What's better: 2k or FullHD monitor 144 Hz
In fact, there was this question: what's better: 2k or FullHD monitor with 144 Hz? And generally much noticeable difference between FullHD and 2k?2K@60Hz is better because it does not need smoothing. But the map needs at least a GTX 1070.
warp 37
That is the card I planned to buy a 2k monitor. I can tell the difference between FullHD and 2k feels?
the monitor with the big Hertz probably speed NT matrix which has bad colors and is not very good angles obzora.also it may need high fps as if he is kind and honorable, then it Matritsa will have a very short switching time of flowers and thus a stable 20 fps ilitny Novigrad will look like a slideshow exaggerated. to enjoy peck's performance may well be that ought to be around 80 fps or above and joy of this special will not be
the large monitor does not always mean it does not need smoothing. there probably plays the ratio of the resolution size. and which boyar from this monitor sits. well, of course with the increased resolution increases the load on the graphics card and 1070 may not be enough honor for such permission.
more not knowing the specific monitors to not comprehend possible.
WaylonJones wrote:
much noticeable difference between FullHD and 2k?
by 128 pixels wider horizontally. only
WaylonJones
If you prefer to play online shooters it is better to buy a monitor with 144гц. For example I have a fullhd monitor with the included sight AOC G2460PG 144гц, 1ms response time with G-Sync function. Very good monitor, though it's not cheap. I have a UltraHD monitor Asus 27 MX27UQ 60Hz games on this monitor look very nice, but it needs 1080ti or the new gtx Titan) Monitor road course. And so he prefer to play on your full HD monitor aoc g2460pg, as play in online shooters, and there 144гц and minimum response time gives a good advantage. Asus MX27UQ 27 turned on to the second where the computer usually sits my wife, and sometimes plays horror)
2K is better, if in some games the graphics card will not pull the resolution I'd can be reduced. At 27 inches the difference is noticeable in full HD pixels.
WaylonJones wrote:
In fact, there was this question: what's better: 2k or FullHD monitor with 144 Hz? And generally much noticeable difference between FullHD and 2k?
For a start you have to give yourself a report that for such sets Monica need a very powerful video card again, still depends on your needs,if you're important in the first place FPS,then of course Monique 144Герц here out of competition,but as I said above,what video card will be able to issue such a number of frames,especially in modern games.2K is primarily a picture will be better and not only because there are more pixels (actually the difference is not that big compared to Full HD) but above all because the matrix is likely to be IPS (or newer versions of MVA, PLS ) and monitors with a large hercovka it is always TN that color conveys worse,although 2K also need a powerful video card and Full HD if you're going to get a decent frame rate in 2K, this figure will naturally fall of course 1070 is especially monitored by PWM will be fine to pull 2K,unless some sort of port of the curve,so choose what is important to you,image, or FPS,even better to try yourself and the other Monique,if possible.
Under 2K standards monitor costs 30K+ and vidyuhi at least 1070 is needed, but still a comfortable 60 fps preferably gtx 1080. And generally better reviews to look at and compare.
EvgenyDMT
Support! better full hd and 144гц than 2K and 60 fps with dips to 40 ))
2K take it and don't think the picture in all the games better in General, I have 2k 60 Hz and 1080 sli,no problems. the price tag on rules monitor starts from 30 and the best course to take 1080
Sergey American
Of course, the ladder turns into a ladder under a microscope on a small monitor.
https://catalog.onliner.by/display/viewsonic/xg240r This monitor is now ideal for games. Correct colors, practically no glare on black, deep black (by LCD standards).
I would not highly recommend buying Ips monitors for games, they have a lot of disadvantages. Slightly more saturated colors are not worth bad blacks (gray for most Ips, pls), high latency and input lag.
Do not trust any paid tests, buying a monitor download the TFT Test program and measure the frame response time yourself. Most monitors have 16ms. Here it is.
For a resolution of 2560x1440, a monitor of 32 inches and more is desirable and seats one and a half meters away from it. Otherwise, everything will be too small on the screen.
And never buy a monitor with an extended color gamut - your eyes will bleed out, you will get a lot of problems and spend all your money on treatment.