The RTX 3060 sits as a mid-range GPU champion. Its MSRP of $329 places it perfectly among the rest of NVIDIA’s stock, although getting your hands on any graphics card at the recommended price is still a challenge. This card is not meant to push 4K gaming or anything close. Instead, it serves the 1080p crowd perfectly, and can respectfully manage a few games at 1440p. Perhaps more than any other card from the 3000 series, the rest of your rig will have to pull its weight for the best performance.

With all of that in mind, the question of the best resolution to play it with this card comes up. Note that everything we just said is about the RTX 3060, not the RTX 3060 Ti. If you manage to upgrade to that even more elusive card, your resolution options open up significantly. While this article focuses mostly on the original 3060, we’ll reference the 3060 Ti a few times. And, to put it out there; if you have the choice between the 3060 and the 3060 Ti at MSRP, choose the upgrade. The extra $70 will be worthwhile.

Above all else, the 3060 is a 1080p GPU. You should always look at what games you play and their requirements, as well as the rest of your rig. However, for those looking to future-proof their build or game in high resolutions, you’ll have a better time waiting for an upgrade. Let’s see why and how to optimize this card.

The Champion of 1080p Gaming with RTX

For those looking to play the most modern games at good frame rates on the RTX 3060, there’s only one resolution option. 1080p became the standard monitor resolution years ago, and for good reason. It’s sharp enough to be usable at almost all screen sizes, games can hit ludicrous frame rates on it, and 1080p monitors are relatively cheap.

Compared to other cards in both the 2000 and 3000 series, the RTX 3060 is an exceptional deal for playing at 1080p. This is especially true for those interested in utilizing RTX technology for ray tracing and special effects. At only $329, it’s one of the cheapest ways to access this tech and get great performance. Across benchmarks, its performance is almost equivalent to the 2060 Super while being slightly cheaper.

Techspot’s analysis of modern games such as Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla, Watch Dogs: Legion, and Death Stranding all place this GPU around the middle of the pack at maximum settings. While this might seem like a lackluster result, it’s actually great performance for the price. Most GPUs ranking higher than the RTX 3060 are much more expensive and made for gaming at higher resolutions. Notably, the 3060 Ti breaks this mold. It’s only $70 at MSRP but consistently beats more expensive cards, even outperforming the RTX 2080.

RTX 3060 performance suffers moving up to the 1440p range. In fact, at maximum settings, it rarely even hits 60FPS on the same titles. While many gamers would be fine using the 3060 for 1440p gaming, it will not be useful for monitors with a refresh rate higher than 60Hz.

What Refresh Rate to Aim for While Gaming At 1080p

As we mentioned earlier, the exact performance you’ll get with this card depends heavily on the rest of your setup. However, assuming you don’t have a major bottleneck for your CPU, there are some general guides we can provide. Most people gaming at 1080p on the RTX 3060 will comfortably hit 120 or 144 frames per second using medium settings. If you bump that up to ultra-settings or care more about RTX, you’ll probably be closer to about 60 frames per second.

If you’re looking to upgrade your monitor, a 120 Hz monitor is a safe bet. With that said, it may not be worth upgrading specifically because of this card. Due to how long 1080p monitors have been the standard, many of them at 60 Hz refresh rates, your current setup may be more than enough.

However, for those of you who need an upgrade, consider grabbing a monitor with a higher refresh rate. We recommend splurging for the upgrade for three reasons:

1. You will likely play many games that can reach those higher frame rates
2. The monitor will be better for future upgrades to your build
3. The difference in price between a 60 Hz and 120 or 144 Hz 1080p monitor is minimal

Choosing A Higher Resolution

While the RTX 3060 performs best at a 1080p resolution, gaming at 1440p is certainly a possibility. If you’re considering leaving behind higher frame rates for graphical fidelity, you’re not making an incorrect choice. We recommend upgrading to a 3060 Ti instead if you can find one, however. It simply performs far better while gaming at 1440p than the basic 3060 can.

Consider that RTX features and ray-tracing capabilities will be limited while playing at 1440p on this card. With these effects on at a higher resolution, it’s easy for the 3060 to fall well below 40 FPS, which many people consider unplayable. Think about your personal tolerance and preferences before deciding.

Closing Thoughts

The RTX 3060 is currently one of the easiest graphics cards on the market to place. When found at MSRP, it is a respectable deal that serves all gamers who aren’t interested in upgrading to 1440p resolution just yet. Its graphical prowess will get you through all modern games and likely the next few years with no issues, even on maximum settings.

It’s not the choice for those with enormous budgets or who want to push the very edge of gaming, but it’s not supposed to be. However, there is enough zip in this to carry a few games through nice 1440p performances. As always, consider what games you play and their requirements to make your final decision. If it were us, we’d choose a 1080p resolution with a high frame rate for this card every time.

Relevant Guides

Want to read more about the RTX 3060 and its capabilities? We’ve written plenty about NVIDIA’s 3000 series and have the answers to all your questions. Check out these articles to get a head start:

• RTX 3060 vs RTX 3060 Ti: What Are the Key Differences?
• RTX 3060 Ti vs 3070 vs 3080: Benchmark Comparison (Real World Tests)
• 5 Best Monitors for the Nvidia RTX 3060 Ti
• AMD RX 6700 XT vs Nvidia RTX 3060 Ti: Which is Best?

The post What is the Optimal Monitor Resolution for RTX 3060 Builds? appeared first on PremiumBuilds.

Curved monitors seem to be taking over the market. With different screen sizes, curves, and viewing distances available, it can be hard to decide what options are right for you. Luckily, there is a standardized system of measurement which should make things easier.

Most monitor manufacturers measure the curve as a radius. This is usually expressed as “0000R”, where relevant numbers replace the zeroes. So, for example, a 1000R curved monitor means that the monitor has a radius of 1000 millimeters, or one meter.

The larger the number, the bigger the curve on the monitor. This translates to softer curves – to help, imagine the monitor wrapped around a large ball. The radius is half of the imaginary ball.

For consumers, this means that different measurements are better for different things. Let’s explore what the radius of the curve means, go over some of the more common sizes, and then decide what style is best for you.

The Radius of the Curve

As explained, curved monitors are measured as a radius. Most monitors range between 1500R and 4000R in curvature. As you might expect from the previous explanation, the higher the number, the more curved the screen. Generally speaking, larger screens will have a more drastic curve, although this does not have to be the case.

The point of any curved monitor is to provide an experience similar to our peripheral vision. By extending the monitor from a flat view into one with an arc, manufacturers reduce eye strain and make the monitor “match” our eyes.  Different curves are better at this than others, depending on monitor size and viewing distance.

Knowing the monitor’s curve lets us figure out how “aggressive” the curve is and what our viewing experience can look like. If you have ever seen a monitor that seemed too curved, it likely had a low radius, like 1500R, on a screen that was too small to support it.

Maximum viewing distance is intrinsically tied to the curve of the monitor. Whatever the radius of the curve is, you should view the screen from no more than that distance away. Let’s use a real-world example – a 1800R monitor has a radius of 1800 millimeters, or 1.8 meters. That’s roughly six feet. This means that you want to stay within six feet of the monitor whenever you use it. Otherwise, viewing the screen can become difficult due to the curve.

1000R – Matching the Human Eye

1000R screens are rare to find because of how aggressive this curve is. The most popular monitor with this curve is likely Samsung’s Odyssey Neo G9, a massive 49” ultrawide screen. Because the size is so large, getting a reasonable curve requires it to be more aggressive than normal.

Rather than trying to find monitors with a 1000R curve, use this number for reference. The field of view of the human eye is said to have a curvature rating close to 1000R (or an optimal viewing distance of about one meter). This is what our peripheral vision is, and is one of the key reasons why curved monitors can help with immersion while playing games and watching movies.

Usually, to support such a drastic curve in a monitor, you can expect these chasses to be thick and heavy. Especially if the monitor is small – for this curve, likely anything under 40” – it will extend far out onto your desk or look awkward while wall-mounted.

1800R – A Sharp Curve in The Monitor

1800R tends to be the sharpest curve you can find for most monitors on the market. While some 1500R models are available, they tend to be so dramatic that they become unusable at most available sizes. At a 1800R curve, you open up a significant number of possibilities.

Slight differences in curvature are difficult to notice; a 1800R curve compared to a 1900R to a 2000R curve will be incredibly difficult to spot. Instead, consider whether you want your curve to fall into the “sharp” category or the “subtle” category.

Sharp curves like a 1800R tend to be perfect for gaming, watching movies, and other activities where you want immersion. This is because the curve hits more of our peripheral vision, allowing us to see more of the screen and less… everything else.

Most monitors with a sharp curve will be quite large – 27” is the average minimum, but plenty of them start above 30”. This is common across the board for curved monitors, as they can quickly get unwieldy and uncomfortable for small screens.

If you do more productive work or are searching for a monitor for your home office, consider a more subtle curve. How much of an effect they will have depends on your work, but severe curves can alter the appearance of straight lines or video and photo effects. Unless you are looking to get immersed in a fantasy world or racetrack, choosing a radius larger than 1800R is a good idea.

3800R – A Subtle Curve

3800R curves are a subtle step up from flat monitors. They can help with focus and immersion without creating a dramatically different experience than what you’re used to. Notably, they are available at almost all monitor sizes, although they are still most popular above 30”. One example is this monitor from Samsung, a 34” 3800R monitor focused on providing a nice business experience.

