27 vs 32 for fps. 1440p is a noticeable drop off, .

27 vs 32 for fps You’ll get the same FPS on 4k native. If both are oled I'd get the 32 inch. I switched from the Redmagic 27 inch 4k 160hz to the Aw 322. Have to ask yourself what’s most important: 240hz 27in competitive monitor that can double as a nice small media screen vs a 42in 120hz which can still be somewhat competitive, but nicer looking since 4K/glossy. I want to have a dual Just like in monitor Hz, When I was younger, playing ~30 fps on a 60 Hz monitor before was like heaven, no Fcks given. Welp, as the title says, I'm looking for a 24'' or 27'' monitor. I’m sure I higher refresh rate would be more smooth. You shouldn’t buy a 24″ – 32″ widescreen (16:9 aspect ratio) monitor just because it’s curved unless you’re also interested in other features and specifications the display offers. please everyone do yourself a favor and get 1440p. Went from 23" -> 27" -> 23" and now waiting for 25" 240hz IPS 1080p. ) as possible under $850. I think to download it you need to use the computer software which i dont have. At 27/28 1440p seems to be the sweet spot for scaling vs resolution. Reply reply More replies More replies. Also 27"is good for competitive fps games, on 32" it might be hard to check the corners and check the pheripherials (or so I have read) I think 27 is a better size but 32 is not a big difference. Brothers, I am struggling and can’t decide whether to go with the ultrawide or the 4k. Depending upon the card, he won't be getting much more than 60 fps to notice that difference anyways. PBP and great TB implementation are icing on the cake - I can run two 2560x2160 screens side by side, and use With 32″ or bigger curved monitors, the curvature becomes more noticeable, especially if it’s 1500R or steeper, but even then, the curvature isn’t exactly necessary. Its way better imo. The 27 itself seemed rather large even with the curve which is quiet negligible to be honest unless viewed from the side. I don't, but it won't hurt. Would you buy 2TB and put everything in there or buy two 1TB then separate media vs games? For me, it’s easy. Join us for a wider point of view. Is 24 inch worth it? Apparently it's better for fps games but I'm not really sure. I've drawn some conclusions: - The biggest factor that makes a difference in sharpness is not resolution, it is FPS. The Odyssey g7 (32 inch) is amazing for competitive FPS. 32 Basically as the title says, I play a TON of Overwatch and will be getting more games as time goes on, I am wondering for FPS games if 24" or 27" is better and also if anyone can tell me a good budget 1440p monitor or I may have to stick to 1080p. For a 27'' monitor you should have a distance of 70 cm (about three miles in imperial units I think, but better double check that yourself). 27” vs 32” 1440p monitor Dell has an active fan but I found it to be inaudible. Have you considered a 34 inch 21:9?it’s kind of the middle ground. -moved to it from 1080p and a small 27” 4K, much better. Ultra wide preferable for the wife’s photo editing but not necessary. Reply reply 27 inch vs 32 inch is all about view distance. I say 'almost' because the difference is noticeable mainly in screenshot comparisons, not during gameplay. The most favored sizes can be 24, 27, and 32-inch monitors that fit all your requirements, but still, there are options to choose the most appropriate size technically. The refresh rates vary depending on one's needs and budget but usual consensus is 240hz or higher. Updated 2024 monitor buyer's guide - https://youtu. - 2. The time has come to move on from my 24 inch 1080p 144hz display. With 1440p you are pretty much stuck with that resolution. upvotes and id 27 vs 32 on 1440 means u get a cleaner image on 27 because of the better pixel density Reply reply Grahamotronz • I have a 32” and it depends. If it's in your budget and your PC can push high FPS through them (assuming you're talking about 1440p resolution) then go with the 32s. I understand there are 27" 4K monitors, but I am just comparing the two monitors mentioned in the title. However, just the screen size can be a big difference. You’ll definitely notice the increase in PPI. 15 FPS on OBS When Capturing Two Windows of Skype upvotes $720 vs $530 27" vs 32" flat vs curved IPS vs VA Mini-LED for true HDR vs edge lit "fake" HDR 90W USB-C PD vs 15W Full bandwidth HDMI 2. The triple 32" 16:9 will give you all the horizontal FOV you need while giving you better vertical FOV which isn't vital but definitely helps with immersion/enjoyment Both the 27 and 32 inch models are on sale and currently the same price. Performance. I'll mostly be playing FPS games like PUBG, BFV or CSGO. Not being a pro, not sure I see the difference between 240 and 360, especially since few games run at more than 240 fps on my PC For me, it was 27" vs 32". Asus has a few features Dell doesn’t, notably passive cooling, a KVM, a traditional audio out, 24”/27” screen modes that shrink the image to the middle for competitive play, and USB-C alt mode. Center screen is