60hz is more than adequate. Good monitor for the money.
steve_bezerker to benrobertsno1
14 Aug 17#9
Eh, Not really.. This is about what you would expect to pay for 4k 27" at only 60hz. Most of the money held in gaming monitors comes from the noticeable jumps in FPS.
JimmySaville to benrobertsno1
19 Aug 17#18
'more than adequate'
You pay £500 for a monitor with 'adequate' features? Most competitive games pretty much require 144hz to execute and perceive high level gameplay these days, see counter strike for example.
Given that predator are supposed to be among the best, this is **** poor.
sazza6969
14 Aug 17#3
I think you would be lucky to get a locked [email protected] with high settings, and current high end GPU's. Will stick with my ASUS PG279Q
FrancescoSpina
14 Aug 17#2
Meh, 60Hz @ 4k and 4ms response rate. Better of just going for the 1440p (2k) version of this monitor at 144/165hz for a far better gaming experience.
Good price for this monitor but I would hold off on buying a 4K monitor until they roll them out with higher refresh rates at this price point.
stuellis to FrancescoSpina
14 Aug 17#4
Thats a very general statement, it depends a lot on the type of game you play. Also high fps needs far more cpu power than 60Hz/fps so depends on your setup.
Edit: Also all console gaming is a max of 60fps and with G-Sync you can achieve much better smoothness of motion at lower fps than non G-Sync/Freesync.
steve_bezerker to stuellis
14 Aug 17#10
Not so sure about that. Once you've experienced 144hz it is EXTREMELY hard to go back to using 60hz. My girlfriend uses a 60hz monitor (my old one) right next to my 144hz monitor and the difference is absolutely insane, she thinks she's lagging half of the time because of the noticeable jumps, and she's always complaining about how mine always looks so smooth. Giggity.
dozstanford to stuellis
14 Aug 17#11
1. All console gaming is not max 60fps, some games are max 30fps. 2. G-Sync only works with Nvidea GPU's on the PC, it does not function with either the Xbox One or PS4.
stuellis to dozstanford
14 Aug 17#12
We are saying the same thing, I said consoles were a max of 60fps knowing that many games are less, hence 'max'. You don't buy this monitor unless using on a PC with NVidia GPU, the point is you cannot compare a set fps between g-sync and non g-sync monitors as at sub 60fps the g-sync (or freesync) will feel much smoother.
Jiwani80 to FrancescoSpina
14 Aug 17#6
Does anyone know how to check refresh rate of iMac 27 inch please. Thanks
stuellis to FrancescoSpina
14 Aug 17#7
Also 4ms is normal for IPS of any resolution and I'd take IPS colours every time. With consoles and TV's an input lag of 40ms or below is considered good so while not the same thing a 3ms delay is going to be unnoticeable to all but the most hardcore/professional gamer.
Thoughtful to FrancescoSpina
14 Aug 17#8
They are coming out anytime soon, but at a launch price of nearly £2000 it's not remotely affordable for most people. Also remember that to run these Hi res screens you also need a high end graphics card if you want decent frame rates.
sion22 to FrancescoSpina
16 Aug 17#14
Debateable, I take 4K 60hz over 1440p/144hz(4ms is an issue unless you have godly reaction). i mean you need GTX 1080 minimum just to hit 1080p/144hz, and there is not even a single card that can do 1440p/144hz. unless you and a pro gamer, majority would be happier with 60fps with great grahic fidelity at 4K
Nate1492 to sion22
16 Aug 17#15
4ms response isn't about 'godly actions' it is 4ms added on to anyone's ability.
I don't agree that non pro gamers are 'better' at higher resolution, lower FPS.
It completely depends on your gaming styles.
Race games? Shooters? You should really consider 144hz+
Civ6? 4k would look great at 60 fps.
sion22 to Nate1492
16 Aug 17#16
Response time(IPS min is 4ms, VN is 1ms) is not the the same as input lag. but even if its 30 ms input lag., you wont notice a different. for example. if you game on a 30ms or a 10ms input lag monitor. it wont affect you performance or enjoyment at all. unless arguably in pro gaming for game like CSGO. evidence for this is majority of gamer is on console with TV where input lag is much higher.
Bottomline is, the majority of gamer dont care about 144 hz and will be happier with better grahpic than 144hz
MichaelGL to sion22
16 Aug 17#17
Yup. Response time is not input lag. They're both measured in ms but not the same thing.
This monitor actually has 10.2ms of input lag (Leo Bodnar) which is decent enough. Less than a frame of input lag at 60fps.
msmyth
14 Aug 17#1
Cheapest around as far as I can see :smile: 4K, G-Sync and up to 100% sRGB colour, make this quite a beefy Gaming monitor.
![Fresh Breakfast Meat Box (Using code) @ Campbells Meat [Haggis / Lorne Sausage / Bacon / Black Pudding & More]](/images/topics/208684_1.jpg)
![[Xbox One] Q. u. b. e: Director's Cut on Deals with Gold](/images/topics/208716_1.jpg)
Opening post
Technical Specification
Display
- Number of Screens: 1
- Screen Size: 68.6 cm (27")
- Response Time: 4ms
- Aspect Ratio: 16:9
- Panel Technology: In-plane Switching (IPS) Technology
- Adjustable Display Height: Yes
Video- Maximum Resolution: 3840 x 2160
- Standard Refresh Rate: 60 Hz
- Brightness: 300 cd/m²
- Tearing Prevention Technology: G-sync
Audio- Built in Speakers
Interfaces/Ports- USB
- HDMI
- DisplayPort
Physical Characteristics- Colour: Black
Package Contents18 comments
Still worth it however
You pay £500 for a monitor with 'adequate' features? Most competitive games pretty much require 144hz to execute and perceive high level gameplay these days, see counter strike for example.
Given that predator are supposed to be among the best, this is **** poor.
Good price for this monitor but I would hold off on buying a 4K monitor until they roll them out with higher refresh rates at this price point.
Edit: Also all console gaming is a max of 60fps and with G-Sync you can achieve much better smoothness of motion at lower fps than non G-Sync/Freesync.
2. G-Sync only works with Nvidea GPU's on the PC, it does not function with either the Xbox One or PS4.
You don't buy this monitor unless using on a PC with NVidia GPU, the point is you cannot compare a set fps between g-sync and non g-sync monitors as at sub 60fps the g-sync (or freesync) will feel much smoother.
I don't agree that non pro gamers are 'better' at higher resolution, lower FPS.
It completely depends on your gaming styles.
Race games? Shooters? You should really consider 144hz+
Civ6? 4k would look great at 60 fps.
Bottomline is, the majority of gamer dont care about 144 hz and will be happier with better grahpic than 144hz
This monitor actually has 10.2ms of input lag (Leo Bodnar) which is decent enough. Less than a frame of input lag at 60fps.
Technical Specification
Display
- Number of Screens: 1
- Screen Size: 68.6 cm (27")
- Response Time: 4ms
- Aspect Ratio: 16:9
- Panel Technology: In-plane Switching (IPS) Technology
- Adjustable Display Height: Yes
Video- Maximum Resolution: 3840 x 2160
- Standard Refresh Rate: 60 Hz
- Brightness: 300 cd/m²
- Tearing Prevention Technology: G-sync
Audio- Built in Speakers
Interfaces/Ports- USB
- HDMI
- DisplayPort
Physical Characteristics- Colour: Black
Package Contents