Softer curves like a 3800R allow for multiple monitors, a slimmer profile, and easy wall-mounting. The more subtle look and general stability of a longer curve is the biggest difference between this and other curves. They are also more useful for people who need longer viewing distances; with a 1800R curve, it is hard to show others what you are working on and get feedback. A 3800R curve makes it easy.

Of course, this does not mean that a subtle curve makes the monitor worse for gaming. They are still available with all the bells and whistles like low response time, high refresh rate, and great color accuracy.  While competitive players will probably want a more aggressive curve, casual gamers will find a 3800R to be more than enough.

What Style Is Best for You

There is no one style that works best for everyone, regardless of what they do at their computer. You may enjoy a dramatic curve even while working on spreadsheets, while others may find that it is too different an experience to continue with.

In general, however, those looking for a monitor for gaming will benefit from a more aggressive radius. Look for something between 1500R and 2400R and remember that the higher the number, the more subtle the curve.

Those looking for a monitor for work may want a less drastic option that allows them to view things without distortion or still use multiple screens.

Regardless of your choice, it is always a better idea to focus on other monitor aspects first. Things like refresh rate, color accuracy, and resolution have a larger impact on your experience. And, of course, monitor size – different curves perform well at different monitor sizes. While not always true, larger monitors can have more aggressive curves without causing issues.

Relevant Guides

Interested in checking out more curved monitors? Take a look at some of our articles comparing different options to see which one is best for you:

• Alienware AW3821DW vs LG 38GN950: Battle of the Ultrawide IPS Monitors
• 6 Best 1440p 240Hz Monitors for 2021
• Samsung Odyssey Neo G9 vs Odyssey G9: What are the Key Differences?
• Dell AW3821DW vs AW3420DW: What are the Key Differences?

The post Comparing Different Monitor Curvatures: 1000R vs 1800R vs 3800R appeared first on PremiumBuilds.

Samsung’s been an innovator in the monitor sphere for years now, pushing the boundaries of both professional and gaming monitors. Offering monitors across the spectrum of budgets, their best work comes at the high-end. While offering some of the most expensive monitors we’ve ever seen, Samsung’s also pushed gaming monitors to new heights. This was true of the original Odyssey G9, and the new Odyssey Neo G9 continues the tradition. Both monitors feature an incredible 49”, 5K ultrawide screen with everything a gamer could need. 240Hz refresh rate, 1ms response time, plenty of connection points, picture-by-picture – both offerings are simply top of the line. So, what are the differences between the two?

The first and most notable difference between these screens is their LED structure. The newer Odyssey Neo G9 is a Quantum Mini-LED monitor. As the newest monitor change on the block, mini-LED technology has received plenty of hype in the past, and it generally lives up to it. Featuring massively better contrast ratios, absolutely no backlight bleed, and better HDR, it offers one of the most significant changes to panels since QLED. Speaking of – the original Odyssey G9 utilizes this slightly older QLED technology for its massive panel. To make it clear, it’s not that this technology is bad. By all accounts and metrics, the G9 is still a cutting-edge monitor. The release of the Neo G9 could easily be thought of as Samsung simply flexing its technological muscles.

Neither of these monitors offers any compromise, and they are certainly not budget options. In fact, they are two of the most expensive monitors on the market, both retailing at $2500. The price of the Odyssey G9 has decreased slightly due to the release of the Neo G9, but it will still run consumers over $2,000. So what justifies the extravagant price tag? And, more importantly, does the release of the Samsun Odyssey Neo G9 make the Odyssey G9 defunct?

Specification Comparison

Monitor	Odyssey G9	Odyssey Neo G9
Design
Panel Type	QLED 1000R Curve	Mini-LED 1000R Curve
Response Time	1ms	1ms
Refresh Rate	240Hz	240Hz
Static Contrast	1900-04-13 04:01:00	1,000,000:1
Brightness	420 cd/m2	420 cd/m2
Resolution	5120 x 1440	5120 x 1440
Screen Size	49”	49”
Adaptive Syncing	NVIDIA G-Sync, FreeSync Premium Pro	NVIDIA G-Sync, FreeSync Premium Pro
Price	$2499	$2499

1. Samsung Odyssey G9

The original Odyssey G9 was Samsung’s first foray into combining their professional and gaming monitor’s technology into one, beautiful package. They succeeded, putting forward an incredible 49” screen packed with just about every feature someone could think of. The QLED panel gets bright, features a 5K resolution, 240Hz refresh rate, and 1ms response time. Putting together a rig that can take full advantage of this screen is already a monumental task, so the extra $2500 might not make much of a dent.

One of the only weak points on this monitor is the contrast ratio. With a static contrast ratio of 2500:1, it offers fine functionality, but plenty of room for improvement. Users largely report that this is noticeable during scenes or games with deep blacks or lots of shadows. While the peak brightness of 1,000 can help with some of the problems, it’s not the optimal solution, and certainly not usable long-term. The other detriment is backlight bleed. Backlight bleed is when an LED or QLED panel “leaks” light from the sides due to uneven lighting. While not present on every model of the Odyssey G9, it is a common complaint among buyers that feels cheap given the hefty price tag.

There’s no gamer out there who could complain about the speed of this monitor, however. It’s rare to find 4K panels featuring 1ms response times and 240Hz refresh rates; the Odyssey G9 offers both in 5K. The 5k resolution is equal to running two 1440p monitors side-by-side. The panel is also NVIDIA G-Sync and AMD FreeSync Premium Pro certified for buttery smooth frames regardless of your GPU manufacturer.

Everything Else

The 1000R curvature is significant, but not overbearing. This is likely due to the size of the monitor; on a smaller screen, the dramatic curve could easily be too much. Instead, it works to draw your eyes in and immerse you in the gameplay. Alternatively, the screen easily splits into the equivalent of three normal-sized panels. This makes it great for working or playing games while catching up on some Netflix at the same time (or all three!). Samsung’s also included picture-by-picture and picture-in-picture, allowing you to show two different sources at once.

Port selection is more than enough to make the screen serve as the hub of an entertainment center. 2x Display Ports, 1x HDMI, 1x USB Hub, and 2x USB Ports. It also includes a 100 x 100 mount option for taking it off the stand and clearing up some desk space.

Samsung includes what they call Infinity Lighting, an LED ring on the back of the monitor. You can change the color in the monitor’s settings or turn it off if RGB isn’t your style. Core Sync, a lighting module on the back of the monitor.

2. Samsung Odyssey Neo G9

The Samsung Odyssey Neo G9 seeks to improve on everything the original Odyssey G9 introduced. Almost everything remains the same, besides one key feature. As mentioned before, the biggest difference between the two monitors is the new mini-LED panel on the Neo. Among other things, it dramatically improves the contrast ratio and solves the problem of the backlight bleeding that was common in the original.

The static contrast ratio on the Neo G9 is 1,000,000:1. To note how much of an improvement that is over the original, its static contrast ratio is 2500:1. Deep blacks and proper color notes are basically guaranteed on this monitor. The sharp increase in contrast is thanks to the mini-LED technology, which changes the way that the LCD screen is lit. Because the LEDs are mini, more of them fit, giving the monitor more control over how bright it can get. This translates to brighter highs and darker lows while simultaneously fixing the backlighting problem.

Notably, better backlighting from mini-LEDs also improves HDR on the monitor. Samsung’s Quantum HDR2000 utilizes the new brightness to improve colors while retaining the 240Hz refresh rate and 1ms response time. In a market with plenty of HDR options that disable the advanced gaming features, it is a fantastic upgrade that does upgrade the feel of using the display.

Most other parts of the Neo G9 resemble the original. The connection ports have been slightly upgraded to include a headphone jack, and the Infinity Lighting system can now sync with your monitor to match the action. A feature called Auto Source Switch+ automatically detects when new devices connect and switches input, letting you get right into the action quicker. It’s a nice upgrade for certain users, but certainly not the star of the show.

Perhaps what’s most impressive about the Neo G9 is that it retails for the same price as the original Odyssey G9. Mini-LED technology is relatively cheap to produce, so Samsung was able to keep the same price point while upgrading the small issues with the original. This is fantastic news for consumers now and in the future when mini-LED technology becomes more common.

Final Verdict – Samsung Odyssey Neo G9

The Odyssey Neo G9 offers a rare strict upgrade over the Odyssey G9. Taking a flagship monitor and improving the only complaints people had about it and releasing it for the same price is a notable move for a company of Samsung’s size, and it should be commended. It would likely have been easy for them to increase the price even further and claim the monitor as part of the future. Instead, they left it at the exact same MSRP, leaving only one question behind: what happens to the original Odyssey G9 now?

Truthfully, I expect the Odyssey G9 to fall out of production and stock quickly. Unless we see dramatic price drops, there seems to be simply no reason to choose it over the Neo. While some drops have already started, the monitors are still within a few hundred dollars of each other. That’s notable at lower price points, but users will end up paying at least $2,200 anyway – is far better contrast and no backlight bleed worth the difference? For most users, the answer is a resounding yes.

With that said, if the price of the Odyssey G9 drops below $2,000, there is certainly a conversation to be had there. It is still a blazing fast monitor that offers incredible specs, after all. The only reason it’s not at the top of most lists of the best monitor anymore is the release of the Neo G9. Keep an eye out for deals if you’re in the market for a massive workstation replacement.

