat it as disposable. They don't care if it burns in. Tablets aren't as disposable, but I'll want to see some hard numbers on it before I trust it for desktop usage.

Of course we may not get it for that, because it may be something Apple has a patent or other lock on and will only allow for their devices, they are wont to do that with tech.

For the immediate future, I'm going to continue fanboying on MiniLED because I'm a brightness addict. In the medium term, who knows... Maybe I'll see if I can make a TV work as a computer screen.
 
Sycraft said:
The Apple tech interests me, but I wonder how good it really is at resisting burn-in. So far it looks like they are only putting it on iPads and those are designed to be more disposable. Same reason you can find 1000nit+ screens on phones: You don't use it as much as a desktop/laptop, and companies treat it as disposable. They don't care if it burns in. Tablets aren't as disposable, but I'll want to see some hard numbers on it before I trust it for desktop usage.

Of course we may not get it for that, because it may be something Apple has a patent or other lock on and will only allow for their devices, they are wont to do that with tech.

For the immediate future, I'm going to continue fanboying on MiniLED because I'm a brightness addict. In the medium term, who knows... Maybe I'll see if I can make a TV work as a computer screen.
Click to expand...

I mean that's just what they are claiming but of course I wouldn't know for sure. Here's the reasoning behind it though:

"what about burn-in? Well, the other advantage of using two layers of pixels is that if you're using the device at a more standard brightness (as you will be the vast majority of the time), each layer can run less bright than a single layer would have to, making each more efficient in terms of energy and heat use. That helps to reduce a key cause of burn-in, and should help to keep the screen going for longer in general."

As for it being locked to only Apple devices, that doesn't make much sense to me either but even if that were the case, LG has also made progress in tandem OLED tech and I can't possibly see them NOT using it for their own products.

https://wccftech.com/lg-solves-oled-brightness-efficiency-issue-two-stack-tandem-structure/

Once we get an OLED monitor with this tandem feature that's when I'll upgrade again. Until then, I bought a GeekSquad 4 year warranty from Bestbuy and I'm ready to hold out with my PG32UCDP for the long haul.
 
Triple EA231WMi's lasted about a year, didn't love the Eyefinity life. Moved to a 30" Dell 3008WFP in 2010 and that lasted me until 2016. Replaced that with an Asus PG348Q that carried me to early 2023 with an LG C2.
 
MistaSparkul said:
"what about burn-in? Well, the other advantage of using two layers of pixels is that if you're using the device at a more standard brightness (as you will be the vast majority of the time), each layer can run less bright than a single layer would have to, making each more efficient in terms of energy and heat use. That helps to reduce a key cause of burn-in, and should help to keep the screen going for longer in general."
Click to expand...
Ya I get the idea, and I hope it works well, I'll just want to see some proving before jumping, particularly since heat is another issue for life and I'm not sure how this solves that. I mean it would work for lower brightnesses fine because less current through each TFT, but at high outputs, you are still talking high current and thus high heat. I'm interested, but want more data before I'd decide to grab one, even if I could.

MistaSparkul said:
As for it being locked to only Apple devices, that doesn't make much sense to me either but even if that were the case, LG has also made progress in tandem OLED tech and I can't possibly see them NOT using it for their own products.
Click to expand...
Hopefully. I will note though that Apple has been known to throw money at companies to give them exclusives, and they've a lot of money to throw. Now I don't know that LG would go for that, but they might, at least for a time.

Whatever the case, despite having only recently paid way too much for a new toy, I am eagerly awaiting an even newer toy that is good enough to tempt me away.
 
I upgrade whenever there's a significant breakthrough in display technology. WIll only move from my 1440p 360hz QD-OLED when 1440p 720hz OLEDs or 4k 360hz OLEDs are available.
 