about 22. As others have said, for gaming, 27”, high refresh is probably the way to go. Custom or FPS Mode Contrast 35-75 ~ Sharpness 68 ~ Faster or Extreme or Extrem (Bfi) ~ Gamma Mode 2 for colors i would turn Red tiny bit up Green a bit under Red and Blue a big chunk under green what monitor size is ideal 27" or 32" I am taking a look at a few monitors and I am contemplating between buying these the specs on the 32-inch seem to be better for more or less the same price but is it going to be too big since the I kept the 4k one. I don't notice any difference between genres. In recent times I've only really played BF4 and Battlefront 2 in terms of FPS games and both play very well. With a 28" draw it is shooting 10 fps faster then the DXT set to 70 lbs with 450 grain arrow and with a hair longer feeling draw (says 28" but feels a hair longer). Open comment sort options. I went from a 23" to a 27" and loved the difference. If a game doesn't support DLSS, it might struggle to achieve over 100 fps, but I'm pretty sure 4090 can handle most games at ultra settings with a stable 60 fps, unless the optimization is terrible. 27 vs 32 inch is preference, both are the same if you move the 32 inch 8cm/3 inches farther away, I play good on both, The ones I have seen call it garbage. I prefer the PPI of 4K at 27" - though I find my semi-gloss coating on my new 32" OLED helps a lot with clarity compared to the matte Definitely there is a different. It's just a better experience. I couldn’t choose between the two, so I just got both. Advantage of 32" is that if you want to watch a movie and go to the bed or sofa, you can always bring closer the 32" to the edge of the desk and it can always be seen bigger than the 27". Welcome to TestUFO 2. You'll have no issue with the 2080ti, though maybe not at 144 fps if that's your required target (get 27" vs 32" 4K Monitor ? Discussion So yesterday I asked people on this subreddit : RUST, can be so varied, some people dont care if it looks like a garbage game from the 90s as long as they get all the FPS, some dont care about FPS as long as its 40-60 but looks good, competitive FPS games like CSGO/Valorant etc, I've really not had any noticeable differences in FPS but the graphics itself was a huge improvement, will never go back. Also if you get At what is for me the optimal viewing distance, screen to eye somewhere between 27 and 32", Since u r playing non fps, leaning toward cinematic game so hight res is better than high fps, so 4k 60fps better option as imo u will get much more satisfaction at Some may think that anything larger than 27" is too big, while others may prefer the higher 4K resolution. Tweet. All these work fine for a casual gamer. Quality, as in resolution? A 32" 1440p is the same pixel density as a 24" 1080p. Btw. Shooters would feel weird if played on the 32 inch while 27 seems like the perfect size. Currently I have a 23" TN panel, which I find to small. It really comes down to resolution vs FPS, which is more I also have a curved screen which probably makes the immersive experience and FPS playing much better than a regular 27 Flat All resolutions, from 21:9 to 32:9, are celebrated here. Figured with those specs the FPS won’t be great without lowering settings, which I refuse to do lol. I'd like to know yall's opinions If yes 27 gonna be better for you, as you see info faster on the smaller screen (this is why not a sigle pro player is playing on a 32") also gonna be easier to keep up with the hardware, if are a casual player who enjoy single player or casual multiplayer go for the 32", for the casual guy the 32" is a better experience. I have an OLED TV. The 32" 4k becomes a pain. Subscribe to our Newsletter. I have the option of waiting for a 27-inch 4k oled monitor or going for the 32-inch 4k. Just 33% wider. I have the chance to get a 32" 4k IPS 144hz display, or, for about the same price, a 27" oled 1440p screen. An orthopedist would even recommend a viewing distance of at least one meter (so more than three feet). Otherwise The difference is huge. I'm personally less sensitive to it for fast-moving material like video or gaming, but the difference is definitely there. Anything worse than that is not good at all compared to the text crispness you get on a mobile/phone or tablet since like 2010. 5” from my eyes. Would love to hear some experiences with playing CS, WoW, ARPG, other fps games if you went from 27" to 32" and possibly with the monitor wall mounted. 32 inch 4k is more versatile. Some would same go for 27" but I have not interest in that size. At 32", you'll have to use at least WQHD as a resolution, if not 4k, that's something to keep in mind. I do a mix of programming (around 6 hours per day) and gaming (maybe 2 I recently wanted to upgrade to 32 inch 1440p and found it to be unwieldy in actual use in FPSs. Overall though I feel you would probably enjoy triple 27" FHD more if framerate is very important to you. 32" at 1440p will have 91 pixels per inch. On the flip side, I have dual 32” 4K absolutely love the extra desktop space it provides. 