What is it you are using to power your 4K 120Hz gaming? Presumably your graphics card from 2019.

Good for a cheap monitor... but 60hz makes me sad.
4k is a bit unreadable without ui scaling in desktop at only 27" with ui scaling things like steam get blurry fonts,
not all things scale (some apps/programs not compatible)
1440p tends to be a touch unclean on 4ks for desktop but generally looks ok in games.

Its another one of those confused monitors which will game better than it displays desktop but isn't a gaming monitor as its got a low 60hz which is barely worth the freesync.

tl:dr
Budget monitor for a budget gaming machine, nothing wrong with that but have limited expectations.

Not voting as while I wouldn't buy it I can see why others might.

can you down scale to 1440p?

hot for ips

I used a 28" UHD monitor as a 2560x1440 one for triple monitor surround reasons, it definitely looked a bit blurrier than ones with that native resolution but it was only noticeable on really fine text, like size 8 and below. Shouldn't be noticeable in games since they never use text that small.

Just be warned that the stands on LG monitors tend to be very flimsy even by normal standards.

Good for a cheap monitor... but 60hz makes me sad.
4k is a bit unreadable without ui scaling in desktop at only 27" with ui scaling things like steam get blurry fonts,
not all things scale (some apps/programs not compatible)
1440p tends to be a touch unclean on 4ks for desktop but generally looks ok in games.

Its another one of those confused monitors which will game better than it displays desktop but isn't a gaming monitor as its got a low 60hz which is barely worth the freesync.

tl:dr
Budget monitor for a budget gaming machine, nothing wrong with that but have limited expectations.

Not voting as while I wouldn't buy it I can see why others might.

To be honest it's not really for a budget gaming machine, since they won't be looking to do 4K.

I actually have this monitor desktop monitor next to my ultrawide and what it is good for is if you have a PS4 Pro or plan on getting a Scorpio since they don't need higher than 60hz but obviously have 4K support. Fort that I recommend it.

What is it you are using to power your 4K 120Hz gaming? Presumably your graphics card from 2019.

I have this monitor and I highly recommend it.
I use it for my PS4 Pro and it's brilliant.
60hz works perfectly for the Pro.

Good deal.

Looking for a 27" 2560x1440 g sync monitor though. Anybody know of any good deals for one?

The price is not bad, not particularly great either. I picked up a BenQ 27inch 144hz monitor for £350 last year which is leaps and bounds ahead of this. As others have said though this would be ideal for a small screen to play Scorpio and Pro games.


4k Gaming at 120hz is possible on the majority of higher end cards - GTX 1080's are dropping in price and would easily run any game 4k 120hz

Providing you drop the settings ... ;-) some ppl are obsessed with ultra everything

A 144hz 4k monitor for £350? Or are you not comparing like for like?

A 1080 might run any game at 120hz 4k if you turn everything down, but nowhere near at high to max settings.

Sorry, No. My monitor supports up to 1440p @ 144hz. I think we can all appreciate that 4k gaming is still in it's early days and has a long way to go before being considered mainstream.

Yes, turning settings to about medium... In order to be able to play 4k 120hz on Ultra you would be expected to be spending about £1000 on your GPU alone.

Whats the point in running 4K if you don't care how it looks?

Yeah I agree, I didnt think a 144hz 4k monitor actually existed for sensible money yet but wanted to check!

And yes I have a single 1080 as I use a 4K TV for playing and its OK for 60fps on most things maxed but to double it would probably be a pair of 1080 or 1080tis as a guess. If I was buying a monitor I would go to 1440p I think for now and take the extra fps.

Yep, sorry, I should have been more specific about my resolution.

I think until gaming on 4k becomes more affordable it's way better to have a solid 1440p monitor with 144hz refresh rate and enjoy the crap out of everything on ultra :smiley:

In your opinion is 1440p 144hz gaming better 'quality' than that of 4k 60FPS? I've never really gamed in 4K although I know a bit about it and would like an opinion on how good that extra resolution actually is.

