This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

What should I look out for when purchasing a new monitor?

#1MightySandvichPosted 8/5/2013 8:01:16 AM
Mainly for gaming about $1100~ budget...I saw that some folks recommended 120Hz monitor for performance and 2560 x 1440 pixel for quality. But couldn't find one that had both 120Hz and 2560 x 1440 pixels. Also I would love to use dual screen for multitasking. Is there a monitor that can split screen to function as dual monitor or a software? Lastly if split screen was possible how big should the monitor be?
#2dennis941012Posted 8/5/2013 8:10:13 AM(edited)
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00BUI44US/ref=oh_details_o00_s00_i00?
ie=UTF8&psc=1
although I am not sure what
DVI-D port is...
---
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lzwNvWsbJKQ
#3_LegendaryPunk_Posted 8/5/2013 8:34:20 AM
The only advice I can offer is that you should not purchase a monitor exclusively through online guides. Even if it's a different brand, find something with similar specs that you can view in a store.
---
"But though you may find this slightly macabre,
We prefer your extinction to the loss of our job."
#4GeejiPosted 8/5/2013 8:51:26 AM
The ones that can do 120hz and 2560 aren't out legitely still, I think. Catleaps use patched driver to allow higher hz, not sure about the new one someone mentioned for 300, or the quality of it. Catleap is still working well
#5Vindication123Posted 8/5/2013 9:27:30 AM
HD 1080p resolution is the new Standard, and it's not even widely implemented yet. There is zero reason to go beyond this unless you want a over-sized screen so you could stay about 10-feet away from the monitor.

120hz is only for 3D applications, as the screens are designed to run split-screen 60hz on two sides to create an illusion of 3D.

Most claims about visual quality to 120hz screens are made out of ignorance as most games repeat frames at these speeds those make a smoother image. Only a small handful of games are designed to run at speeds of 120fps....

You should a second montior if you want to use a split-screen application. In regards to that, bigger screens have more room at the cost of visual quality. As far as software, I have no idea.
---
'The Intel i7-3770 if you're rich, the i5 2500K, i53570 or i53570k if you're doing okay, the AMD A10-5800K or i3 if you're just about hanging in there.'
#6NicodimusPosted 8/5/2013 10:25:22 AM(edited)
Vindication123 posted...
HD 1080p resolution is the new Standard, and it's not even widely implemented yet. There is zero reason to go beyond this unless you want a over-sized screen so you could stay about 10-feet away from the monitor.


1080p was the new standard for PC gaming in about 2006-2007. It's not exactly the "new" standard in 2013. Plenty of games still use it, because that's the most common monitor resolution, but if you look at benchmarks done in the last year or two, on a lot of games you're seeing like 120-150 fps at 1080p ultra settings. In other words, much of the time, the graphics card is overkill for a 1080p 60Hz monitor.

Jumping from 1080p to 1440p adds an additional 75% of pixels in almost the same surface area. If you're sitting at a normal distance from your monitor, you can see all the extra detail, and it looks fantastic. Not just in games, but in your desktop, your browser, and any graphics programs that you use. I completely disagree that there is no reason to go above 1080p, unless you are sitting so far back from your monitor that 1080p and 1440p look identical (which would be a pretty strange setup, honestly.)
---
My movie and gaming room: http://imgur.com/a/IjWr1
My pets: http://imgur.com/a/P9VGU
#7Vindication123Posted 8/5/2013 11:32:28 AM
If you wanted to get a 30" then 1440p would look a bit better vs' a 24"-26" 1080p. But, I think native resolution is more important if you care about performance issues.
---
'The Intel i7-3770 if you're rich, the i5 2500K, i53570 or i53570k if you're doing okay, the AMD A10-5800K or i3 if you're just about hanging in there.'