32 inch 4k looks like crap for text/work. Personally, 27 inches is the biggest I would want. Best. Upvote 1 Downvote. We would like to show you a description here but the site won’t allow us. In terms of performance, there could be a difference if your 32” is a VA panel. I have a 32-inch 1440p monitor that sits almost 1 meter away from my eyes, Basically have to decide if you prefer higher FPS vs higher resolution and size. As an example I had to run FH5 with 4xMSAA to make it acceptable to my eyes. I think theres a newer one, 3. My main reasoning though for going with the 1440p is my GPU is a laptop 4070 with 8GB of vram. I'm not a competitive player so there are people who probably wouldn't like to move their eyes so much. I'd say go for the 27 inch personally, especially if you like higher pixel density. Anyone with experience in 27 and 32 inch monitors can help me make the decision? I want the pixel density of 27, but I think 32 would be nice for gaming too. 98% larger area: As a 4:3 Display Both 27”2k and 32”1080p are the same price. I used a 30" 2560x1600 monitor for a while and it was just big If it works for YOU, then nobody can say it's not the right choice. Thirdly, FPS calculators use AI models to process data, but these models are not perfect and they may not take into account all possible factors that can affect the performance of a system. 1440p or 1080p for FPS gaming? Is there a substantial difference between a 27 inch 1440p 144hz TN/VA monitor and a 34 inch 3440x1440 144hz IPS monitor in experience? Welcome to our latest video where we delve into the world of gaming monitors to help you make an informed decision. I recommend google "difference between Hz and FPS". And 1440p requires a ton more to drive in high fps. I personally prefer the VA panel due to its high contrast. 1440p is a noticeable drop off, I play on a 27" 4k monitor for fps games and it's incredible. Plus, my viewing distance is roughly about 50-60cm. I think a 32" would feel like the same kind of step up. OP do the cardboard thing from the top comment. I did have to set up the monitor about 2-3 inches back compared to the 27 inch. it’s a tough decision if you don’t have a way of looking at some monitors,like in a micro center maybe. Ultrawide is fine, but OW doesn't support it. We Immersion is significantly better due to the larger size. Both are almost same cost. Some folks' eyes prefer refresh rate. . I think it's enough. 1 vs half bandwidth (only really matters for PS5) The Gigabyte is still a nice deal for people wanting a bigger display, don't want HDR, and won't mind VA ghosting. Ultimately I 32" is the sweet spot for monitors at 4k. Pros use 24 inch monitors for fps. Thanks! That's pretty much me right now as well lol I got the XG27AQM but I'm considering returning it to get a PG279QM. Stuck between MSI Optix mag274qrf 27" 2k 165hz and Benq ew3280u 32" 4k 60hz If you’re going with 32”, 4K will make a difference, especially if you code a day. What I’m trying to accomplish is 120hz or higher between 27” and 32 that won’t take away from competitive gameplay for first person shooters , 1440p is the sweet spot for 27, not sure about 32 Think most fps competitive stages use 24. Reply reply axaro1 Best 27-32” monitor for FPS gaming under $550 CDN . I wish went 32" 4k which would have still given me a huge PPI difference over 27" 1440p & got a bigger screen, biggest mistake everif you want a 27". 24 Apr 2023 at 17:41 #2 Casdawer. Not just that, keep in mind I'm still on 1080p. Also the picture quality isn't that great, so it'll be relegated to a second monitor, probably permanently streaming Twitch or a random TV You can absolutely see the difference between 1440p and 4K at 27-28", in particular for text or productivity. So what is closet to 2k 1920 pixels or 2560 pixels? In the movie projection industry, Digital Cinema Initiatives is the dominant standard for 2K output and defines a 2K format with a resolution of 2048 × 1080. I'm struggling deciding between a 27" (or 32" I guess) 2560x1440p monitor and getting really high fps, or a 34" 3440x1440p monitor and getting more if the the field of view in a 1440p 27in monitor is too much for u, usually most fps games have a scaleable field of view in the graphics settings. Also, it is bigger, which makes me worried. Lol. Printable Version. bprat22 . But a short summery for you, the Hz of the monitor is the number of frames a display can show you per second. 5x (or 150%) from 1440p in games on your 27 inch. 2k stands for approximate numbers of horizontal pixels. Will a 32" 1440p monitor output less FPS than a 27" 1440P monitor due to the bigger screen? Or is it the same across the board? This thread is archived New comments cannot be posted and votes cannot be cast I went from a 32” 1440p VA panel to a 32” 4k OLED (AW3225qf) and was in shock at the difference 4k and HDR made in that game. 56% larger diagonal 141. For games, sharpness of 32 feels ok. but I really like the 21:9 ratio,I play on a 30 inch one and love FPS games on it. I also think 27 inch may have sharper image than 32 inch, which could make watching videos more enjoyable (I may be wrong, not sure how much difference between 27 and 32 for 4K). It's a 21:9 instead of 16:9 Indeed, 1080p on a 27" is a bad choice because the pixel pitch is lower than the resolution of the human eye. TLDR for story driven single player games should I get a 4k 27/32 inch display or a ultrawide monitor with a budget of I plan on keeping my 240hz 1080 monitor for E-Sports titles and FPS games. 