LG 32UL500 or ASUS VG289Q? | PCSPECIALIST

LG 32UL500 or ASUS VG289Q?

Voeille

Active member
I ordered a new build on the 17th of September (and I can't help but hope that I will get to see it before November), and I'm wondering about an affordable 4K monitor. I've narrowed it down to LG 32UL500 and ASUS VG289Q, and I'm leaning more towards LG. An important factor for me is how dark it can get at minimum brightness, as I like a quite dark setting. It's hard to find that kind of information without actually looking at the physical screen, is the maximum brightness anything to go by, or does it not effect the minimum at all? At the moment I'm using Samsung C24F396 with my laptop, and the minimum brightness level seems low enough for my needs. I'm planning to use both my 1080p monitor and a 4K one in a two monitor setup, one for casual PC usage and older games, and the other for something more demanding, + more screen real estate is always welcome. Frame rate isn't a big concern for me — as long as I get 60 FPS in virtually anything I might want to play in the next few years, I will be happy (my current laptop is a 6.5 year old elder with a GTX 860M, so 4K at 60FPS will be a great upgrade).

Here are the specs of my new build:
Case PCS SR-819 RGB FULL TOWER CASE
Processor (CPU)Intel® Core™ i9 10 Core Processor i9-10900X (3.7GHz) 19.25MB Cache
MotherboardASUS® ROG STRIX X299-E GAMING II: ATX, USB 3.2, SATA 6 GB/s, Wi-Fi AC - ARGB Ready
Memory (RAM)64GB Corsair VENGEANCE RGB PRO DDR4 3200MHz (4 x 16GB)
Graphics Card10GB NVIDIA GEFORCE RTX 3080
1st Storage Drive8TB SEAGATE IRONWOLF PRO 3.5", 7200 RPM 256MB CACHE
Partitions: 4000GB, 4000GB
1st M.2 SSD Drive1TB SAMSUNG 970 EVO PLUS M.2, PCIe NVMe (up to 3500MB/R, 3300MB/W)
Partitions: 200GB, 800GB
DVD/BLU-RAY DriveNOT REQUIRED
Power SupplyCORSAIR 1000W RMx SERIES™ MODULAR 80 PLUS® GOLD, ULTRA QUIET
Power Cable1 x 1 Metre UK Power Cable (Kettle Lead)
Processor CoolingCorsair H80i V2 Hydro Cooler w/ PCS Ultra Quiet Fans
Thermal PasteSTANDARD THERMAL PASTE FOR SUFFICIENT COOLING
Extra Case Fans2x 120mm Black Case Fan (configured to extract from rear/roof)
Sound CardAsus Xonar SE 5.1-Channel Gaming Audio Card
Wireless/Wired NetworkingWIRELESS INTEL® Wi-Fi 6 AX200 2,400Mbps/5GHz, 300Mbps/2.4GHz PCI-E CARD + BT 5.0
 

SpyderTracks

Huntsman
Moderator
I ordered a new build on the 17th of September (and I can't help but hope that I will get to see it before November), and I'm wondering about an affordable 4K monitor. I've narrowed it down to LG 32UL500 and ASUS VG289Q, and I'm leaning more towards LG. An important factor for me is how dark it can get at minimum brightness, as I like a quite dark setting. It's hard to find that kind of information without actually looking at the physical screen, is the maximum brightness anything to go by, or does it not effect the minimum at all? At the moment I'm using Samsung C24F396 with my laptop, and the minimum brightness level seems low enough for my needs. I'm planning to use both my 1080p monitor and a 4K one in a two monitor setup, one for casual PC usage and older games, and the other for something more demanding, + more screen real estate is always welcome. Frame rate isn't a big concern for me — as long as I get 60 FPS in virtually anything I might want to play in the next few years, I will be happy (my current laptop is a 6.5 year old elder with a GTX 860M, so 4K at 60FPS will be a great upgrade).

Here are the specs of my new build:
CasePCS SR-819 RGB FULL TOWER CASE
Processor (CPU)Intel® Core™ i9 10 Core Processor i9-10900X (3.7GHz) 19.25MB Cache
MotherboardASUS® ROG STRIX X299-E GAMING II: ATX, USB 3.2, SATA 6 GB/s, Wi-Fi AC - ARGB Ready
Memory (RAM)64GB Corsair VENGEANCE RGB PRO DDR4 3200MHz (4 x 16GB)
Graphics Card10GB NVIDIA GEFORCE RTX 3080
1st Storage Drive8TB SEAGATE IRONWOLF PRO 3.5", 7200 RPM 256MB CACHE
Partitions: 4000GB, 4000GB
1st M.2 SSD Drive1TB SAMSUNG 970 EVO PLUS M.2, PCIe NVMe (up to 3500MB/R, 3300MB/W)
Partitions: 200GB, 800GB
DVD/BLU-RAY DriveNOT REQUIRED
Power SupplyCORSAIR 1000W RMx SERIES™ MODULAR 80 PLUS® GOLD, ULTRA QUIET
Power Cable1 x 1 Metre UK Power Cable (Kettle Lead)
Processor CoolingCorsair H80i V2 Hydro Cooler w/ PCS Ultra Quiet Fans
Thermal PasteSTANDARD THERMAL PASTE FOR SUFFICIENT COOLING
Extra Case Fans2x 120mm Black Case Fan (configured to extract from rear/roof)
Sound CardAsus Xonar SE 5.1-Channel Gaming Audio Card
Wireless/Wired NetworkingWIRELESS INTEL® Wi-Fi 6 AX200 2,400Mbps/5GHz, 300Mbps/2.4GHz PCI-E CARD + BT 5.0
Neither of those screens (4k 60) is going to be suitable for the 3080, the 3070 would be more appropriate.