Relevant Guides

Want to see how the Samsung Neo Odyssey G9 lines up against other great ultrawide monitors? We’ve got you covered with comparisons between other heavyweight contenders:

• LG 34GK950F vs Dell AW3418DW: Which Ultrawide Monitor is Best?
• Alienware AW3821DW vs LG 38GN950: Battle of the Ultrawide IPS Monitors
• Dell AW3821DW vs AW3420DW: What are the Key Differences?
• Acer Predator X35 vs Asus PG35VQ: Battle of the 35″ Ultrawides

The post Samsung Odyssey Neo G9 vs Odyssey G9: What are the Key Differences? appeared first on PremiumBuilds.

Asus has been a mainstay in the competitive gaming market for quite some time, especially when it comes to budget-friendly gaming monitors. Their vast lineup of options delivers feature-rich displays that can give gamers a smooth experience and even a competitive edge when it comes to esports titles.

In this comparison guide, I’ll be taking a look at two similar displays from Asus’s line of TUF gaming displays: the VG27AQ and the VG27BQ. Despite only having one letter different in their product name, there are a few key differences that set these two displays apart. Sitting at the higher-end price bracket of enthusiast-level gaming monitors, these monitors are feature-rich and cover most of the options that gamers look for.

Specifications

Monitor	Asus VG27AQ	Asus VG27BQ
Design
Panel	27” IPS	27” IPS
Response Time	1ms	0.4ms
Refresh Rate	165Hz	165Hz
Brightness	350 Nits	350 Nits
Resolution	2560x1440	2560x1440
Connectivity	2x HDMI 2.0, 1x DisplayPort 1.2	2x HDMI 2.0, 1x DisplayPort 1.2
MSRP	$409	$379.99
Availability	Amazon.com	Amazon.com

Appearance & Stand – Tie

Both monitors sport identical matte black designs with a red ring accent on the bottom of the stand as well as a thin bezel design all the way around the display. Additionally, both monitors feature an ergonomic stand that can pivot and tilt past 60-degrees and features a height adjustment slider. It’s very easy to adjust both monitors to the viewing height and angle that will suit your configuration. 

Each stand has a notch for running cables through to ensure a clean and clear desk space. Users can pop the adjustable stand off of either display to gain access to standard 100x100mm VESA mounting holes that are compatible with most arm mounts. With identical aesthetics and designs, we’ll need to take a deeper look at the internal features to see what sets these two monitors apart.

 Resolution, Panel Type, Refresh Rate, & Peak Brightness –  Asus VG27BQ

The Asus VG27AQ and Asus VG27BQ are both 2560×1440 27-inch LED-backlit IPS panels with anti-glare matte finishes. With both having a high peak brightness of 350 nits, gaming and working on either display will be convenient and easy even in the brightest rooms. 

Asus boasts a refresh rate overclockable to upwards of 165Hz out of the box. If you’re unsure about overclocking your monitor, it is quite easy and accessible to do. You can check out our guide on overclocking hardware right here. 

Response time is where the Asus VG27BQ ekes out ahead with a staggeringly fast response time of 0.4ms. The Asus VG27AQ is still lighting-fast with a response time of just 1ms, but Asus kicked things up a notch with the “B” edition of this monitor to deliver even lower latency. That difference may be slight; However, competitive gamers will be pleased to have that additional competitive edge in fast-paced competitive titles.

Colors & Premium Features – Tie

The identical features continue into the color accuracy and coverage of these displays with both hitting 100% of the SRGB space and covering a total of 16.7 million display colors. The pair of monitors both have 1000:1 contrast ratios as well as dark “Shadow Boost” technology that makes blacks more realistic and immersive. Additionally, both monitors boast flicker-free technology, multi-HDR modes/HDR10, low motion blur, as well as adaptive-sync. All of these features are packed together to give gamers the smoothest, highest quality gaming experience possible.

Connectivity – Tie

The Asus VG27AQ and Asus VG27BQ sport identical connectivity options with 2 HDMI 2.0 ports and a single DisplayPort 1.2. With these many premium features and a higher price point than other monitors of the same caliber, USB ports would have been a welcome addition. Unfortunately, users will have to go up in price or side-step to another brand to get a more robust I/O.

Price – Asus VG27BQ

With the slightly more robust feature set and faster response times, I expected the Asus VG27BQ to be the more premium option. Surprisingly, it comes in at $20-$30 less than its predecessor at an MSRP of right around $379.00. Meanwhile, the “A” variety of this monitor will run users $409.00. At a price point under $400, the Asus VG27BQ comes in as one of the best value 27-inch 1440p competitive gaming monitors on the market.

Verdict – Asus VG27BQ

Both monitors excel in terms of response time, viewing angles, color accuracy, and are packed with sought-after gaming features that users will enjoy. It’s a close call, which makes sense since these two displays are nearly identical in build quality and performance. But the Asus VG27BQ inches ahead as the better option out of the two due to its slightly faster response time and lower price point. Keep an eye out on sales, as these two monitors can often be seen swapping price points with one sometimes being lower than the other. Either one will be a solid addition or upgrade to your gaming station. For ideas as to what sort of PC you can pair with this monitor, take a peek at our extensive PC build guide with budget-focused tiers!

The post Asus VG27AQ vs Asus VG27BQ: What are the Key Differences? appeared first on PremiumBuilds.

LG is one of the leading manufacturers in the gaming monitor scene, and for good reason. Their entries into the space in recent years have perfectly blended power, performance, and price, hitting right where the average consumer want them to. Two of their most popular models are the 27GL850-B and 27GN850-B – 1440p IPS panel monitors with a variety of features to boot.

The two monitors are large, 27” IPS screens with QHD resolutions. Made and marketed toward gamers, they have all the common features you could expect from a modern gaming monitor, including high refresh rate and low response time. Technically speaking, the 27GN850-B is a slightly newer offering than the 27GL850-B. However, they work best in tandem. They share a striking number of technical aspects, with the main differences between the two being in connectivity and color coverage.

One of the only issues with these monitors is sourcing one; while they are both listed and available on Amazon and other major retailers, stock tends to sell out quickly. Especially if there is any sort of sale going on, try to beat others to the punch and make your purchase if you have decided to get one. Thankfully, both monitors are reasonably priced for around $400. Let’s examine what few differences there are between these monitors to help inform your decision.

Specifications

Monitor	27GL850-B	27GN850-B
Design
Panel	27” Nano IPS	27” Nano IPS
Response Time	1ms	1ms
Refresh Rate	144Hz	144Hz
Brightness	350 cd/m2 (Typical)	350 cd/m2 (Typical)
Resolution	2560 x 1440	2560 x 1440
Connections	2x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort, 1x Headphone Out, 2x USB Down-Stream, 1x USB Up-Stream	2x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort, 1x Headphone Out
Adaptive Syncing	Adaptive-Sync, NVIDIA G-Sync Compatible	AMD FreeSync, NVIDIA G-Sync Compatible, FreeSync

Appearance – 27GL850-B

The first area where these monitors differ slightly is in appearance. While both offer the well-known, sharp-edged gamer look common among monitors, the 27GL850-B is slightly more subdued. Red accents are common throughout both monitors – the key difference is that the 27GL850-B leaves the accent color in the back.

Most differences are found only in the stands. If you plan on mounting the monitor using the included 100×100 VESA brackets, you will almost certainly not notice any difference. However, people planning on leaving the monitor on the desk should consider whether they want any red accent showing on the base.

Other than the sharp-edged stand, both monitors share a clean and simple look. Bezels are thin across the board, with an almost frameless design across all but the bottom edge. Notably, the included stand on the 27GN850-B is much thicker than the 27GL850-B. The 27GL850-B is only 6.5” thick on the stand – meanwhile, the 27GN850 is 12.7” deep.

Resolution – Tie

Both monitors share a crisp QHD Wide resolution. While some may prefer a 4K option (you can see our list of some of the best 4K monitors here), the 1440p screen is still sharp and beautiful on both 27” screens. For modern gaming, this resolution is a nice compromise. While updated hardware is still required, you do not need a top-of-the-line graphics card to take advantage of the native resolution while hitting a high refresh rate.

Both the 27GL850 and 27GN850 use a Nano IPS display of equal quality. LG introduced the technology with the 27GL850. Put simply, the Nanotechnology improves the response time and image quality of IPS panels by including a layer of nanotechnology on the backlight. This reduces bleed and sharpens colors, making a noticeable difference when compared to a non-nano screen.

Response Time & Refresh Rate – Tie

As expected of a modern gaming monitor, both monitors support extremely fast response times and high refresh rates. A 1ms gray-to-gray response time is standard on both panels alongside a 144Hz refresh rate. While higher refresh rate monitors are becoming more common – more 240Hz options exist now than ever before – most gamers will be more than happy with 144Hz. This is especially true given the higher 1440p resolution, where it is harder to hit consistent high frames per second.

Thanks to LG’s proprietary motion blur reduction technology, along with some other options, users also have the option to slightly alter response times. This is all done through the monitor’s on-screen menu, with both screens featuring options such as “normal”, “fast”, and “faster”. Generally, the faster modes introduce significant motion blur and are likely not worth the trade-off for most users. Regardless of mode, the response time and refresh rates are incredible on both monitors.

Contrast – 27GN850-B

Contrast ratio and brightness are two categories that both monitors sadly fall short in. While the advertised ratios are respectable, plenty of real-world testing and monitor comparisons have provided some disappointing results. While the monitors are still great options, contrast is a major failing of the panel. If you work in a bright room or consistently see changing light around you, it may be best to consider other options.

