Very good price, tempted. Going to check my account tomorrow. Checking online reviews, a few site rated it 3/5 and 7/10. A hand full gave it 4/5 and 85/100. One review gave it 5/5. The main issue reviewers had with this monitor was the TN panel. To get the best out of it, you must be dead center, a few degrees to the side and the "view becomes an indiscernible yellow mess." Still very positively reviewed.
People that review monitors and complain about it being a TN panel are stupid, though. It's a gaming monitor, period, and you don't game with your monitor at an angle.
musssy to ritchiedrama
5 Sep 17#3
They didn't just say "oh it's a TN monitor, its crap." They actually stated the results of being a TN panel. It justified criticism. If I do buy it, I will be plugging it into my laptop which has a gtx 1070, so I will be playing a few games while also using for work, research and general use. Likeliness, I won't be center of the screen always, I will be affected by this issue. Regardless, the monitor got very positive review, nothing below 3/5. Nothing is perfect.
musssy to ritchiedrama
5 Sep 17#4
Btw, I voted hot and considering on buying it tomorrow. If I'm forking out £400, I want to know the pros and cons so I can make the correct decision. I'm sure most sensible buyers would do the same.
ritchiedrama to musssy
5 Sep 17#5
Well if you have a 1070 I wouldn't buy a 4K monitor anyway, there are better choices than this for a similar price with Gsync and 1440P. 4K and a 1070 is just not a good move.
musssy to ritchiedrama
5 Sep 17#6
You're correct, but I'm not buying mainly for games. I need it for work mainly, to be able to have more than one window open at the same time is ideal for me. Plus to watch 4K videos is another reason. But mind you, my laptop is a 15" 4K monitor, I've ran GTA V on ultra setting and 4K, it ran pretty smoothly in the opening 30 minutes. So 1070 is pretty capable. But 15" way to small for 4K
ritchiedrama to musssy
5 Sep 17#7
You and I will definitely have a different definition of what "smoothly" is :grin:
BetaRomeo to ritchiedrama
5 Sep 17#8
At 4K, roughly twice the frame rate a PS4 manages at 1080P. GTAV scales well on PC hardware.
And remember that benchmarks tend to use Ultra settings, while in the real world, we can lower settings to get a much higher frame rate at the same resolution. A 1070 is perfectly fine for 4K60 gaming for anyone smart enough to access the Options menu.
ritchiedrama to BetaRomeo
5 Sep 17#18
Yes, exactly, 60fps is not "smooth" though, thats the problem.
BetaRomeo to ritchiedrama
6 Sep 17#20
Perhaps you would be so kind as to recommend a 100Hz or higher 4K monitor in the ~£400-500 range, then?
As musssy has clearly proven, 4K60 makes great sense for a screen that is primarily for work - and some great-quality gaming secondarily. (Not this screen necessarily!)
ritchiedrama to BetaRomeo
6 Sep 17#21
You won't find a 4K monitor at that refresh rate at that price. But my point was nothing other than 60hz is not smooth and that a 1070 is not for 4K gaming.
Alfresco to ritchiedrama
6 Sep 17#22
Doesn't the G-Sync make up for the refresh rate? I've recently picked up a 1080ti and i'm going from 1080p at 60hz. Would you recommend this or lower rez with higher refresh rate?
Domislice to Alfresco
6 Sep 17#23
I'm not an expert but the effect of G-Sync or Freesync and increased refresh rate are technically two different things.
G-Sync / Freesync prevents dissonance between the GPU render rate and the monitor refresh rate, so all frames that are rendered are displayed properly. Occasional a rendered frame can be lost which will cause a slight graphical glitch, probably barely noticeable, and the loss of any visual change for that frame. This is where the "optimal gaming performance" element comes in, although honestly the issue is rare and minor in most situations.
Refresh rate of the monitor is the maximum number of frames per second that the monitor can display. A high refresh monitor will show more information, provided the GPU is powerful enough to render at that rate. As an example, a 120hz monitor will show twice as many frames as a standard 60hz monitor. This is a big improvement and as well as smoother gameplay in fast games it can result in information being displayed a frame earlier a lot of the time.
