4k Monitor suggestions | PCSPECIALIST

4k Monitor suggestions

Elliott B

Bronze Level Poster
Hi All,

With the black friday sales potentially around the corner are there any well known brands that do 4k gaming at more than 60hz? I can find lots for 4k at 60hz but only 1 for 100hz+. Any suggestions of where to look?
 

SpyderTracks

Bingo Bango Orchestrator
Moderator
Hi All,

With the black friday sales potentially around the corner are there any well known brands that do 4k gaming at more than 60hz? I can find lots for 4k at 60hz but only 1 for 100hz+. Any suggestions of where to look?
Whats your max budget?
 

Elliott B

Bronze Level Poster
Whats your max budget?
I don't exactly have a "max" budget. But I don't want anything bigger than 32", 27" would be perfect. 100+Hz (ideally 120-140Hz) with adaptive sync and like 2ms or 1ms response times would be perfect. I would guess around £600-800 as a budget?
 

SpyderTracks

Bingo Bango Orchestrator
Moderator
I don't exactly have a "max" budget. But I don't want anything bigger than 32", 27" would be perfect. 100+Hz (ideally 120-140Hz) with adaptive sync and like 2ms or 1ms response times would be perfect. I would guess around £600-800 as a budget?
That would get you an entry level monitor at around £750, that would be extreme budget.

The mainstream monitors are all over £1000
 

Elliott B

Bronze Level Poster
It's generally considered that anything below 32" for 4k is too small, there are loads of options at 32" and over but none at your budget.
I'm really struggling to find any that are 32" or bigger. Except one for 42". Where would be a sensible place to start looking?

Alternatively if this is a silly endevour. Would a 1440p UWQHD monitor work for an RTX 3080 and if so what kind of monitor should I be looking at?
 
Last edited:

SiAdams

Enthusiast
I'm really struggling to find any that are 32" or bigger. Except one for 42". Where would be a sensible place to start looking?

Alternatively if this is a silly endevour. Would a 1440p UWQHD monitor work for an RTX 3080 and if so what kind of monitor should I be looking at?
Samsung G9 mate. I have a 3080 and a G9 and it just amazing
 

Outerarm

Well-known member
Is that the 49" version?
Yup. It is larger than you think it will be! I've just had a G9 turn up for my new build (based on a 3080ti) and the monitor is huge -- 115cm from edge to edge. It is in effect two 27" 1440p monitors side by side, but without the bezel. Pixel count comes in at about 10% less than true 4K so you do need a good card to drive it.
 

DarTon

Enthusiast
If you want a 4k 32" IPS monitor with a refresh of 120Hz+ these are your current options

Asus Rog Swift PG32UQ £850
Gigabyte M32U £750
Gigabyte Aorus FI32U £900

The first is a AU Optronics panel with wider colour gamut and HDR600 but somewhat slower response, the second/third are Innolux panels with faster response but more mainstream gamut and HDR400.

Also coming soon we have

Acer XB323K
MSI Optix MPG321UR-QD $1000
ViewSonic XG320U $1000
Acer XV322QK
AOC AGON Pro AG324UX £900
ViewSonic VX3220-4K-PRO
Philips 329M1RV/329M1RVE

The first 3 are the same AU Optronics panel as the Asus and the last four are the same Innolux panels as the Gigabyte.

So far LG and Samsung have not implied they will enter the 32" 4K space.
 
Last edited:

Elliott B

Bronze Level Poster
If you want a 4k 32" IPS monitor with a refresh of 120Hz+ these are your current options

Asus Rog Swift PG32UQ £850
Gigabyte M32U £750
Gigabyte Aorus FI32U £900

The first is a AU Optronics panel with wider colour gamut and HDR600 but somewhat slower response, the second/third are Innolux panels with faster response but more mainstream gamut and HDR400.

Also coming soon we have

Acer XB323K
MSI Optix MPG321UR-QD $1000
ViewSonic XG320U $1000
Acer XV322QK
AOC AGON Pro AG324UX £900
ViewSonic VX3220-4K-PRO
Philips 329M1RV/329M1RVE

The first 3 are the same AU Optronics panel as the Asus and the last four are the same Innolux panels as the Gigabyte.

So far LG and Samsung have not implied they will enter the 32" 4K space.
Thank you very much. Very useful list. For response times, how impactful are they in all reality? Would a normal person notice playing non fps titles?
 

DarTon

Enthusiast
I play RTS and RPG stuff. I've never really seen the difference above 120 fps on those sort of titles. In fact, my interest in higher refresh 32" 4k panels is mainly to achieve a move from a 60 fps to 90 fps, which does deliver noticeable better smoothness, while still keeping that 4K detail.

I'd take a look at a few reviews:

Gigabyte M32U

Gigabyte FI32U

Asus PG32UQ

I think it's clear that these panels are not quite up the standard of some of the 4K 27/28" panels such as the LG 27GP950-B, Gigabyte M28U, Asus XG27UQR. There seems to be some disagreement over the exact response rates, input lag between reviews but I think it's far to say that they lack a truly effective single overdrive level that can cope with a very wide variable refresh rate. We really need LG to launch a 32" version of it's fast IPS for that.