5 (Wide Angle) Punch Hole: Front Video Recording: 1080p @ 30 fps FHD Well it will look very similar but more condensed. Based on our analysis, the Samsung 32" G5 Odyssey and Samsung 27" G5 Odyssey monitors both have a refresh rate of 1 ms, which we found was excellent for gaming. g9 is Blur Busters UFO Motion Tests with ghosting test, 30fps vs 60fps, 120hz vs 144hz vs 240hz, PWM test, motion blur test, judder test, benchmarks, and more. Though, with that said, I’ve never tried triple 32’s so I can’t comment on the difference - just sharing my experience with triple 27’s. And looking at 90-ish fps in 1440p, I probably prefer 60-ish in 4K. Also I don’t mind the curve. 27" vs 32" triples for "Formula" style rig . 50% smaller diagonal 54. Anecdotally, I'd get 32s if you mount your screens behind your wheelbase and 27s if you can get the screens between your wheelbase and the steering wheel (if 27" Odyssey G7 vs 32" option . 5%, and up in resolution by 225%. However, the LG UltraGear 27 has a slightly higher refresh rate, which gives it a slight edge in terms of smoothness. With lowered settings I am actually able to maintain a steady 70-90 fps in 4k (in the games I play, Killing Floor 2, Borderlands 3, GTA V). Build Upgrade Hi, I currently use a laptop and a 24” gaming monitor, Friend's PC not getting high FPS from Ryzen 9 5950X + 3080Ti build. So, There are quite a few differences between the 27-inch and 32-inch screen sizes. The 4k is a 16:9, (3840 X 2160). Also have to consider what you’re plugging in, desk space, etc. To use They're just extra wide 27" monitors. gpu horsepower, pixel density, panel quality, 27" 1440p is ideal. 60 FPS is far sharper than 30 FPS, with auto shutter. I play a lot of fps games, and the difference is night and day for me. On PC no 144Hz does't mean that you will get 120 FPS or 144 FPS. it really depends on what you want out of a monitor. If you play rpg games go big n have fun. But they both will be sharp enough in games (unlike desktop). gm/386fSuGรับประกัน 3 ปีเต็ม ราคา 16,900 บาทMSI G32C4 32" VA 165Hz FHD 1ms It will be used solely for gaming; fps (sometimes competitively), singleplayer, multiplayer, rpg, etc. Also the PPI at 32 inches is 91 while at 27 inches it is 108 which does make a difference. In this video, we compare the popular 27- In Comparison: 27 inch 16x9: 42 inch 16x9: Actual Aspect Ratios: 35. Sort by Of course it depends on graphics settings but if you want to see details and have a good framerate, I don’t feel like we’re there yet in terms of power for triple 1440p. Absolutely love it. In this case, you get the same picture clarity you would get with 24-inch 1080p monitors, but many find 32-inch monitors too big for competitive FPS gaming For FPS games any thing bigger then 27“ won’t be good because it affects reaction time in many different ways, but for AAA games will be good since you’ll be able to see much more of the game’s world. The higher pixel density is much nicer to me and the curved screen up close gives it a larger impression than your typical flat 27 inch panel, imo. I contacted lg to ask about the number of the newest revision but they didnt know. Top 1% 27” vs 32” 1440p monitor 1440 Ultra Wide 34" Curved vs 4k 144HZ 27" . But also the general experience from the 32" owners out there. Posted by u/[Deleted Account] - 1 vote and 7 comments I'm between the LG 27GL650F (27" 16:9 144hz IPS 99%sRGB) and the LG 29WL500 I don't think I can every go back below 100 FPS in any game Reply reply sirsynx • So I work at a popular computer store in the US, we have the 29” on display next to some 27”, 32”, and 34 Depends on your requirements (target fps) and the distance between your eyes and the monitor. You are getting more pixels per inch if you use a 28 inch vs 32 inch. It's the same pixel density as a 27" 1440. Reply reply 27 inch 1440p looks like crap for text/work. Tbh 4k on smaller screen is kinda waste unless u going to pixel peel on every game u play. I have a monitor arm so I can realistically move it closer or further as necessary. The ones for the Samsung SF351 (32" 1080p) all call it great. Perfect blacks in OLED enhance immersion even further. I value higher fps over the resolution so the 27” is the way to go for me but I’m just waiting for Hardware Unboxed detailed review to pull the trigger on it. As for competitive I mainly play warzone and modern warfare III. Is it worth paying so much more for a 32 inch monitor or 32inch panels are in general worse than 27inch atm, i'd always go 27inch for 1440p. I freaking adore my 32" monitor in every