Basically a high refresh rate is much more significant than the effect of G-Sync / Freesync.
LeftResponse to Domislice
6 Sep 17#24
To add value to this, having one without the other would affect your experience watching the game depending on your hardware. I would agree having G-Sync/Freesync running on a 60fps game could have less value than on a game running 200fps, but G-Sync/Freesync technology was introduced to counter visual issues caused by the FLUCTUATIONS in fps.
I would never buy anything above a 60fps monitor without G-Sync personally, because I would notice the difference significantly especially with games constantly improving. I would however get a 60Hz monitor WITHOUT G-Sync.
As an example, a GTX 1080Ti can smash anything at 60fps regardless of resolution (so less fps fluctuation). G-Sync wouldn't be as effective here, but a weaker GPU in this case would benefit more from G-Sync because it can't hold 60fps at 4K resolution. It's down to your hardware and resolutions whether you need what, so I can't agree one is more valuable than the other.
ritchiedrama to LeftResponse
6 Sep 17#25
This is just daft information.
I'd recommend 1440p 144hz gsync, or 1080p 144hz gsync over anything else.
LeftResponse to ritchiedrama
6 Sep 17#28
Oh God, he's back. Please master of all knowledge, please go ahead and correct my daft information!
Btw, you do realise this is a G-Sync monitor right? The last time we crossed paths, you said there was no point buying G-Sync for anyone anywhere ever. Change of heart? :smile:
Are you saying AMD cards are suitable for people who already own GSync monitors?
ritchiedrama to LeftResponse
6 Sep 17#30
Yes, I am aware it is a gsync monitor, which is 4K, and the person who was interested has a 1070, which is not a 4K card at all, not even close.
Yes, I was wrong about gsync, under certain scenarios, it's useless for competetiive gamers and great for anyone else.
BetaRomeo to ritchiedrama
6 Sep 17#31
This is the kind of statement that clearly reveals whether the writer is someone who has experience with a range of graphics cards on a range of screens, or someone who lives vicariously through reviews and is laboring under the misapprehension that graphics card reviews are the best way to see how a game will typically run (as opposed to the actual purpose of graphics card reviews - to see how the graphics cards perform).
The misconception that gamers have no choice but to run every PC game at Ultra settings is tragically ludicrous - although to be fair, it's not an uncommon mistake among enthusiastic amateurs. The idea that "a 1070 is not for 4K gaming" is almost painfully out of touch with reality, though. On a platform with over 10,000 games, having to lower Shadows and drop down to SSAO on two dozen games is a minor inconvenience for someone with gaming as a secondary concern.
And as the "person who was interested" quite clearly indicated that their primary usage for the monitor was work, and that they were happy with how smooth games can appear at 60Hz, trying to force your own standard of smoothness onto them afterwards is just... bizarre. It's like telling someone they should buy shoes that fit you instead of them.
Personally, I think 1440P and 144Hz or 165Hz with adaptive sync is the best gaming balance for me, too, as my main screen at home is primarily for gaming, so we have do that in common. But I've also used a couple of 4K60 screens with 1060s, 1070s and 1080s, and found that modern PC games (say, post-1995) have included something called a "Graphics" menu that allows qualified computer geniuses like myself to adjust the level of detail in games, and you will probably be surprised to learn that lowering the detail slightly can (gasp) give a big boost to the frame rate.
ritchiedrama to BetaRomeo
6 Sep 17#32
The argument would be if you have to lower settings that much with a 1070 to get 60fps with 4K, why would you even play in 4K, the advantage of 4K is, downsizing ingame to 1080p is good, but still, 1440P is definitely a sweet spot atm with the technology available.
Alfresco to Domislice
6 Sep 17#26
Cheers for the replies. I'd heard reports of the increase in smoothness with (particularly) G-Sync being so noticeable that it feels like playing at higher frame rates than you really are. From your replies though, this is only a benefit if the FPS drop below the refresh rate of the monitor so would be of no use if using a GPU that's always able to run above 60fps.