The 3080 is a 4k 144Hz card and you'd need to spend around £1000 for a suitable monitor to pair with it.

You may want to read up on the state of intel vs AMD, AMD have just announced new CPU's which are being released on 5th November and put the nail in intels coffin in their entirety. Basically, there's no reason to go with Intel, they're awful compared to AMD.


I would strongly recommend cancelling that build and getting some advice on something more suitable. Even if you want to stick with Intel, which would be insane, that build is all wrong!
 

Voeille

Active member
Thank you for the advice. I opened a new thread about the build itself here.

As for the monitors and frame rate, how big of a difference is between 60 and 100+ from a human experience? I've heard several times that a human eye can't tell the difference between 30 and anything above 30, however from personal experience I can tell that it doesn't seem true, as 30 and 60 do feel different, so I'd like to know where that statement comes from. If 144Hz makes a big difference, I'd be happy to upgrade to a more expensive model.
 

SpyderTracks

Huntsman
Moderator
Thank you for the advice. I opened a new thread about the build itself here.

As for the monitors and frame rate, how big of a difference is between 60 and 100+ from a human experience? I've heard several times that a human eye can't tell the difference between 30 and anything above 30, however from personal experience I can tell that it doesn't seem true, as 30 and 60 do feel different, so I'd like to know where that statement comes from. If 144Hz makes a big difference, I'd be happy to upgrade to a more expensive model.
Most people can tell a huge difference up to about 120Hz, anything above that very few people are sensitive to.

But the difference between 60Hz and 144Hz is huge for gaming. To the point where 60Hz is not really considered a gaming monitor these days.

For a suitable monitor for the 3080 you're looking around £1000
 

Voeille

Active member
In that case I'll wait a bit more and get a 144Hz one, if it really is that different then it will be exciting to try it out as I've spent years not knowing better than 60Hz. Thanks a lot!
 

gianky89

New member
Thank you for the advice. I opened a new thread about the build itself here.

As for the monitors and frame rate, how big of a difference is between 60 and 100+ from a human experience? I've heard several times that a human eye can't tell the difference between 30 and anything above 30, however from personal experience I can tell that it doesn't seem true, as 30 and 60 do feel different, so I'd like to know where that statement comes from. If 144Hz makes a big difference, I'd be happy to upgrade to a more expensive model.
Hi, for sure the human eye cannot detect beyond 90Hz in perfect genetic and healthy condition. On average a healthy man can detect around 75 / 80Hz. I have always been of the opinion that 144hz was only market, and indeed it is. It would be great to have a screen at 80 / 90Hz, those who say they notice the difference between a 60 and a 144 is only because it still manages to detect around 80Hz, but the expense is not worth it. Then it is subjective. I advise you to go to the store, with screens on and check that you notice the difference, because between 60Hz and 144Hz the cost changes a lot, you could save or invest it in a much better panel.
 

Voeille

Active member
Interesting to know. The thing is, currently with 4K you either get 60 or 144 and nothing in between... I have seen 120, but that's only for really huge screens.
 

ActuallyDenz

Gold Level Poster
Interesting to know. The thing is, currently with 4K you either get 60 or 144 and nothing in between... I have seen 120, but that's only for really huge screens.
Yeah, that's been my frustration. After having a 1080 144Hz laptop for a few years, I decided to buy a desktop and decided I wanted to go 4K. I'm now used to 144Hz, so kinda disregarded 60Hz, because as that video shows, once you get used to it, you really start to notice it. I would have gone 120Hz but the monitors offering that seem to be out of stock most of the time. Managed to get an XG27UQ in the end which cost me £800 when they're normally closer to £1k.

144Hz has ruined my life! :LOL:
 

ubuysa

Moderator
Moderator
If its any consolation, by the time you get to my age your hearing is shot, your eyesight is rubbish, your hands shake, and your thinking is like wading through treacle. So although I'm now financially secure enough to buy a gaming PC with a 4k wide-screen monitor at 240Hz, super fidelity sound, and pin point accurate controls, I can't see it hear it or use it....!
 

Voeille

Active member
Now I wonder... What about those crazily high refresh rates such as 240Hz? If we can't see beyond 90, then those seem pointless. Unless there's more to it?
 

SpyderTracks

Huntsman
Moderator
Now I wonder... What about those crazily high refresh rates such as 240Hz? If we can't see beyond 90, then those seem pointless. Unless there's more to it?
They're for competitive players who are literally superhuman in their vision and reactions, hence why they get paid about $1M per match. There's about 1% of human beings that are able to perform to the higher refresh rate.

But yes, 99% of the Fortnite and Warzone players literally have no idea what they're doing, they just go by what they hear on YouTube.
 
Top