way. 5 feet more of horizontal screen space for additional field of view and total immersion. Just curious to see what y'all prefer. But I moved from a 24 inch 60hz to 27 inch 144hz. 7 30 FPS and 60 FPS at low and high bitrate. I am overthinking a lot about it! The difference isn't that much at higher field of views: A 27" at 36" (35 FOV) viewing distance is the same apparent size as a 32" at 43" distance. [2][3] For television and consumer media, 1920 × 1080 is the most common 2K resolution, but this is I actually ordered the 32 inch myself and replaced it with the 27 inch. So let’s make a comparison based on the factors mentioned below to make the right choice for you between 27 and 32-inch monitors screen. There is a noticeable quality/sharpness difference between a 27" 1440p and a 32". Just get a 32 inch 4k so you can compare. 073. 1440p ultrawide 34-inch VS 4K 32-inch . If you are into fast shooters go for the 27 Also, I am currently rocking a RX5700XT with an Ryzen 5 3600 and it's absolutely amazing for 2k. And in terms of performance, scale your render resolution to 1. During common usage only will he notice that difference. 44% smaller area: 48. I think 4K60 is less demanding than 1440p at 144Hz in terms of hardware, I'm a bit lost between 27'' vs 32'', 1440p vs 4K (at each respective size), VA vs IPS, and 60Hz vs 144/165, upgrading vs sticking with what I have. I like playing CS 1. At that point, if you are good with that resolution at the distance you will use, and if 4k text and other details We ranked each aspect of the Samsung 32" G5 Odyssey and Samsung 27" G5 Odyssey monitors based on our analysis to determine if this monitor is good for gaming. I'm sure that it will be a 1440p monitor regardless of 24 or 27 inch. But can't decide between 27", 28" and 32". And when i went from 27 1080p to 32 inch 1440p the immersiveness was a big upgrade. 1 👽. 6. There’s a performance penalty for running a larger monitor if you hate jaggies. Depending how close you will sit, you may find much more than like the 27 inch is too large for you. I play mostly FPS games and the g9 is kinda massive . But I would rather have more of the game to look at to make me actually think I’m in the game opposed to looking at a game. oh and can a 1080 run 1440p and get really g For gaming, either 27" or 32" will work just fine, with one offering a bit more immersion and the other a bit sharper image. Most played games: survival games (Conan Exiles, Last Oasis etc. They charge a premium price for a gimmick. Colours are phenomenal but my LG monitor is less than half the cost of a legit OLED + the pixel density of 4k is superior imo Getting 240 fps in 4k will be very resource intensive, I dont even know if it's feasible. Currently playing on a 55” LG oled tv for context. Since day 1. Just switched to triple 1440p 32" monitors a few weeks ago. The 27” 1440p will be much better especially if your moving from 1080p. I currently have have a 27 inch 60 hz monitor (overclocked to 74). MSI G32CQ4 32" VA 165Hz 2K 1ms : http://msi. Pretty much the only reason to switch to 240 Hz seems to me the opportunity to ditch G-Sync, as I imagine screen tearing will be next to I'm a cheapass, so I plan on using my 27" 1440p monitor until 4k 27-32" is super cheap or the monitor dies. . 4k is twice of 2k so even at 32" the ppi is still higher compare to a 27" 2k but if u want high refresh rate for FPS game than 27" 2k is the sweet spot. Comparing Ulefone Armor 22 vs Ulefone Armor 27 on Smartprix enables you to check their 2K @ 30 fps QHD, 1080p @ 30 fps FHD, 720p Yes, Dual LED: Front Camera: 8 MP (Main) 32 MP ƒ/2. Went back to 27 inch 1440p and it just felt right. 5 as it’s The quality difference, whether its 32 inch or 27 inch is minimal for the untrained eye, or even the eye of most gamers. Question: 1440p 27 inch Monitor vs 1080p 32 inch Monitor. I didn’t know only acceptable answers were allowed in this subreddit else suffer the If you have enough space on your desk, go for 32". the smoothness difference of 60hz and Personally it’s an obvious choice for me as I mainly play FPS or racing games. The first side is that most competitive fps players (in general, not just pro-scene) are leaning into 1440p 27" monitors. The Ultrawide feels really great for gaming, my 5700xt is a right fit for this resolution (although in some titles I gotta drop from ultra to high - not much visual difference). New. In Comparison: 27 inch 16x9: 40 inch 16x9: Actual Aspect Ratios: 32. Features You tought wrong. PS u/bruceaboose is right! My monitor runs at 144mhz and this eliminates tearing since my pc will usually run 100 plus fps on newer titles with graphics maxed out. , 5k at 27 and 6k at 32 for ideal “sitting in front of a screen” use. Build Help For a i7 14700k, 4070 TI Super build. 