So the conclusion is G-Sync at 4K 60hz is (currently) pretty useless with a 1080ti? I really need to pick up something to make use of this 1080ti asap. I ordered a Hp Omen 2560 x 1440 monitors from Amazon when they were £299 a couple of weeks ago which isn't going to be fulfilled until next week, but that doesn't have G-Sync and is still only 75hz so i'll likely cancel. Any recommendations for a sweet spot monitor under £500 or is that not possible?
LeftResponse to Alfresco
6 Sep 17#27
30fps will still look like 30fps and 60fps will still look like 60fps. If you have that card, I would recommend getting a better monitor than 60fps (that has G-Sync). You will get more out of your card, and you won't regret the difference. :smile:
Alfresco to LeftResponse
6 Sep 17#29
Are you sure 4k won't pull a 1080ti down to around 60fps in modern games? Seeing as i'm not already used to higher refresh rates, I'm just wondering if staying at 60hz with 4k G-Sync might be a better option, especially long term. Or do you really think the extra frames are that much of an improvement?
Joshimitsu91 to musssy
5 Sep 17#11
Wouldn't you be better off with a 4K IPS screen for productivity and movies? Can't see why you would consider a TN panel with G-Sync when your main focus isn't gaming.
musssy to Joshimitsu91
5 Sep 17#13
Yes I would prefer, but they are so damn expensive. That is also the reason why I didn't dive in and order it. I needed to think about and consider many factor, one being ips monitors.
Joshimitsu91 to musssy
5 Sep 17#14
Plenty at Scan for less than this one. Though as you say make sure you read reviews before buying.
musssy to Joshimitsu91
5 Sep 17#16
I will check them out. With that sort of money, I'm going choose wisely, last thing I want is to regret my purchase.
roguesspam
5 Sep 17#9
60hz tho
LeftResponse
5 Sep 17#10
This is a VERY good deal, but I couldn't go back to 60Hz for gaming. If this was 144+Hz I would of bought in a heartbeat, but I don't think this kind of price would exist for 4k + GSync + 144Hz(or higher) monitors at the moment.
The prices are getting better though, I paid about this for the 1440p / GSync / 144Hz ASUS one I use at the moment. This is a good deal, especially for a new monitor. Heat added.
jimbo001
5 Sep 17#12
Is G sync necessary for 60hz?
And wouldn't HDR be a big draw in gaming monitors?
TheSweeney
5 Sep 17#15
£564 for a monitor!?!?!?! You can keep your PC master race.
ritchiedrama to TheSweeney
5 Sep 17#19
As opposed to £500 for a TV? o.O
oldrichie
5 Sep 17#17
This is a really good price, gsync is not cheap generally, so good price even at 60hz. Personally I am waiting to see what the hdr offerings will be like before I go 4k (from 1440)
![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
Screen Size
28"
Edition
Predator XB281HK
Panel Type
TN
Panel Coating
3H
Panel Finish
Touchsceen
No
Backlight
LED
Pitch Size
0.161 mm
Curvature
N/A
Adaptive Frame-rate Technology
NVIDIA G-Sync
HDCP
Yes
Connectors
1 x HDMI
1 x USB 3.0 In
4 x USB 3.0 Out
Position Adjustment
Pivot
Swivel Stand
Tilt
Resolution
3840x2160 (Ultra HD)
Aspect Ratio
16:9
Refresh Rate
60Hz
Response Time
1 ms
Brightness
300 cd/m²
Viewing Angle
170/160 (°H/°V)
Contrast Ratio/DCR
100M:1
Color Gamut
72% NTSC
Color Bit Depth
8Bit + Hi-FRC
Speakers
Yes
Speaker Configuration
2W x2, Stereo
Web Camera
No
Power Usage (Switched on)
59 W
VESA
100 x 100
3D Support
No
Anti-Theft Features
Included Accessories
Monitor Colour
Black/ Red
Dimensions (with stand)
659 x 415 - 565 x 268 (WxHxD)
Dimensions (without stand)
Weight (with Stand)
7.8 kg
32 comments
pcauthority.com.au/rev…442
At 4K, roughly twice the frame rate a PS4 manages at 1080P. GTAV scales well on PC hardware.