Because it's not mainstream enough 4k is a bit of a hassle IMO. The scaling is a bit daft for starters and it seems even W10 isn't really designed for it. I think having a low input lag 1440p monitor with gsync and 144hz would give an overall better experience than what I have at the moment when playing FPSs. Strategy games are fairly good on the TV with high res because the slight lag isn't important. It's just I haven't space in my man cave for a desk and monitor at the moment as it is doubling up as home theatre, music listening and gaming room. I think 32" is as small as I would want to go with 4k too!

Vs 1080 the extra res is really noticeable IMO, and in my rug would rather do 4k at 60 than 1080 at 150 it whatever, but I haven't played 1440 but I imagine it's almost best of both.

I own this, it's worth this 100% I got it for £400 just a month ago so I'm gutted. It's a steal.

sweet

I never said it was a bad monitor. you seem confused.

lol, never said I 4k game. 144hz at 1440p freesync on a monitor that is designed for 1440p. 1440p looks better on a native 1440p screen.

btw I hear they are bringing out 2019 in just over a year and a half.

anyway please refrain from reading my comments in future as it seems you just read what you want rather than what is written.

Gamut (CIE 1931) NTSC 72%, 8bit +FRC bit depth. So not for me, but a good deal if you don't need a wide gamut or high bit depth (which is most people).

There's so much negativity on this thread. This is a 27" 4k IPS monitor for under £300! It's a great price and the lowest I have ever seen for this class of monitor. Heat added and ordered.

Er, okay, looks like you took offense from absolutely nothing there.

Anyway, anyone on the fence about this, I can recommend it as a good monitor for your Pro etc. It doesn't suffer too much bleed either, at least in my case.

There are no 4k panels currently available that run higher than 60Hz due to limitations of the 1.2 display port format. Several 4k 144Hz panels have been announced using the display port 1.4 format but won't be available until later this year.

They will also cost a small fortune. The least of your worries will be whether a GTX 1080 can hit 120 fps because you could probably afford a pair of 1080 Ti's if you can afford one of those screens.

nope, colours are really vibrant!

What game is that on the screen?

i have the 23.5" version. with freesync it can go to 75Hz. I have a GTX960 set at 75Hz 1080p

looks like amazon have priced match it amazon

Most people game on 60hz displays.

And no 'budget' gamer is looking for a 4k screen.

Not the best company once you run into promblems or returning the goods back.
Few weeks ago bought a dell ultrasharp monitor from them, and it was delivered damaged.
It took more then 3 weeks till I received replacement which also had a damaged box but luckily screen was fine. I saved nearly 40£ compared to amazon, but after all this hassle with pictures to proof that damage was done in transit and tons of phone calls every other day…
Dont think ill ever deal with them again.

Sorry to divert from original deal. But has anyone any comments on following option I was considering for a 3 screen setup?

http://www.ebuyer.com/707243-samsung-ue590d-28-ultra-hd-freesync-monitor-lu28e590ds-en
OR
http://www.ebuyer.com/639060-asus-pb287q-28-4k-60hz-uhd-hdmi-monitor-pb287q

Thanks for reading.

What do you want it for?

They are both 16:9 Aspect Ratio, Both 60hz, 4k, UHD with HDMI support, Both have 1ms Response time... the Asus has (tinny) speakers, but both have 8bit TN panels so picture quality and viewing angles will be frustrating on both in a gamer set-up.

All depends what you're using them for?

because a lot of the ultra settings make very slim differences for the FPS hit you get from having them on... and resolution offers a great upgrade over high-ultra on some effects... but anyway, it was all rather tongue-in-cheek! :wink:

seriously it's almost like people look at benchmarks for PC and go yep nothing can game at 4k . . . a GTX 1060 can game at 4k60 for the most part on medium to high settings but for some reason these benchmark sites always test at ultra which these days basically has very little difference for a massive performance drop =/

I want to use it for Home office and occasional FPS gaming. Want to future proof it when I build a High end gaming rig next yr. For now I would be using Surface book with performance base.

this is key question

is 4k at medium with anti aliasing off

better or worse than 1080p at ultra?

one youtube guy says ultra not much difference to medium. is it all a con?