Both monitors advertise a contrast ratio of 1000:1 under typical conditions with a minimum of 700:1. On paper, this category should be another tie – however, the previously mentioned tests prove the 27GN850-B to fair slightly better in this category. RTINGS conducts heavy contrast testing from black to white across a variety of monitors. In real world conditions, they found that the 27GL850-B has a native contrast ratio of 735:1 – an extraordinarily low number. The 27GN850-B faired slightly better in testing at 852:1, but still may not be enough for some users.

Some variation is expected between units, but numbers this far below advertising speak to a larger issue with the panel. IPS panels have traditionally struggled with contrast, and LG clearly focused on other specs of this screen. Do not expect great contrast performance from either.

Colors – 27GN850-B

After some necessary post calibration, these two monitors are some of the best options available for color accuracy and gamut. Out of the box, they both struggle with correctly displaying blue tints, and the provided picture modes are nothing special. With that said, most users will not have any issues with the immediate options but taking some time to properly calibrate is a good idea. With no calibration, the 27GN850-B slightly edges out the 27GL850-B.

After calibration top balance out gamma settings and color temperature, both monitors boast upwards of 99.6% sRGB color accuracy. Adobe RGB has 84.2% color accuracy on the 27GL850-B and 88.8% on the 27GN850-B as well, making both monitors perfect for people switching between gaming and content creation.

HDR support is standard on both screens and shares the same technology and color boosting technology. While this mode can cause some issues otherwise with response time and refresh rate, it is a welcome boost for watching movies or generally consuming media.

Given the slight boost it has to out-of-the-box accuracy and Adobe RGB, the 27GN850-B edges out this category. With that said, almost nobody will notice any difference between the two here – they are some of the best around.  

Connectivity – 27GL850-B

This is a simple and clear win for the 27GL850-B, as it includes a USB hub that was cut with the newer release. Outside of these three USB ports – 2x downstream and 1x upstream – connectivity is a mirror image. Both include 2x HDMI ports and 1x DisplayPort. If USB connectivity is not a major concern of yours and prices are similar, this category becomes personal choice yet again.

The choice to leave behind a USB hub instead of expanding to include USB Type-C is a strange one but was likely done to cut down on costs. Given how similar the monitors are in almost every other category, this could become a reason why someone chooses the slightly older 27GL850 over the newer model.

Final Verdict – 27GL850-B

Given the two monitor’s similar prices and across the board statistics, either choice is a valid one. With that said, the smaller footprint, more subdued aesthetics, and increased connectivity of the 27GL850-B make it a more versatile option for the average buyer. If there is a significant price difference between the two and you are not attached to any of the above, however, choosing the 27GN850-B can become the better option.

The biggest win the 27GN850-B has is in color accuracy, and the difference is so minor that few people are likely to notice. Especially for gamers – the primary market of these screens – all the important categories are ties. We recommend looking for a nice deal on either (or even finding one available) and pulling the trigger if connectivity is not a major concern of yours. Both retail for around $400 currently, with an MSRP of $500, making them even easier purchases.

Relevant Guides

Looking for more information on LG’s 27GL850-B? We’ve compared it to several other monitors from different manufacturers so you can get a complete picture:

• Dell S2721DGF vs LG 27GL850-B: Which is Best Value?
• ASUS TUF Gaming VG27AQ vs LG 27GL850-B: Which is Best?
• Samsung Odyssey G7 vs LG 27GL850: Which is Best Value?

The post LG 27GL850-B vs 27GN850-B: What are the Differences? appeared first on PremiumBuilds.

Despite the release of new-generation GPUs – from both AMD and Nvidia – that are capable of processing 1440p and 4K resolutions at high refresh rates, Full HD 1080p monitors are still as popular as ever, especially for competitive gamers. And though having a higher resolution does add a more pleasant visual elements to triple-A gaming, browsing, and watching movies, aesthetics always take the back seat when it comes competitive online multiplayer titles, where practicality is far more important. Maintaining high refresh rates together with low input lag is paramount in ensuring that one’s chances to victory or not hindered by any external (to the game) factors.

This is also why TN monitors were almost exclusively used by competitive gamers and tournament organizers alike, as these panels are known to display the least amount of input lag, and have some of the fastest response times when compared to their early IPS or VA counterparts. However, as monitor technology has advanced, these shortcomings have been expiated to a considerable degree with the release of fast IPS, SS IPS, and SVA panels. 

One such example of the upgrade from TN to IPS can be found in Dell’s Alienware AW2518HF, and its successor: the AW2521HF. But, the question is, does this new monitor display the same excellent gaming qualities found in its predecessor, or is it just an attempt to capitalize on this new shift to more modern – and typically more expensive – IPS panels? Should TN monitors be sought after no matter what their current price, or are they unworthy of the adulation they receive? Let’s compare these two Alienware variants in-depth, in order to determine what type of upgrade Dell has provided with this new monitor, and, in turn, reach a verdict on which model is better worth the investment for its intended market: competitive gamers.

Specifications

Appearance – TIE

Staying true to the external design one can expect from Alienware monitors, both these variants have the sleek, modern, and simplistic shape that the brand is known for. The slightly older model, the AW2518HF, is a somewhat bulkier than the AW2521HF, but equally stylish nonetheless. It has a tripod stand, an all gray matte anti-glare coating, and three LED-illuminated bars, as well as an Alienware logo, on the top-right corner of the backside of the screen; which can be customized to your liking via the Dell’s AlienFX software. Not to be outdone by its predecessor, the AW2521HF also has an RGB lighting zone, in the form of an accent on the backside of the bi-pod stand, as well as the standard Alienware logo on the same top-right corner.

The borders on both these monitors are rather thin, at 5 mm for the AW2518HF and 7 mm for the AW2521HF, making them excellent options for multi-monitor setups. Of course, it must be mentioned that their respective stands are quite thick, so they do require a decent amount of desk space.

All in all, both monitors look great and can be used in any setting – whether it be a bedroom or an office.

Resolution & Refresh Rate – TIE

Since both AW25HF options have identical resolutions (1920 x 1080) and refresh rates (240 Hz), neither model holds an advantage in this category. However, it must be mentioned that in order to run games at such high framerates – even at a FHD resolution – one will need some of the best PC hardware the market has to offer. When tested by Techspot, the highest performing 1080p GPU was found to be AMD’s $999 Radeon RX 6900 XT, which averaged 207 FPS for 18 different titles. Even Nvidia’s popular high mid-end option, the GeForce RTX 3080, was only able to average 186 FPS in these benchmarks. Of course, these metrics represent an average, so there will be games that reach well above the 240 FPS mark; though these will be less-demanding competitive online multiplayer titles, rather than single player triple-A games.  

Display – Dell Alienware AW2521HF

One of the specifications where the IPS panel outshines most of its competition – including that of its TN counterpart – are its viewing angles. TN panels are mostly meant to be viewed from the front, and the Dell AW2518HF is no exception. It has poor vertical – and even horizontal – viewing angles, which is typical for its panel type. On the other hand, the Dell AW2521HF, with its IPS panel, only begins to display a color washout at a 45 degree horizontal angle (either left or right), while colors  begin to shift at the 57 to 58 degree mark. Similarly, black level raises are noticed at a high, 70 degree angle from either direction. Its vertical viewing angle is not as impressive, as color washout begins within a 31 degree angle (from above or below), and color shift begins from 39 to 42 degrees (black level raise is identical for both vertical and horizontal angles). Gamma shift from above and below begins at 32 degrees, while from the left and right directions it is noticeable at 58 and 57 degrees respectively.

Neither of these Alienware models have screen curvature, but the AW2518HF is not ideal for sharing, which is an issue that the AW2521HF ignores completely.

Contrast & Brightness – TIE

We can’t expect much from either IPS or TN panels when it comes to contrast ratios, and neither of these competing options is an exception to the norm. The Dell AW2518HF was measured to have a static contrast ratio of 948,5 to one by Tom’s Hardware, while Rtings.com measured the AW2521HF to have a native contrast of 1,198 to one. Of course, a 20% contrast ratio may seem like a substantial upgrade, but in reality these metrics vary between units, and are within the same 1,000 to one range of their advertised specifications. A mediocre static contrast ratio means black colors may look more like gray, especially in darker environments; which is something to be expected when purchasing either of these monitors.

Also of equal caliber are the peak brightness levels that these Alienware variants are capable of. Though neither of the two support HDR, both exhibit an impressively high SDR peak brightness level that exceed 400 nits. According to Tom’s Hardware the AW2518HF was able to reach a peak brightness level of 418.6 cd/m², while according to Rtings.com the AW2521HF exhibited an SDR Real Scene peak brightness level of 406 cd/m².

Color Range – Dell AW2521HF

Another inherent advantage of IPS monitors is their superior color saturation and larger color gamut, which becomes apparent when they are compared to TN panels. This commonality proves to be true in this comparison as well, as we see the Dell AW2521HF outperform the AW2518HF in the Adobe RGB 1998 color gamut by a significant margin. That being said, the latter model does hold its own in regard to the sRGB color space, with Tom’s Hardware claiming it was able to reproduce 99.78% of the sRGB color spectrum, but only 68.42% of the Adobe RGB color space. On the other hand, when measuring the Dell AW2521HF, Rtings.com found it to be able to reproduce 97.7% of the sRGB xy color space (on CIE 1931 xy), and 75.21% of the Adobe RGB xy color spectrum (80.4% in lCtCp). Though its advantage is not of the magnitude one would expect for the typical panel properties, it still does give itself the edge over the Dell AW2518HF.