And remember that benchmarks tend to use Ultra settings, while in the real world, we can lower settings to get a much higher frame rate at the same resolution. A 1070 is perfectly fine for 4K60 gaming for anyone smart enough to access the Options menu.
As musssy has clearly proven, 4K60 makes great sense for a screen that is primarily for work - and some great-quality gaming secondarily. (Not this screen necessarily!)
G-Sync / Freesync prevents dissonance between the GPU render rate and the monitor refresh rate, so all frames that are rendered are displayed properly. Occasional a rendered frame can be lost which will cause a slight graphical glitch, probably barely noticeable, and the loss of any visual change for that frame. This is where the "optimal gaming performance" element comes in, although honestly the issue is rare and minor in most situations.
Refresh rate of the monitor is the maximum number of frames per second that the monitor can display. A high refresh monitor will show more information, provided the GPU is powerful enough to render at that rate. As an example, a 120hz monitor will show twice as many frames as a standard 60hz monitor. This is a big improvement and as well as smoother gameplay in fast games it can result in information being displayed a frame earlier a lot of the time.
Basically a high refresh rate is much more significant than the effect of G-Sync / Freesync.
I would never buy anything above a 60fps monitor without G-Sync personally, because I would notice the difference significantly especially with games constantly improving. I would however get a 60Hz monitor WITHOUT G-Sync.
As an example, a GTX 1080Ti can smash anything at 60fps regardless of resolution (so less fps fluctuation). G-Sync wouldn't be as effective here, but a weaker GPU in this case would benefit more from G-Sync because it can't hold 60fps at 4K resolution. It's down to your hardware and resolutions whether you need what, so I can't agree one is more valuable than the other.
I'd recommend 1440p 144hz gsync, or 1080p 144hz gsync over anything else.
Btw, you do realise this is a G-Sync monitor right? The last time we crossed paths, you said there was no point buying G-Sync for anyone anywhere ever. Change of heart? :smile:
I'm not sure where you get your information.
Yes, I was wrong about gsync, under certain scenarios, it's useless for competetiive gamers and great for anyone else.
The misconception that gamers have no choice but to run every PC game at Ultra settings is tragically ludicrous - although to be fair, it's not an uncommon mistake among enthusiastic amateurs. The idea that "a 1070 is not for 4K gaming" is almost painfully out of touch with reality, though. On a platform with over 10,000 games, having to lower Shadows and drop down to SSAO on two dozen games is a minor inconvenience for someone with gaming as a secondary concern.
And as the "person who was interested" quite clearly indicated that their primary usage for the monitor was work, and that they were happy with how smooth games can appear at 60Hz, trying to force your own standard of smoothness onto them afterwards is just... bizarre. It's like telling someone they should buy shoes that fit you instead of them.
Personally, I think 1440P and 144Hz or 165Hz with adaptive sync is the best gaming balance for me, too, as my main screen at home is primarily for gaming, so we have do that in common. But I've also used a couple of 4K60 screens with 1060s, 1070s and 1080s, and found that modern PC games (say, post-1995) have included something called a "Graphics" menu that allows qualified computer geniuses like myself to adjust the level of detail in games, and you will probably be surprised to learn that lowering the detail slightly can (gasp) give a big boost to the frame rate.
Cheers for the replies. I'd heard reports of the increase in smoothness with (particularly) G-Sync being so noticeable that it feels like playing at higher frame rates than you really are. From your replies though, this is only a benefit if the FPS drop below the refresh rate of the monitor so would be of no use if using a GPU that's always able to run above 60fps.
So the conclusion is G-Sync at 4K 60hz is (currently) pretty useless with a 1080ti? I really need to pick up something to make use of this 1080ti asap. I ordered a Hp Omen 2560 x 1440 monitors from Amazon when they were £299 a couple of weeks ago which isn't going to be fulfilled until next week, but that doesn't have G-Sync and is still only 75hz so i'll likely cancel. Any recommendations for a sweet spot monitor under £500 or is that not possible?
The prices are getting better though, I paid about this for the 1440p / GSync / 144Hz ASUS one I use at the moment. This is a good deal, especially for a new monitor. Heat added.
And wouldn't HDR be a big draw in gaming monitors?