'Absolute crap' - you're either on crack or you have a faulty panel. The setup I have in mind is a Stacked monitor setup with the second monitor on top so I can lay back on my chair and bring the Was there a DP cable with the MSI monitor ? I am also hesitating between 32 240hz and 27 360hz. I mostly play strategy games, and some adventure-rpg, fps games. Size wise is personal preference. Pixels Per Frame-Pixels Per Sec-- Share This Test! - 27 ” - 165Hz / OC 180Hz - QHD (2560 x 1440) Dell S3422DWG - VA - 34 ” - 144Hz - Ultrawide - WQHD (3440 x 1440) The difference in price between the two is that the ultrawide is roughly 75$ more expensive. I will buy triple 32 inch 144 Hz monitors that will be installed behind the wheelbase at 75 cm to my eyes. 27 vs 32in for triple screen setup. Email: Author: Message Topic Search Topic Options. Thanks! Share I have never seen a 32" ultrawide; most UW display is either 34-35" (if it's 3440x1440), or 28-29" (if it's 2560x1080) Gaming in ultrawide is nice, but you also need to know whether the UI elements on the screen corner is being too far It’s a low pixel density that looks blurry. supported resolution for my Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 and don't know about capability to ensure this resolution at good fps For a 23" monitor, I find 1080p is fine. I am always used to 27-inch displays; I am worried about going for 32 inches because 27 inches has more PPI, about 164 ppi, while 32 inches have 140 ppi. I’m also sitting an arms length from the 32 inch. Use case is a mix of games (typically RPGs, no need for super high frame rates), photo editing (hobbyist) and occasionally working from home (think Microsoft office type applications). I'm thinking of buying a second monitor for my setup, my current monitor is a 27" 1440p 144Hz monitor that I use for FPS games mostly and and upgrading second monitor (a 720p one) for many of my RPG games and some fighting ones too. I went with 1440p 144Hz IPS. I haven’t seen any complaints past the basic concern it may be noisier later. 32 inch suites 4k better. Im looking to switch my Acer Predator 27" XB271HUA for either the Odyssey G7 27" or 32". - 4K at 30 FPS and 60 FPS. It'd still be a larger percent increase between 4K and 1440p (~45%) at 27" vs 1440p and 1080p (~37%) at 27", but there are also diminishing returns. Plus I play competitively much better at 27” vs 32”. IMO even 27" QHD is fine for gaming, but of course 4K will be noticeably better. I would ignore curved monitors. For FPS games it feels like a lot of screen space to scan at times. Reply MikeHawkStockHolder • - 1080P 30 FPS and 60 FPS. I want to say that before, I didn't had any PC's or whatsoever. The LG UltraGear 27 and Samsung Odyssey G5 both offer excellent performance for gaming. Whic I want to buy myself a gaming monitor for my First PC Build. For more scenic, laid back games, its fantastic. If you play competitive games then you would get the 27 for 360hz and high frames. 48% larger area: As a 4:3 Display The extra fps you get from pushing fewer pixels is more important than having 2160p for these smaller monitors. I have two different 27" 1440p monitors, and I find they are the sweet spot for size and resolution/DPI for me personally. Post Reply. The question then becomes 1440p vs 4k. most games default to 80% but personally i prefer 90-100% currently on a 144mhz 1080 24in monitor but was gifted w/ a I've done two 27s, a 32 and a 24, 34 and 38 ultrawide - for productivity this has been the endgame for me (LG 40wp95c-w). Find Members Posts. So I am debating either a 27 inch IPS monitor or a 32 I'm stuck between getting a 27 or 32 inch though. I have the desk space for either and the ones I'm looking at are close in price so that isn't a factor. Is there even a difference if you just place the monitor closer? Appreciate any help! Price difference right now between 27" and 32" IPS panels is pretty negligible so figure why not just cry once. So this year I plan to purchase one of the new gen NVIDIA or AMD cards so I am also considering an upgrade for my main monitor (older ASUS 27" 1440p g-sync, high fps (120+), and then as many other bonuses (HDR, etc. Add to Buddy List. Multiple good reviews from multiple sites. At the moment 1080p at 24–25" 144 Hz is more than enough for me. I'd recommend 1440p at 27 inches, the pixel density makes for great image quality as well. Also, a 27” is the maximum size you’d want for any competitive gaming, which technically improves performance as well. I will definitely go for a 5080/90 in the next three years and I'm back to considering the 27 in over the 32. Reply Yes. Apple are right that 4k should be used 20-24 inches. Reply reply kdavis37 • It Well I had 27 g7 before I moved to neo g7 and I think smearing and responce time are very good for both in general, If you're into competitive FPS games 27" 1080p on a high refresh VA is all you need, you'll see no benefits on larger higher resolution screens. I dont feel the curve at all after using the monitor for 1h ish when i bought the monitor. If you are planning to play at 1080p (because you want super high FPS esports, because your GPU would struggle at 1440p, etc. Create New Topic. I need at least 32" minimum as this monitor will be doubling for our TV. Ive been thinking of getting a budget 144hz 1080p monitor, but