Response Time & Input Lag – TIE 

Where the TN panel shines, is its low response times and input lag. However, in this case (surprisingly enough), the IPS panel of the AW2521HF actually performs on an almost equal level to the TN panel of the AW2518HF. 

Firstly, for full black to white transition times, it took the AW2518HF just 6 ms to respond, and not far behind was the AW2521HF which took 6.4 ms at its default overdrive setting (Fast). These measurements are taken using the monitors’ native refresh rate, since at 60 Hz the response times (and input lag) do increase. To be more specific for the AW2521HF, the total response times increases to 10.4 ms – which is still an excellent result.

When responding to an input, the AW2518HF was measured (by Tom’s Hardware) to have an absolute (end-to-end) input lag of just 19 ms, which is incredibly low. Similarly low were the tests carried out for the AW2521HF (by Rtings.com) that was found to have 2.7 ms of input lag (not absolute) at its native resolution and refresh rate, increasing to 3.1 ms with VRR enabled, 9.7 ms at 60 Hz, and 12.7 ms at 60 Hz with VRR enabled. 

Whether it be for competitive gaming on an enthusiast, or professional level, these monitors are both suitable for even the highest competitive standards.

Ergonomics & Power Consumption – TIE

Another nearly identical aspect of these two monitors is their ergonomic versatility. They both have a removable stand and can be mounted via a standard VESA mounting interface of 100 x 100 mm, though, if the monitors are left on their stand, they can have their height adjusted by up to 130 mm, they can pivot (clockwise and counterclockwise) by 90 degrees, they can swivel (left and right) by 20 degrees, and they can tilt forwards by 5 degrees and backwards by 25 degrees (AW2518HF) or 21 degrees (AW2521HF).

Also similar are their power demands, with the AW2518HF consuming 26 W on average (73 W maximum), while the AW2521HF fares slightly better at a 24 W average power consumption (72 W maximum); meaning an estimated 55.52 kWh of annual energy expenditure.

Connectivity & Features – TIE

Other than display connectivity, modern gaming monitors are also equipped with USB ports, used for plugging peripherals directly to the screen, thus saving ports from the PC and relieving some of the resulting cable clutter. In this regard, both monitors fare equally well, as both include a total of five USB 3.0 ports: four downstream and one upstream. Display and audio connectivity are also the same for these two variants, as they carry two HDMI 2.0, and one DisplayPort 1.2 sockets, as well as one 3.5 mm audio in and one 3.5 mm audio out jacks.

In terms of features, we have VRR, in the form of native AMD FreeSync support and Nvidia G-Sync certified compatibility, an on-screen timer, and fps counter, and display alignment (which helps when setting up a multi-monitor setup) for both options.

Verdict

After a thorough analysis of the two Alienware monitors in all aspects relating to a monitor’s performance, we see that they are surprisingly similar – despite the relative upgrade from a TN to an IPS panel. These upgrades for the Dell AW2521HF include having better viewing angles, and a slightly larger (and more accurate) color volume. Other than that, they perform on an almost equal level. In other words, the IPS panel seems to attain all the same positive qualities of its TN counterpart – like quick response times and low input lag – while adding the aforementioned advantages.   

Of course, one can argue that  these advantages are very minor for what should be an upgraded model, but given that the Dell AW2521HF launched with a 20% lower suggested retail price than the Dell AW2518HF, these upgrades are rather nice.

But, is there any reason to purchase the Dell AW2518HF at its current price, given that it costs $230 (67%) more than the DellAW2521HF? Surely not for any practical reasons, but a collector might want to attain what is possibly one of the best TN monitors to have ever been released, now that TN panels are slowly becoming obsolete.

The post Dell Alienware AW2518HF vs AW2521HF: What Are The Differences? appeared first on PremiumBuilds.

Visuals are crucial for the gaming experience, and today there are hundreds if not thousands of gaming monitors on the market.  They might not only differ in resolution, or physical size, or refresh rate, but also in more fundamental ways. When it comes to gaming monitors, manufacturers tend to use one of these three distinct types of panel technologies: twisted nematic (TN), in-plane switching (IPS), and vertical alignment (VA). Each one has its strengths and weaknesses for gaming.

TN

TN monitors have been around for some time, and consequently they are usually the cheapest monitors on the market. Though this technology is old, it is legendary for amazingly low pixel response times, which is the amount of time required for a pixel to update its color, usually measured in milliseconds. At one point, only TN panels were able to deliver response times lower than 1 ms and refresh rates at 240 Hz. Although TN is no longer the leader in refresh rate, it is still a leader in response times.

To put that in perspective, at 60 FPS, the average amount of time between each frame is 16.6 (repeating of course) ms. At 120 FPS, it’s 8.3 ms, and at 240 FPS it’s just about 4 ms. At 1000 FPS, it takes 1 ms to create a new frame. Of course, sub 1 ms response times are technically overkill when TN panels can only refresh the display every 4 ms or so (this is the 240Hz refresh rate), but it significantly reduces or completely eliminates ghosting. For those unaware, ghosting is a visual artefact which occurs when pixels fail to update quickly enough, causing old colors to stick around like a ghost. This results in a smearing effect as multiple frames, new and old, are blended together.

 However, TN’s fatal flaws are in color and viewing angles. The best TN panels can only cover about 100% of the sRGB color gamut, which is mediocre these days. Though, TN does make up some ground in darker scenes because, well, black is the absence of color, so a narrow gamut doesn’t matter as much. Viewing angles are also bad; most TN panels will look horrible unless viewed more or less head on.

The best TN gaming monitor will have a refresh rate of 240Hz, sub 1 ms response times, very poor colors, and very narrow viewing angles, and it’ll typically be one of the cheaper options on the market.

IPS

IPS is a much more recent technology and it is almost the polar opposite of TN. Whereas TN is best known for response times, IPS has become synonymous with good colors and wide viewing angles, thus making it one of the most used technologies for mobile devices like phones and commercially oriented displays (for instance those used advertisements in a mall).

IPS displays can reach the color gamut of DCI-P3, which is a bit overkill for gamers but ideal for professionals; more consumer oriented displays can easily reach sRGB’s gamut and beyond. Viewing angles are so wide that IPS displays look fine from almost any angle. IPS succeeds where TN fails.

However, IPS also has the exact opposite weaknesses of TN; the technology suffers from poorer pixel response times and has poorer detail in darker scenes. Top end IPS displays have been able to match TN’s 1 ms pixel response times, but other displays can have higher response times, sometimes significantly so. For example, the display ASUS used for its last generation G14 (a bonafide gaming laptop) had about a 33 ms response time, which could result in smearing starting at just 30 FPS. IPS panels also struggle to discern slightly different levels of darkness, so detail is lost in darker scenes.

IPS has recently overtaken TN in one key area: refresh rate. TN for a long time was the only technology which could reach 240Hz, but last year companies like Acer were able to finally launch 240Hz IPS monitors. But before those monitors even released, Nvidia and ASUS had already announced they would have a 360Hz IPS display launched by the end of the year. IPS is actually the best technology for refresh rates, not TN.

The best IPS based gaming monitor will have a refresh rate of 360Hz, sub 1 ms response times, good or great colors, and wide viewing angles. However, it will also command a high price.

VA

You might not have heard of VA, because it is a fairly niche panel technology. The technology itself is about as old as TN but it hasn’t enjoyed the same levels of popularity. For gaming, it is often considered a middle ground between TN and IPS; monitors using VA tend to be competent enough in response time, color gamut, and refresh rate.

VA panels cap out at around 90% of the DCI-P3 gamut, but this is adequate for gaming as it’s well above sRGB. Furthermore, details in darker scenes are better preserved compared to IPS. Viewing angles are decent and better than TN, though not quite as good as IPS. However, more extreme angles can cause loss in saturation level, which could be fairly noticeable. Some VA monitors reach sub 1 ms response times, but just like IPS, there will be models which do not perform nearly as well. Unfortunately, just like TN, VA is stuck at 240Hz.

The best VA gaming monitor will have a refresh rate of 240Hz, sub 1 ms response times, decent or good colors, and wide viewing angles. However, not too many VA monitors are on the market, so your choices are more limited compared to TN and IPS.

Sources:

1. “How to Choose Between TN, VA, and IPS Panels for the Games You Play”, BenQ.
2. “The Evolution of VA Panels”, AOC.
3. “IPS”, LG.
4. “IPS monitors have finally reached the coveted 1ms response time”, PCGamer.
5. “NVIDIA unveils a 360Hz ‘world’s fastest’ esports display”, Engadget.

The post TN vs IPS vs VA: Which Panel Type is the Best for Gaming? appeared first on PremiumBuilds.

Finishing off a nice PC with an equally fantastic high-end monitor is an essential step in completing the tech package. Preparing for the future inevitably means choosing a monitor with a 4K resolution, often at a large size perfect for a variety of tasks. 32” monitors are a sweet spot for single monitor setups, where there is enough screen real estate for almost any task without taking up too much room on the desk.