Im a sucker for gaming displays. In the past few years this is what I have gone through (not in order) :

LG CX 42"
LC C2 42"
Samsung Odeyssey Neo G9 49"
Samsung Odeyssey Neo G9 G95NC 57"
Samsung Odyssey G65 32"
Samsung Odyssey G65 27"
LG 39GS95QE
LG 38GN950 38"
Gigabyte M27QX 240hz
Samsung 120hz 42" VA (display forgot model name)
MSI 271QRX 360Hz Oled
ASUS PG27AQDM 240hz Oled

I am sure there is a few I am missing, just can't remember them all.

And if you like to know which I have kept the longest, it is the Samsung 57" (dual 4k 32") Neo G9. I still have it and using it since it was released, and I don't think I plan on changing it out to anything else anytime soon.
 
Lets see...
Dell U3011 - 2011 - fb marketplace $100
philips 32" - 2018 - Amazon $300
dell 24" - 2022 - fb marketplace $20
 
XoR_ said:
From here I don't really plan now to replace LG 27GP950 and only wait to see developments in OLED screens to replace mu current one. Probably will be QD-OLED panel as I am not the biggest fan of WOLED light spectrum.om regular use.
Click to expand...
Didn't take long since Saturday (its Wednesday today). Today unpacked fancy 27" QD-OLED screen with 1440p resolution and 360Hz refresh rate.
Went with resolution to 1440p because 4K was an overkill. I did ponder about 32 inch but I already have 27", size seems enough and I wanted to have two monitors of the same size. In this case IPS will become humble text/internets monitors and I will also use it for things like YT and videos when playing games.

Other than getting $77 Pioneer Kuro PDP-LX5090 two weeks ago - well, because its Pioneer Kuro plasma and was only $77 with shipment I got last 48 inch WOLED monitor which replaced 42 plasma less than two years ago and LG 27GP950 which just got replaced in gaming role about exactly 3 years ago.

I am not sure how long I will keep each monitor but I guess I will replace QD-OLED much sooner than IPS.
For text this IPS is amazing, has nice colors, doesn't burn-in and using it for desktop is overkill but at least lag-less mouse at 160Hz feels nice. Probably best to sell OLEDs while they are hot and with warranty and get better model as the rate of yearly improvement is quite rapid.
 
GotNoRice said:
I don't upgrade my monitor on a set schedule. I upgrade if my existing monitor is showing signs of failure, there is new tech available, or if I simply want something bigger.

I stuck with my 21" Trinitron for as long as I possibly could, until it died. I probably had it at least 5 years at that point.
I got a 24" Samsung 245BW as my first Widescreen LCD. I also used this for about 5 years. It was great but being stuck at 60Hz and the semi-awkward 16:10 ratio made me want to move on.
I got a 27" Samsung S27A950D, which was my first 120Hz monitor, although it was only 1080p. I used this for about 7 years, as I felt that 120Hz was good enough, and the low resolution went well with the cards I was using at the time which were fairly VRam limited (3x GTX680 2GB in SLI).
I got a 32" Samsung C32HG70, which was my first Adaptive Sync monitor, and my first curved monitor. 1440P, 144Hz. I used it for about 5 years and would have kept using it longer but it had some issues which just bothered me, such as terrible HDR, backlight "flickering" when using Freesync, and a 48fps minimum for Freesync which was IMO too low.
I got a 38" Alienware AW3821DW, which is my first ultrawide, and my first monitor with a hardware G-Sync module (meaning no minimum FPS, etc). I'm still using this and enjoying it a lot.

So I guess my answer is 5-7 years, even though I didn't upgrade any of them simply because they were "old".
Click to expand...
That is me too.

I had a 19in CRT for a long time. But it died. Then I built a whole new machine and had an el cheapo like 24in. But I like more real estate, so used a 32in TV. Decided I liked 32in and then got a proper 32in 1440p display. I like it well enough. I suppose what would make me swap would be death of a display somewhere or some new feature that makes life easier........not sure what that would be to be honest. Some sort of home lab KVM proxmox remember your vnc thing that hasn't been invented?

I'll tell ya one thing, my wife still has dual 1080p 24s and yucky. I think once you go 32, there is no turning back. I have dual 32s at work and I know my brother covets my displays.
 
About 4-6 years, just depends if something comes to market that seems like a proper upgrade.
 