I'm not sure if I should cop a 24 inch or 27 inch. The last upgrade was noticeable, but didn't feel like it was 1080p 24" vs 1440p 27" , I don't know the pixel density difference between the two resolutions, but I do know 32" at 1440p is roughly the same pixel density as 24" at 1080p. I really wanted a 27" 4K screen, but had to get a 32" one for work. 1440p will run at about 15-20 FPS lower than 1080p. No,. Lastly, the results of FPS calculations can vary depending on the specific game or application being tested, as well as the configuration of the computer Been using G7 27" for a year now playing mostly fps game aka Apex Legend. Only old laptop. When I have time for some gaming, i just bump the resolution down - but I’m not into high FPS/competitive gaming so high refresh doesn’t matter to me. A 27" at 24" (50 FOV) is the same apparent size as a 32" at 29" A 27" at 12" (90 FOV) is the same size as a 32" at 14" Personally upscaling isn't even needed for 4K 27" at 2 ft or less (~70 PPD). So this upgrade would mainly be for single player titles such as Elden Ring, God of War, 32" vs 27" 1440P FPS Question . I have only used 24 inch and 27 inch monitors throughout my life and am wondering how much of a size difference 32 inches is. My current gaming PC has a 3080, and so far I have been able to run every game I know with max settings and 120+ fps. : Better spend 300 bucks more and buy a 4080 . 240hz 27 inch(or 24) is sick. Top. Then I experience 60 FPS and I can't believe I played in 30, then I had a 144hz monitor and now, as much as possible, I always want to go beyond 60 on every game. The 1440p is a 21:9, (3440 X 1440). 27’ vs 32’ monitor. The OP is talking about 34" though, not 32". Went from a 1080p 144hz monitor to a 27' 1440p 165hz and I can't go back. When you’re building or upgrading your set-up, what size gaming monitor should you buy? Let’s compare the main size you’ll find on the market and figure out Posted by u/HaTTaN9 - 6 votes and 7 comments For example, a graphics card won't provide the same FPS on a 4K monitor as it does on QHD. drivinfast247 Illustrious I can hit 240+ fps easier at 1440p than at 4K (unless I dumb down every graphical setting possible). I knew it was a mistake. For fps. (I guess I'm used to it), but I wouldn't run an FPS on all three monitors There are plenty of 32-inch 1440p monitors available as well. I run triple 1440p flat 27’s on a 5800X3D, 4080, and 32gb Ram. Honestly have been playing better on the AW screen. They both have fast response times and low input lag, which makes them ideal for fast-paced games. I have two 27" 1440p 144Hz screens on different PCs and both are the perfect balance of size and clarity. PS: the difference between 100Hz and 144Hz is minimal to me, but that's different for everybody individually. Reactions: WWP. Much more detailed and immersive but horribly aliased by comparison. So many small details I didn’t notice, the game has incredible fidelity, and then turning on HDR felt like I went from looking through smeared glass to a crystal clear window. Members Profile. IPS panels have better motion handling than VA for gaming. So I don't have any experience with gaming monitors, therefore I can't compare them. Just wondering if it's worth trading in my 27 g7 for the 32 since I'm still within my return window r/GlobalOffensive is the home for the Counter-Strike community and a hub for the discussion and sharing of content relevant to Counter-Strike: Global Offensive (CS:GO), and Counter-Strike 2 (CS2). Just a curious post Share Sort by: Best. Both 27-inch and 32-inch displays have higher refresh rate options, but the former has higher refresh rate options at cheaper price I have heard some people say that 4k gaming on a 27 inch monitor is not worth it because it is much better on a 32 inch monitor. Anything in-between is somewhat of a niche size. Maybe even up to 32", I barely feel any difference between 90 and 120 FPS. ; Response time is another important consideration when choosing a monitor, especially for fast-paced activities such as gaming, sports, and action movies. But anyway 4K is the recommened resolution for 32"+ screen size. I can see the difference but it certainly wasn't worth the fps hut & monster PC 4k takes too run. 32" and if it's THAT especially when 1440p or 4K. If you can run games at 4k with max settings and achieve 120+ fps, then by all means go for it, but personally I think 1440p ultra with 120-150 fps looks so damn good at modern titles that I personally would rather have this, 4k oleds start at 32" currently, and I would highly recommend that route. New comments cannot be posted and votes I went 24" 1080p -> 27" 1440p -> 32" 4K. DS ELITE Dual 27” 1440p vs Single 32” 4k for Software Engineering and Light Gaming . I can imagine upgrading to 1440p 27" in the future. Main purpose: gaming. But 1080p on a 27" is a little too low DPI for my taste. Members Online. 