Plus, at 32”, a 4K resolution makes the most sense. Even a 1440p monitor may look blurry and have low pixel density up close at the 32” size. Upgrading to 4K assures that the monitor will serve you well for years to come. Of course, this means that some good hardware specs are required in the computer. Especially for 4K gaming, a multi-GPU setup or a nice card like a 2070 Super is basically a requirement. Finding a monitor at 32” and 4K resolution with a refresh rate over 60Hz is almost impossible; that is important to consider for FPS or competitive gamers. While you will see significant gains in resolution, some quickness will suffer.

With that said, most 32” 4K monitors are great for multi-tasking, gorgeous gaming, and screen viewing. Let’s take a look at the best 32” 4K monitors on the market now to compare 2021’s options.

Buying Guide

There are a few categories to consider when looking at 32” 4K monitors. Given the requirements for resolution and size, however, some other options quickly become limited. In general, while shopping for a monitor, it is important to consider panel type, budget, and features. Most 32” 4K monitors share similar refresh rates, contrast, and brightness; as these areas only see minor changes, it is best to think of other reasons why one may be better than another.

Panel type changes can directly influence colors, viewing angles, and general image performance. Monitors fall into one of three main categories: TN panels, IPS panels, and VA panels. At 4K 32”, most panels are TN, though IPS panels are gaining popularity. VA technology is generally reserved for larger screens like televisions, although not always. IPS panels often feature great responsiveness, something new to the tech. However, they also tend to feature less contrast than TN panels in favor of deeper colors. TN panels are common, and most monitors on this list use this tech. Here, you can expect a good mix of quality mixed in with some side effects like reduced viewing angles and occasionally off colors.

Budget-wise, most 32” 4K monitors range between $600 – $1000 depending on what kinds of features the monitor includes. People looking for USB-C power connectivity, AMD FreeSync, and more image modes are likely to need to pay more.  These features are another essential consideration with monitors; every option listed here has good image quality, but things like color gamut and HDR tech can vary between them. Consider what is most important to you and your workflow.

Best 4K 32″ Monitors – Our Recommendations

Monitor Name	Design	Panel Type	Features
ASUS VA32UQ		LED	Multiple HDR 10 modes, 2W speakers, AMD FreeSync
Samsung UH850		QLED	AMD FreeSync, Fully adjustable
LG 32UN880-B		IPS	Ergo stand, USB Type-C
BenQ EW3270U		LED	USB Type-C, AMD FreeSync
AOC CU32V3		LCD	FlickerFree, Curved
LG 32UL500-W		LED	AMD FreeSync, HDR 10

1. ASUS VA32UQ

The ASUS VA32UQ is a fantastic mid-budget offering from ASUS that hits all of the notes for 32” 4K monitors. Focused on versatility, the VA32UQ features multiple HDR10 modes – one for gaming, another for cinema-quality visuals. The gaming HDR mode still boosts colors and contrast while not decreasing performance otherwise, while the cinema mode focuses entirely on picture quality. Switching between the two is a nice benefit that is unique to ASUS products.

ASUS focused heavily on picture quality while creating this monitor rather than extra connections. AMD FreeSync, Shadow Boost, Flicker-free Tech, and Eye Care are all packed into the monitor in combination with the multiple HDR modes. 95% DCI-P3 color coverage also comes with the monitor for bright and vibrant colors. Outside of picture options, the monitor’s features are sparse. 1x DisplayPort and 2x HDMI ports come standard, and ASUS includes stereo 2W speakers as well. While serviceable, people who enjoy nice audio will still likely want an upgrade. No USB-C connection means that connecting other devices to the monitor is impossible. Still, for anyone looking to upgrade their current monitor to 4K in 32”, who does not need any extras, the picture quality offered by ASUS is tough to beat.

2. Samsung UH850

Samsung’s UH850 is one of the best 4K 32” monitors on the market today. It features a number of fantastic options and features for business and creative uses. While not focused on gaming, it can hold its own against some of the other heavy hitters on this list as well. Chief among its features is the monitor’s color accuracy and black equalizer. It includes 1.07 billion colors, 125% of the sRGB space, and 20 different dark values to adjust between. The calibration settings allow for details even in dark images and scenes, making this monitor perfect for gaming, image and video editing, and movie watching.

The refresh rate on the monitor is a respectable 60Hz – while serious gaming, especially FPS play, will want a higher refresh rate, it is enough for most 4K gamers. It also includes AMD FreeSync tech for use across any number of applications. Combined with the monitor’s Flicker-Free Technology, using Samsung’s offering should be easy on the eyes.

I/O and included ports on the UH850 is expansive as well. Four USB ports are on the side of the monitor, with two supporting fast charging for mobile devices and laptops. Visual ports include two HDMI inputs, a DisplayPort, and a Mini DisplayPort all hidden away comfortably on the back of the monitor. The Samsung UH850 has a sleek, modern look with thin bezels and a nice stand that can be replaced with a VESA mount as well. Thanks to its great color accuracy and port selection, it is a higher-priced item than some others on this list.

3. LG 32UN880-B

The LG 32UN880-B has a lot going for it. As the only IPS display on our list, it features some of the best color accuracy and viewing angles of any monitor out there. Combined with a 3-side borderless design, USB Type-C connectivity, 95% DCI-P3 color gamut, and extremely customizable ergonomics, this offering from LG is one of the top of line 32” monitors out there. Key to putting this monitor over the top is its IPS panel, allowing for a larger gamut of colors. When combined with the screen’s high resolution and HDR capabilities, it is a perfect monitor for viewing and working.

Ergonomics clearly played an important role in designing this offering from LG. The monitor stand uniquely clamps into the desk for extra pivot and swivel capabilities, resembling an after-market stand. It allows for the 32UN880-B to extend and retract, rotate a full 90°, and swivel in all directions up to 280°. Thankfully, the stand also clears up space on your desk, allowing extra room while avoiding awkward times when you must move it. Its IPS panel supports viewing angles up to 178° in all directions along with 350 nits of brightness for easy use.

Gamers will likely want to look elsewhere; this offering from LG has a relatively slow 5ms response time, while most other 4K monitors are 4ms or below. Notably, the 32UN880-B does support AMD FreeSync and HDR10. Truthfully, however, this monitor is best for those looking to upgrade for work or color accurate work.

The included ports on this monitor are more than enough for most people’s needs. With USB Type C connectivity up to 60W available, you can plug in and charge most devices, or hook up a separate laptop to the monitor. Two more USB 3 ports are also comfortably included on the back – right near the 2x HDMI ports, single DisplayPort, and Headphone Out jack. LG has managed to produce one of the cleanest and most high-end 32” monitors on the market today with a unique mix of features.

4. BenQ EW3270U

BenQ has been a featured name in gaming spaces for quite some time now thanks to their low input monitors and esports sponsorships. Finding their products in large sizes like 32” can be difficult, but they had made an offering through the EW3270U. Featuring the company’s classic sharp-edged and gamer-themed aesthetics, BenQ has toned it down to a comfortable level for this model. The EW3270U is meant to serve as a media experience center, amplifying movies and TV shows and long-use sessions.

This 4K screen includes a number of options and settings to make the screen more vibrant or comfortable to use over long periods. This makes it one of the best options at this size for gaming or media. AMD FreeSync is fully supported, and reviews report that NVIDIA’s G-Sync works with some minor configuration. BenQ’s low blue light filter and flicker-free technology are also toggleable to reduce eye strain.

Although almost every 4K monitor at this size supports HDR10, BenQ introduces a new setting called Opt-Clarity to enhance it even further. This is another setting meant to improve eye comfort without affecting the picture on screen. Instead of dampening colors or reducing contrast, it aims to enhance brightness and contrast while reserving color temperature. Streaming is enhanced because of it, but this setting serves little purpose outside of that.

The EW3270U includes DCI-P3 95% for great color accuracy and expansive port options as well. While it does include a USB Type-C port, it notably cannot be used for power – only data transfer. However, connecting multiple devices and turning the monitor into a media center is easy.

5. AOC CU32V3

While most monitors at the 32” size with 4K resolution focus on additional tech to gain an edge, AOC decided on another direction for the CU32V3. Its included ports and connectivity options are basic, and the monitor is barebones in other ways such as a lack of speakers and AOC-specific tech. Instead, the monitor is most notable for its curved screen and high-quality screen. Buyers looking for a great deal on a large, curved monitor who do not need most bells and whistles are likely to enjoy this monitor.

The color options on this monitor are respectable, covering 89.9% of DCI-P3, 90% Adobe RGB, and 121% sRGB. A blue-light filtering mode can be enabled on the monitor for long night sessions, and flicker free tech comes standard as well. Brightness is relatively low at 250 nits, so those working in bright rooms may have trouble.

The nice 1500R curve of this monitor is its biggest feature, improving immersion and viewing angles for users. Curved screens also give the feeling of a larger workspace. The frameless design of this monitor also allows multiple to be connected for a full, cockpit-like feel. Rounding out the monitor is a 4ms response time and 60Hz refresh rate, putting it average for 32” 4K monitors. The lack of some features like USB-C and AMD FreeSync allows this monitor to come down in price as well, making it one of the better budget options available.

6. LG 32UL500-W

LG’s 32UL500-W is one of the cheapest 32” 4K monitors currently available. Despite the low price, it contains a number of great features and has received rave reviews from users, making it one of the best values available in this market. It comes equipped with AMD FreeSync and works with NVIDIA G-Sync after some configuration, as well as LG’s “Dynamic Action Sync” feature. Combined, this makes the monitor fluid and easy to use, even if the response rate is still a relatively low 60Hz. Anti-flicker technology rounds out the selection.