Well it's not really future proof - 120hz 4k screens will be available at the end of this year (for a lot of money) but 60hz 4k gaming is very relevant now. Depending on your GPU you can expect to get decent ish frames on most 4k games - As long as they support 4k.

Still think you're better off with 1440p over 4K but that's personal preference - I prefer to play 1440p 144hz as it's a much better screen clarity and has massively improved performance.

Thanks. Will just get the Samsung for now. I don't need to be on bleeding edge but good clarity is what I am after.

£289.97 on Amazon now if you prefer them to eBuyer.

Interesting thread.

I run a watercooled 7700k rig overclocked to 4.8Ghz with an eVGA 980Ti SC to provide graphics. It's not slow.

Day to day I run a 27" 1440p 144Hz monitor - I can deliver well in excess of 144fps (like 300+ in older games like CS:GO).

For fun, I tried connecting my rig to my Living Room TV the other day. It's a 55" LG OLED 4K 3D set which allows a 60Hz 4K input.

I played GTA in 4K 3D at ultra. It looked nice but 60Hz is just awful. Every game, regardless of settings, limited to flickery 60Hz. Driving games felt completely unplayable as a result, no control, horrible. Windows desktop looked pretty and some games looked quite funky with 3D turned on. Lego City Undercover looked amazing.

But 60Hz is horrid and I could never go back to that.

This monitor is not marketed for competitive gamers. I mean, it has an IPS panel. But to me who wants a monitor for productivity and casual gaming, this is a great price for a 4k IPS. Freesync is also sweet.

I have CB271HK Acer 4k IPS 60Hz 4ms monitor quite a while now, and I've seen maybe 3-4 minor apps with bad scaling. 60Hz is absolutely fine in 4k as long as you not play very fast fps games as a pro. Still you can have more than 60fps on those monitors if your card is strong enough. It won't be a full frames, but even those half frames will make the move in games look smoother.

Why do so many people assume that everyone wants to play games and cares about refresh rates? This should be great for photo work - high res and IPS for under £300. Bargain.

I have the Acer XB270HU - it's the G-sync IPS model. Really nice panel actually, IPS is lovely and G-sync seems to do its stuff - I hate visual tearing from half frames, looks awful and I find it distracting.

p.s. also worth mentioning that I recently moved my 980Ti from an old Sandy Bridge i7 rig (overclocked to 4.5GHz) to this new 7700K set-up. Old PC had plentiful RAM (16GB) so only major difference from a gaming perspective was the CPU.

In many case, my FPS went up by 20-30, e.g. Forza 3 going from 60-70fps to 90-100fps. Same GPU.

It's not all about having the latest nVidia card and a nice panel, at some point you need everything else to catch up.

I have a ps4 pro. I want a monitor/ tv this sort of size to connect it to. £300 is the right sort of money. its what the console cost after all. if i cant get better for the money then this is the one for me?

what is freesync?

It's G Sync for AMD cards

Loads.

The rig, including 1TB M.2 NVME PCI-E and 64GB of RAM was over £2k without the GPU. The GPU and screen cost over 500 each, so about £3500 all in.

Jumpman - I have it for my pro and it's brilliant!!!

Is that necessarily true?

This monitor will be fine for PS4 Pro.

I have this monitor on my desk at work. I don't game so I cannot comment particularly but I can give you a view on it from the perspective of a professional pair of eyes. It is a nice picture, clean and clear, it displays video nicely (although it doesn't support 50p!).
Frankly I half regret asking for a 4k display for work, it's too big with such a high resolution. Things are too small on the screen so I either have to zoom in or get close. Often I find myself getting closer to the screen and now I often miss notifications because they are out of my field of view.
if it wasn't for the fact that I need to look at 4k images from time to time and I can't really ask IT to take it back I would feel bad. If I was to start again I would go back to two 1080p displays, or perhaps a medium size 1440p.

It's a good value 4k monitor, but are you sure you really want a 4k monitor?

Indeed, mine is going back.
I cannot fault monitor alone. However next to my 27 inch 16:10 monitor it is small. In Windows 10 I can barely make sense of text at 125% magnification, my other half requires 175% - still gains some real estate.
Anyway, we are sending it back in hope we will get a 32 inch one in not so a distant future.