On the other hand, I think a few of the reviews expect too much (Hardware Unboxed specifically). A decent 60Hz professional office IPS monitor like the Dell P3222QE or Benq PD3200U is £600. The Gigabyte M32U holds up pretty well compared to those, so you are essentially paying £150 for the higher refresh rate. A low end 32" for creators with higher colour accuracy like the Dell U3219Q is £800. The Asus PG32UQ is only £50 more and has similar colour gamut, HDR 600, and higher refresh but loses USB-C, KVM etc. I don't think they are overpriced. It's just that a 4K 32" 144Hz IPS monitor with great VRR, HDR1000, mini-led local dimming etc isn't happening yet below £1,500-2000.
 

Elliott B

Bronze Level Poster
I play RTS and RPG stuff. I've never really seen the difference above 120 fps on those sort of titles. In fact, my interest in higher refresh 32" 4k panels is mainly to achieve a move from a 60 fps to 90 fps, which does deliver noticeable better smoothness, while still keeping that 4K detail.

I'd take a look at a few reviews:

Gigabyte M32U

Gigabyte FI32U

Asus PG32UQ

I think it's clear that these panels are not quite up the standard of some of the 4K 27/28" panels such as the LG 27GP950-B, Gigabyte M28U, Asus XG27UQR. There seems to be some disagreement over the exact response rates, input lag between reviews but I think it's far to say that they lack a truly effective single overdrive level that can cope with a very wide variable refresh rate. We really need LG to launch a 32" version of it's fast IPS for that.

On the other hand, I think a few of the reviews expect too much (Hardware Unboxed specifically). A decent 60Hz professional office IPS monitor like the Dell P3222QE or Benq PD3200U is £600. The Gigabyte M32U holds up pretty well compared to those, so you are essentially paying £150 for the higher refresh rate. A low end 32" for creators with higher colour accuracy like the Dell U3219Q is £800. The Asus PG32UQ is only £50 more and has similar colour gamut, HDR 600, and higher refresh but loses USB-C, KVM etc. I don't think they are overpriced. It's just that a 4K 32" 144Hz IPS monitor with great VRR, HDR1000, mini-led local dimming etc isn't happening yet below £1,500-2000.
I notice the goal is for 32" , why is the sweet spot for 4k considered to be 32"?
 

DarTon

Enthusiast
I'm not sure there is a goal as such. Personally, I'm keeping up to date with 32" displays since I like the format. 27"/34" UW/49 SUW", I find these don't give me enough vertical height in a single row but too much when stacked on each other. Unlike @Outerarm, I actually think the G9 which is 2x27" is too small! I just prefer 32"/38" UW/40" UW for that extra few inches of vertical height.

As @SpyderTracks says 4k on a 27" display is 163 dpi or 91 pixels per degree at 80cm distance. This is really well above what is required. Unless you are an Apple user since they all have amazing eyesight! It can result in very small text etc, unless you scale massively at which point the screen won't feel that big.

By comparison, 32" at 4k gives you 138 dpi or 77 pixels per degree at the same distance. This still gets you that "retina feeling" to make Apple types happy but text is still large enough at 125% scaling to not require you to sit with your nose pushed up against the screen.
 

Elliott B

Bronze Level Poster
I'm not sure there is a goal as such. Personally, I'm keeping up to date with 32" displays since I like the format. 27"/34" UW/49 SUW", I find these don't give me enough vertical height in a single row but too much when stacked on each other. Unlike @Outerarm, I actually think the G9 which is 2x27" is too small! I just prefer 32"/38" UW/40" UW for that extra few inches of vertical height.

As @SpyderTracks says 4k on a 27" display is 163 dpi or 91 pixels per degree at 80cm distance. This is really well above what is required. Unless you are an Apple user since they all have amazing eyesight! It can result in very small text etc, unless you scale massively at which point the screen won't feel that big.

By comparison, 32" at 4k gives you 138 dpi or 77 pixels per degree at the same distance. This still gets you that "retina feeling" to make Apple types happy but text is still large enough at 125% scaling to not require you to sit with your nose pushed up against the screen.
It seems to me, although please do correct me if I'm wrong. 27/28" 4k seems to be good quality although perhaps missing some HDR support. Where as 32", whilst bigger has much slower response times and is therefore an inferior product? Or am I overestimating the effect of response times on the final image?
 

SpyderTracks

Bingo Bango Orchestrator
Moderator
It seems to me, although please do correct me if I'm wrong. 27/28" 4k seems to be good quality although perhaps missing some HDR support. Where as 32", whilst bigger has much slower response times and is therefore an inferior product? Or am I overestimating the effect of response times on the final image?
Response times listed in specs mean absolutely nothing, it's marketing nonsense.
 

DarTon

Enthusiast
Depends on how you define "inferior". It's personal. For me no set of 27" panels (or anything UW version such as a 34" or 49") would provide enough desktop real estate without me ending up with neck strain. That's pretty inferior by my metrics!

By comparison, the 32" format gives me the desktop real estate I want. In terms of pure "response times" (whatever that really means) it might sub-optimal compared to some 27" 4K panels but I don't need 120fps+. I wouldn't be able to tell the difference. It's good enough for me. Moreover, if I really wanted truly great response times, I'd be better off with a 27" 1440p type monitor.
 
Last edited:
Top