I'm about there too, 4-6 years or so usually. I upgrade when something better comes out. Might go longer this time. My "main" screen is still a 43" 60Hz 4k IPS Dell I got in late 2019 that I use for work (programming) and general use. I have an OLED for gaming, but the IPS has better text and it's between my 24" side screens (in portrait mode) so I use it a lot more. I don't think I'll upgrade my 43" LCD until I can get a similarly sized 8k screen at a reasonable price. All it would really do for me that I care about it make things smoother by using more scaling. I'm probably more likely to upgrade the OLED even though I just got it last year. At 48" it's big enough to use as a secondary TV, so it's easier to repurpose.
 
-snoopi- said:
Im a sucker for gaming displays. In the past few years this is what I have gone through (not in order) :

LG CX 42"
LC C2 42"
Samsung Odeyssey Neo G9 49"
Samsung Odeyssey Neo G9 G95NC 57"
Samsung Odyssey G65 32"
Samsung Odyssey G65 27"
LG 39GS95QE
LG 38GN950 38"
Gigabyte M27QX 240hz
Samsung 120hz 42" VA (display forgot model name)
MSI 271QRX 360Hz Oled
ASUS PG27AQDM 240hz Oled

I am sure there is a few I am missing, just can't remember them all.

And if you like to know which I have kept the longest, it is the Samsung 57" (dual 4k 32") Neo G9. I still have it and using it since it was released, and I don't think I plan on changing it out to anything else anytime soon.
Click to expand...
I also love changing displays as life is too short and no mater how powerful your PC is you only experience what your display shows.

I'm using a Samsung 43" mini-led right now but I've been tempted by the Samsung 57" for too long.

I'm worried about it's vertically limited aspect ratio. How did you get used to it after the 42"? It just seems not tall enough to me and it's the only reason I haven't bought it.

To answer the topic I change my display every 2 years on average.
 
1999 - 15" CRT

2002 - Samsung SyncMaster 955DF (or similar model), 19" CRT, up to 1280x1024 80Hz

2005 - Dell 2405FPW, 24" PVA panel, 1920x1200 60Hz

2015 - Philips BDM4065UC, 40" VA panel, 3840x2160 60Hz
^ I use this currently for work

2019 - LG C9, 65" OLED, 3840x2160 60Hz (could do 120Hz, but my GPU doesn't have HDMI 2.1)
^ I use this currently for watching videos and playing games

I'm contemplating whether to upgrade my work monitor to Odyssey Neo G9 57" (7680x2160 240Hz). It would finally be a clear upgrade to my 40" Philips. It has twice as many pixels, but requires using a higher DPI scaling, so effectively it would give 30-50% more screen estate, with clearer text and smoother mouse movement. It would just and just fit on my table, but it would block my speakers (KEF LSX). Decisions, decisions.
 
Last edited:
LG C2 48in has been here for two years. Until large type 42in plus displays come out with high refresh. I have 0 need to move to a new display. Nothing out there is worth it to me currently.
 
jarablue said:
LG C2 48in has been here for two years. Until large type 42in plus displays come out with high refresh. I have 0 need to move to a new display. Nothing out there is worth it to me currently.
Click to expand...
Yeah hard to find a valid upgrade for those. I'd like to see 240 Hz models with higher HDR brightness and a better pixel structure, that might be enough to make me upgrade from my CX 48".
 
I think I've had 4 monitors since I first got a PC back in about 2000. 15" CRT -> 19" CRT c.2003 -> 22" 1680 x 1050 LCD c.2009 -> 24" 1920 x 1200p LCD c.2013.

I'm definitely thinking about an upgrade, probably to something like a 40" 5120 x 2160, but it'd be a luxury purchase so it's harder to justify. It would also involve some desk reconfiguration as I have some wall-mounted shelves next to the desk that would need to be moved, and I'd have to work out where to put my speakers as there wouldn't be enough space for them currently. Plus (touch wood) my current monitor is working great without any issues (and I definitely don't have enough room to keep it and dual-screen).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top