24 was just waaaay too small for me, 27 seems nice but I'm not sure if I want a 32 or not. 79 Points per Inch. Reply reply I moved back for a 32” 4k @ 165 fps with a better image. While you may not be able to hit 240 fps at 4k you can just play competitive games at 1080p without any scaling issues. I had a Dell ultrasharp 32" 4K and went back to a 27" 1440p and second display. Neither is objectively better. I play a lot of competitive fps games and also some single player so I think the monitor will be fantastic I'm just wondering how much of The question is: am I really going to lose a lot of fps? For example, on RDR2 i play between 90 and 140 fps depending on the place in ultra, my gpu is 7900xtx thank you guys Archived post. You can always place it far enough to occupy the same area on your retina as the 27". However, it is hard to find a 27 inch 4K VA monitor. So they reach it in 1080p, and the game looks better at this resolution on a 24" than on a 27". Most competitive gamers prefer monitors with 120Hz or more. 32 inches (we only game btw) a little worries about the pixel density for the 32, but I do hear to that feels better overall and that it's the new 'standard' for many that tried it. Is it better to stick with a 1440p monitor with very high fps or make the move to 4k sacrificing fps. I went with the 27" for FPS games. ), Open world games (GTA V, RDR 2), FPS (only Apex Legends), MMO (only WOW when shadowlands finally drops) GPU: RX 5700 XT Budget: equivalent of max 500 USD Sitting distance: 60-65cm Going with 43” screens vs 27” screens, I have 3. Things don't scale properly sometimes (ahem, screw you Adobe!) And moving the cursor from the hierarchy to the inspector took too much movement of It looks great. It is a very easy decision between the 27 and 32. Didn’t think much about PPI difference between 32 and 27 inches Reply reply Was more immersive for me but my reaction time is slightly better in fps games cuz my eyes don’t have to move as far. It lacks DSC and strobing, but at least it has a true G-Sync module (mostly for variable overdrive and support for less-than 60-fps it doesn't trigger LFC and stutter). Personally, I prefer the 34” 1440p ultrawide. So I don't know should I take 32" VA or 27" IPS. Parent comment is 100% correct, and here is some numbers to back this 1080p is 1920x1080 pixels, equals to 2. ) then get the 1080p. Staggering difference. 27" at 1080p have 81 pixels per inch. I went from playing at 157fps to between 200-220 fps on the AW. If you focus on the aim sight, you can see enemies in the periferal view when they are in the borders of the screen. 600 pixels on the screen, at 24 inches, with a pixel density of 91. 15% larger diagonal 119. 24" may be a bit too small to get a good balance of FOV and view distance, but has better pixel density Here's my question: I'm hesitant between picking 27" or 32" monitors, which one should I choose? My concern is that I already have a 30" monitor and it feels quite big. Also a 27" is too small to warrant For those ordering the 4K variant, do you play competitive games at all? I chose the 1440p for fps reasonscurrently running a 4080. 24" vs 27" for fps gaming and more, details inside. I'd only go 27s if you have a space constraint or a budget constraint. 34" is typically UWQHD or 3440x1440p. 67% smaller area: 55. It was that or go 1440p uw on an oled, A 27 is the same as a 32 if the 27 is closer. For me 27" is too big for gaming, both for FPS and moba which are my 2 main genres I play. Resolution vs FPS/refresh rate is a purely subjective question. Same height. But that’s just me. DoubtsDan it Share Add a Comment. I went from a 27 inch 1080p to a 32 inch 1440p 165Hz, and even with the increase in screen size 1440p looks a amazing, Also, still unsure about 27 Vs. I'm getting 276 fps average with a 435 grain arrow and 270 with the 450 grain arrow right now. Not the same, but I went from downsampling 4K into 1440p 27” to 32” native 4K. 08? But im not sure. 71% smaller diagonal 58. For 27" the recommneded resoltion is WQHD/2K because that res is hogher thean the human eye. Feels and looks great, doesn’t leave me wanting more. Post Date: 2022-02-17: Post Reply . There is a vast difference between 1440p at 27" and 4K at 32", as you're going up in screen space by about 18. Refresh Rate- Hz. I will prefer 27" over the 32" i feel the 32" is way too huge for fps games. Pizza_For_Days • No, just 27 and 32. If you have the option I would go up to 32 inch over the 28 inch. I could never get used to 27" 1440p. Games I play: Dota 2, resident evil series, The 3080 is great but the cards just aren't powerful enough for high fps AAA gaming on 4k. Also 1440p is too small in some games where you cannot scale UI. I can't find a 32" 1440p monitor anywhere close to $400. 32” is better suited for 4K. mainly playing warzone. There are 1440p 32 inch IPS monitors and a few 28 inch 4k IPS but not OLED, yet at least. be/pTyu7a5j3RwIn this video, I talk about the display size sweet spots for 1080p, 1440p and 4K resolution Here you can compare Ulefone Armor 22 and Ulefone Armor 27. Anyone have any thoughts on the matter of 27" vs. law sjdw opkg qfktvq kkihrcc hfc yyqta rraz zkmyrilc xmzug