Considering possibility of adding third monitor

[Compnewbie01]

I currently have two Dell 24" monitors (2407WFP and U2412M) and might add a third. Should I stick with Dell or try another brand out? I have been happy with both so far but am open to all options. Ideally I'd want the new monitor to be 1440p (will have RX480 GPU) and be less than 30" so it fits in well with the other two. Anything on the horizon I should be looking out for if I decide to make this purchase?

 

[Headfoot]

productivity? Gaming? photoshop?

 

[Bacon1]

Most monitors use the same or very similar panels since only Samsung and LG make most of the panels. The difference is in the warranty, "out of the box" color calibration and other things. Dell does have good warranty and their pro monitors usually have good color calibration out of the box, but they tend to be very pricey.

 

[Compnewbie01]

Gaming would probably be the main reason for this purchase.

 

[Bacon1]

Gaming would probably be the main reason for this purchase.

Do you care about 60 vs 75 vs 144hz? 1440p and up are quite demanding, but as long as you turn down a few settings it should run very well.

 

[Compnewbie01]

I've never understood the significance between the different refresh rates on monitors since I always assumed the graphics card would be a limiting factor in fps. While 60 fps is great, I usually am okay with a steady 40 fps in most games. Generally I go with settings as high as possible before the stuttering gets to be too bad. As long as 3-4 years from now I can still get decent frame rates with medium+ settings I will be happy.

Perhaps you could explain the difference between those rates. If a monitor is set to 144Hz but a game is stuttering does refresh not matter? If the monitor is set to 60Hz and a older game is playing will it be limited to 60fps even if the game reports 100+ fps?

 

[Bacon1]

Perhaps you could explain the difference between those rates. If a monitor is set to 144Hz but a game is stuttering does refresh not matter? If the monitor is set to 60Hz and a older game is playing will it be limited to 60fps even if the game reports 100+ fps?

So you have a few options:

Option 1) VSync. This will limit the game from displaying and rendering over the hz on your monitor, and will remove any tearing. Going under your monitor refresh rate can cause hitches as the game will not update until its finished rendering another

Option 2) Unlimited / VSync off. This will let the game render and attempt to display as fast as possible. You can end up with tearing which can be anywhere from "unnoticeable" to very annoying depending on your tolerance.

Option 3) FreeSync (Adaptive Sync) / GSync. This will remove any tearing while inside its range, which is under your monitor refresh rate. Its best for >60hz monitors as it allows more leeway to stay inside the range without having to use vsync / frame limiter.

Option 4) Frame limiter. This will stop the GPU from rendering more frames once you've hit the limit.

You can combine Option 3 with either 1 or 4 for the best experience if tearing bothers you.

Does that help or answer your question?

 

[Headfoot]

I've never understood the significance between the different refresh rates on monitors since I always assumed the graphics card would be a limiting factor in fps. While 60 fps is great, I usually am okay with a steady 40 fps in most games. Generally I go with settings as high as possible before the stuttering gets to be too bad. As long as 3-4 years from now I can still get decent frame rates with medium+ settings I will be happy.

Perhaps you could explain the difference between those rates. If a monitor is set to 144Hz but a game is stuttering does refresh not matter? If the monitor is set to 60Hz and a older game is playing will it be limited to 60fps even if the game reports 100+ fps?

If you can push high frame rates via your graphics card, high refresh rate monitor + high FPS is amazing. It will blow your mind, especially if you play FPS. But even just scrolling webpages is way better. It's one of those things that once you experience 100+ hz/fps you will find it difficult to ever go back. Like trying to watch a VHS today.

Think of HZ on your monitor as the maximum number of FPS you can show. You still have to push that level of FPS from the graphics card. It essentially raises the ceiling from 60fps to 144fps or more. Imagine the difference in smoothness from 30 FPS to 60 FPS, it's like that again.

 

[tamz_msc]

The biggest deciding factor in choosing a high-refresh rate monitor is whether you play competitively. Same goes for GSync and FreeSync, though the answers are going to be opposite in the two cases.

 

[Headfoot]

High refresh rate is awesome even if you dont come close to competitive gaming. Definitely not reserved to competitive gaming alone.

 

[tamz_msc]

It's all about prioritizing your needs. I for one would never choose a TN 144Hz panel over an IPS 60Hz one. Colors, contrast and panel uniformity are much more important for me. Besides whether or not your aim improves is up for debate.

 

[Compnewbie01]

Both of my Dells are currently running 1920X1200 at 60Hz and it has never been a problem for me. Then again I don't know what difference I would notice if I moved up to a higher refresh rate. Since I am only getting an RX480 I probably won't get >60fps for newer games but that is okay for me. One thing I do appreciate is proper color and contrast. One of my biggest gripes about LED monitors/TVs is how they can make everything look vibrant and colorful in a fake way. I prefer 'real' colors. Normally I would want to look at monitors in person but in-store selections/prices are usually not great and this forum has always steered me in a good direction. I'm wondering if departing from Dell is worthwhile to break into higher resolution territory.

 

[Headfoot]

IMO high refresh rate is way more impressive than modestly better color reproduction, for gaming, since you're in fake environments that dont require accurate reproduction. Contrast ratio is the next most important thing in my mind