Visibility is great as well, with DCI-P3 at 95% accuracy and HDR10. The monitor is also bright at 300cd/m² and features good contrast, especially for the price. As it is a budget 4K monitor, extra options like USB-C are missing, but the basic connections are all included. 2x HDMI ports and 1x DisplayPort mean that the monitor can be used for all modern gaming consoles and PCs, and a headphone jack could be nice in some niche uses. For those looking to get into the 32” 4K monitor space who are uninterested in a curved screen, this is one of the best budget options available.

The post 6 Best 32” 4K Monitors for 2021 appeared first on PremiumBuilds.

Gamers have long struggled to find that one shred of competitive edge to give them the win. It could be an ultra-lightweight gaming mouse with insane DPI to land those hard-to-hit shots across the map. It could be a blistering fast rig with a water-cooled RTX 3090 to get every last frame. Companies have even pushed out crazy peripherals like gamer glasses, gloves, energy drinks, and so much more. Some enthusiasts will even go so far as to get a keyboard with the smoothest, fastest registering key switches to ensure that their moves are as precise as they can be. 

One big factor that many gamers overlook is the monitor. Countless images have been posted to battle station threads online showcasing beastly PCs with old, dinky monitors. A good gaming rig needs an equally powerful monitor to get the most out of your system. But sheer image clarity isn’t the only deciding metric. Sure, a 1440p monitor may sound appealing, but that added image clarity won’t matter if it blurs and struggles to keep up in competitive titles. What matters in terms of competitive performance is the refresh rate of the monitor. Before diving into the exact difference between 1440p 144Hz vs 1080p 240Hz displays, let’s cover exactly what a Hz is and how it affects your gaming performance.

What Does Refresh Rate Mean and Why Does it Matter?

Essentially, the refresh rate of a monitor is equal to how many times that display can show an image in one second. So, a 60Hz display can show the same image 60 times every second while a 75Hz display can show an image 75 times every second. The higher the refresh rate, the more stable and clear that image becomes. Think back to older consoles and television where you could see flickering or horizontal bars. That flickering was the image refreshing, only much slower than what current displays are capable of. The quicker a monitor refreshes the smoother and less noticeable that flickering or tearing will be. 

Casual users won’t find themselves needing higher refresh rates for regular productivity tasks. Many casual gamers may not even notice the subtle differences between the higher-end refresh rates. However, a higher refresh rate has been shown to give competitive gamers a slight edge over users with lower refresh rate monitors. Information is displayed smoother, which can make landing that tricky headshot all that much easier.

Resolution & Response Time

Before diving into the exact differences between 144Hz and 240Hz, it’s good to understand the differences in base resolutions first. 2560p x 1440p monitors are considered QHD, which stands for “Quad High Definition.” That means that a 2K display is 4 times sharper than base 720p HD. So, you can expect much more sharpness and clarity over a 1080p FHD (Full HD) display. The added clarity does not necessarily come with a boost in competitive gaming performance, but the difference in clarity will be quite noticeable. That added resolution will place more demand on your GPU, leading to a more expensive rig if one wishes to take full advantage of a 2K display. 

As a quick side note, buyers should keep an eye out for the response time of a monitor in addition to resolution and refresh rate. While there is plenty of high refresh rate 1440p monitors on the market, many lag behind with 4-6 ms response times versus some of the quicker and cheaper 1 ms 1080p displays available. The lower the response time, the quicker and more accurate your reactions and inputs will be. 1 ms is a must for those looking to get every bit of competitive edge out of their display.

1440p 144Hz vs 1080p 240Hz

With all of those nitty-gritty details broken down, we can look at just how big of a difference these two options present. For sheer image quality, a 1440p QHD monitor is the clear winner between the two. In sight-seeing titles and story-based games, the 1440p 144Hz will be more than enough for gamers looking for a smooth and stylish gaming experience. A 1080p 240Hz display will be buttery smooth and deliver a stellar performance in terms of Esports titles and other competitive games. 

But here is where things get a little tricky. The difference between a 60Hz display and a 144Hz is fairly noticeable. Menus are smoother. Movement looks cleaner. However, even competitive gamers may struggle to see a perceivable difference between 144Hz and 240Hz. It comes to a point of diminishing returns. The 240Hz display may slightly add to the performance of the highest level of competitive gamers out there, but the hefty price tag associated with that technology simply doesn’t make it a reasonable value option for even the most hardcore hobbyist gamers out there.

Additionally, the PC required to pump out frames that can even take advantage of that difference would have to be the best that the market can offer. One would need to constantly achieve a stable frame rate higher than 240 FPS to fully take advantage of the minute performance boost that a 240Hz display could offer.

Verdict

A 1440p 144Hz monitor will be the sweet spot for the vast majority of casual and competitive gamers. It offers crisp and clear resolution and a buttery smooth refresh rate across at a reasonable price point. With displays getting cheaper and cheaper, many 1440p 144hz monitors are placed at or below what a similar 1080p display would have cost just a year ago. A good budget option would be a 1080p 144Hz display if you happen to be running older hardware or don’t care for the added clarity that 1440p offers. 240hz will be overkill for most gamers, even those in the competitive scene. The noticeable performance is simply too minor to justify the higher cost for most use cases.

1440 144Hz & 1080p 240Hz Recommendations

Best Enthusiast 1440p 144Hz Gaming Monitor – Asus ROG Strix XG279Q

The Asus ROG Strix XG279Q is a 27” monitor with a beautiful 1440p QHD display and a 144Hz refresh rate (170Hz achievable with overclocking). It comes packaged with HDR compatibility, a 1 ms response time, G-Sync compatibility, and low motion blur technology. The Asus ROG Strix XG279Q is currently the best 1440p gaming monitor that money can buy, and its high price tag of $549 drives that fact home. This is the ultimate option for enthusiasts looking for a no-compromise 1440p 144Hz gaming experience.

Best All-Rounder 1440p 144Hz Gaming Monitor – BenQ EX2780Q

BenQ has long been the leading name in high-quality, color-accurate displays. The BenQ EX2780Q is no exception. This 1440p 144Hz 27” display supports HDRi, FreeSync Premium, and has a low 5 ms response time. This display can meet the needs of professionals in need of a premium-grade accurate monitor that wants to game on it as well. This display delivers impressive performance metrics at the staggeringly low price of $449.

Best 1080p 240Hz Gaming Monitor – Samsung 27-Inch CRG5

With such a niche market, one 240Hz monitor rises above the rest. The Samsung 27-Inch CRG5 is a premium curved gaming monitor that offers a lot of bang for the buck. This 1080p display offers a 4 ms response time, G-Sync compatibility, and a 1500R curve for added immersion. With a competitive price point at just $350, this display is a great option for budget-focused gamers looking for the best performance that a high refresh rate 1080p can deliver. 

The post 1440p 144Hz vs 1080p 240Hz: Which Resolution Is Best for You? appeared first on PremiumBuilds.

Choosing a 1440p 144+ Hz monitor seems like a no-brainer, given the increase in performance found in new-generation hardware, as well as the decrease in price that some of these monitors have been given.

If you prefer curved monitors, then few can compete with Samsung’s Odyssey series, especially in the 27-to-32-inch screen-size range. These monitors have an aggressive 1000R curvature, that is scarcely found in any other gaming monitors, and the Samsung Odyssey G7 also features Samsung’s proprietary Super Vertical Alignment (SVA) panel – which improves on many of the shortcomings found in standard VA panels, like the one found in the Odyssey G5.

The Odyssey G7 is often discounted and can be found for under $500 at major retailers. However, this is still about $200 (67%) more than the Odyssey G5, so, the following question arises: Is the Samsung Odyssey G7 a large enough upgrade to warrant the much higher investment it requires? Additionally, is this monitor’s specifications necessary for most PC setups, or would the Odyssey G5 the offer better value for its price?

To find out, we will compare both options, in every aspect relating to a monitor’s performance, and reach a conclusion on which model better deserves to become the outlet for your PC’s graphical processing power. 

Specifications

Monitor	Samsung Odyssey G5	Samsung Odyssey G7
Design
Screen Size	27 inches	27 inches
Resolution	2,560 x 1,440 pixels	2,560 x 1,440 pixels
Refresh Rate	144 Hz	240 Hz
Aspect Ratio	16:9	16:9
Curvature	1000R	1000R
Panel Type	VA	SVA
Display Area	0.9007	0.8514
Bit Depth	8 bits	10 bits (8 bits + FRC)
Colors	1.67 million	1.07 billion
Contrast	2,500 : 1	2,500 : 1
Brightness	250 to 300 nits	350 to 600 nits
MPRT	1 ms	1 ms
Price (As of writing)	299.99	$499.99 ($699.99 MSRP)
Availability	Amazon.com	Amazon.com

Appearance – Samsung Odyssey G7

When it comes to their external looks, these two monitors are very similar: they have a textured backside cover, a V-shaped stand with a cutout hole for better cable management and a black, matte, anti-glare finish on the anterior. The Samsung Odyssey G7 still does stand out versus the G5 in that it has a tall stand, and an RGB-illuminated ring at the junction where the stand connects to the monitor. The front side of the G7 also has two RGB lit accents (at the bottom of the bezel), so its lighting displays are also visible from the front.

The Samsung Odyssey G5 has 20% thicker borders, measuring 1.2 centimeters (0.5 inches), versus the Odyssey G7 which has 1 cm (~0.4 in) thick borders. The monitors are both rather thick, due to the 1,000 mm radius curvature, with the G5 being 12 cm (4.7 in) thick without the stand, and 24 cm (9.4 in) with the stand, and the G7 being 18.9 cm (11.6 in) thick without the stand, and 29.5 cm (11.6 in) thick with the stand. Neither of these monitors would be ideal for wall mounting, and they do need to be placed on spacious desk. 

Resolution & Refresh Rate – Samsung Odyssey G7

The resolutions may be identical (both being 1440p) but the Odyssey G7 has a significant advantage when it comes to its refresh rate. Of course, this may not be relevant to everyone, as single player, triple-A, gaming-titles will hardly reach such high framerates; even with the best hardware components the consumer market has to offer. In fact, benchmarks from Techspot show that the best performing GPU at 1440p (the Radeon RX 6900 XT) only reaches an average of 169 FPS, while the popular upper-mid-range Nvidia GPU, the GeForce RTX 3080, only averages 153 FPS. That being said, the 240 Hz framerate is excellent for less-demanding competitive multiplayer titles, like DotA 2, Counter Strike: GO, or Valorant, where 240 FPS is a far more realistic framerate to achieve.

Display – Samsung Odyssey G7

Viewing angles are a weak point of VA panels, though Samsung’s SVA panel (found in the Odyssey G7) does fare better than the standard VA panel of the Odyssey G5. 

To be more specific, the G5 begins to have color washout from just 29-degree angles (left & right horizontal viewing angles), a color shift from 39 degrees from the left viewing angle & 42 degrees from the right angle, and a dark shade washout from just 12 & 14 degrees from the left & right respectively. The G7 fares slightly better, with a color washout from 32-to-33-degree angles, a color shift from a 65-degree angle (for both horizontal angles), and a black washout beginning at a 17-degree angle. Similar are the results for the vertical viewing angle, those these curved monitors are meant to be viewed from an eye-level, so this should hardly be an issue – even when sharing the monitor.

Contrast – TIE

Though both monitors are advertised as having a 2,500 : 1 static contrast ratio, they both do prove to reach higher levels when benchmarked. The Samsung Odyssey G5 was found to have a native contrast of 2,997 : 1 by rtings.com, while the Odyssey G7 was measured to have an impressive 3,912 : 1 ratio by the same website. Though it may seem that the Odyssey G7 has the advantage in this regard, these measurements are highly dependent on the specific tested unit, so the results will vary for each monitor shipped.

Brightness – Samsung Odyssey G7

SDR and HDR peak brightness levels of these monitors range from great to mediocre, though the Odyssey G5 is once again eclipsed by the Odyssey G7, by a significant margin. 

The Samsung G7 reaches standard definition peak brightness levels that range from 333 nits to 544 nits (with a real scene peak brightness of 341 nits), while the Odyssey G5 reaches a SDR peak brightness of 150 to 285 nits. In HDR, the Odyssey G5 does not fare much better, reaching only 159 to 298 nits of brightness. That being said, in HDR the Odyssey G7 does not reach its promised 600 nits, with benchmarks showing it could only reach an HDR peak brightness level of 324 to 531 nits (with a real scene brightness of 407 nits).

Color Range – Samsung Odyssey G7

Making use of the Frame Rate Control (FRC) control function – which cycles through color tones quickly enough to create the illusion that more intermediate color tones are also reproduced – the Odyssey G7 has a 10 bit panel depth, which makes it capable of displaying over a billion different colors; while the Odyssey G5’s 8-bit panel depth can only reproduce 1.67 million colors.

For the SDR color gamut, the G5 can reproduce 89.6% of the sRGB color space and 73.2% of the Adobe RGB color space, while the G7 can display 98.2% of the sRGB color space, and 83.2% of the Adobe RGB color space. The difference is equally noteworthy in HDR, where the G7 reproduces 86.3% of the DCI P3 color space, and 67.6% of the Rec. 2020 color space, while the G5 can only reproduce 60.5% of the DCI P3 color space, and 51.8% of the Rec. 2020 color space. 

Response Time – Samsung Odyssey G7

Another aspect in which the Odyssey G5 underperforms, especially for competitive gamers, is its response times. Both monitors have three overdrive settings: Standard, Faster, and Fastest. The higher the overdrive setting, the less the response time, but the more the overshoot error increases – which is the blurry trail seen in fast-moving on-screen objects. 

At its native resolution and refresh rate, the Odyssey G7 has a total response time of 7 ms with 5.5% overshoot error on the “Faster” overdrive setting, while at 60 Hz – surprisingly enough – the response time drops, instead of increasing, to just 6.9 ms (with an overshoot error of 7%). On the same overdrive setting (Faster), the Odyssey G5 has a 14.7 ms response time (at its native resolution and framerate), which increases to 18.2 ms when running at 60 Hz. This is especially important for those that enjoy fighting games, as they are capped at 60 FPS by design.

Input Lag – Samsung Odyssey G7 

When it comes to input lag, the Odyssey G7 has some of the best values seen at its price range. It displays only 2.7 ms of input lag at its native resolution and refresh rate, which increases to 3.1 ms with VRR enabled. At 60 Hz this input lag increases to just 9.6 ms (12.7 ms with VRR). The Odyssey G5 also has an excellent input lag value at its native resolution and refresh rate, one of just 4.2 ms (4.6 ms with VRR), though this value goes up considerably at 60 Hz, where it was measured to reach 23.5 ms – more than double that of the Odyssey G7. With VRR enabled at 60 Hz, however, it did decrease to 9.7 ms at 60 Hz.

Ergonomics – Samsung Odyssey G7

Curved screen monitors are meant to be viewed from the front, which is why having ergonomic versatility is always a plus, as they can be adjusted to attain the best position available, for their rather narrow viewing angles, depending on where they are situated.

The Odyssey G7 does not disappoint in this regard, as it can have its height adjusted by 120 mm (~4.72 inches), it can pivot between landscape and portrait orientations (by moving clockwise by up to 90 degrees), it can swivel – to the left or right – by up to 15 degrees, and it can tilt forwards by 9 degrees & backwards by 13 degrees.

Unfortunately, the Odyssey G5 has very little ergonomic flexibility to mention, as the monitor can only tilt backwards by 18 degrees. 

Both monitors can be removed from their stand and mounted via the VESA Mounting Interface Standard: 100 x 100 mm for the Odyssey G7, and 75 x 75 mm for the Odyssey G5.

Connectivity – Samsung Odyssey G7

The reason why the Samsung Odyssey G7 pulls ahead in yet another category, is because it features two USB 3.0 downstream ports – which are meant for plugging in peripherals, like your keyboard and mouse, in order to save your PC’s USB ports and provide you better cable management –and it has better overall display connectivity. It has one HDMI 2.0 port, two DisplayPort 1.4 sockets, and a 3.5 mm audio-out jack. The Odyssey G5 has no such USB 3.0 ports, and for display connectivity it only has one HDMI 2.0 and one DisplayPort 1.2; together with the standard 3.5 mm audio jack.  

Features – Samsung Odyssey G7

Both of these options are feature-rich, and offer most of the same additional software functions that most Samsung monitors offer: like a Black Equalizer, Flicker-free Technology, an Eco Saving Plus mode, a Low Blue Light filter, a Low Input Lag mode, a Game Mode (crosshair and timer overlays), Off Timer Plus, and the Super Arena Gaming UX OSD interface. The Odyssey G7 also has the Mega Dynamic Contrast feature, RGB compatibility (for its illuminated displays), and a Smart Eco Saving option.

The G5 has AMD FreeSync Premium, whereas the G7 includes AMD FreeSync Premium Pro. Both have Nvidia G-Sync compatibility, though only via a DisplayPort. 

Where the Odyssey G7 pulls ahead is its Picture-in-Picture (PIP) and Picture-by-Picture (PBP) functionality – which can be incredibly useful for gaming and productivity applications. These features allow for a second device to be connected to the monitor simultaneously. With PIP, the second device is displayed via an inlay window, while with PBP, the screen is split in two, with each device occupying its respective half. 

Verdict

So, is the Samsung Odyssey G7 worth its 66% higher price? Surprisingly enough, it does appear so. It outperforms the Odyssey G5 in every single category relating to a monitor’s performance; perhaps with the only exception being its static contrast ratio, where it could be argued that depending on the units provided, the monitors may function on an equal level.

Samsung’s SVA panel offers amazing performance enhancements that cannot be dismissed as extra fluff. Even when it comes to basic, necessary, functionality – like input lag and response times that are particularly important for competitive gamers – the Odyssey G7 is far superior to its predecessor, the Odyssey G5. If the curvature of the screen is what attracts you to the Samsung Odyssey series of monitors, then there are few options that can compete with the G7, especially for its discounted price. 

That being said, if you don’t mind the monitor’s curvature, and aren’t looking to pay $500 for a gaming monitor, then other 1440p 144+ Hz options do exist that offer better value for their price, even when compared to the Odyssey G5. One such monitor is Gigabyte’s exceptional M27Q.

If the choice is strictly between the Samsung Odyssey G5 and the Odyssey G7, then the latter monitor is the victor of this comparison; with a large enough gap to warrant the extra investment necessary for its purchase – which will be money well spent, given that the Odyssey G7 allows more than enough of a performance leeway for future upgrades to your PC hardware to make use of its high performance potential.

The post Samsung Odyssey G5 vs Odyssey G7: What Are The Differences? appeared first on PremiumBuilds.