Opinions 27 or 32 in. monitor for 1080p

[Roosterfeet]

Trying to decide between 27 and 32 inch curved gaming monitors to run DCS at 1080p. I'm concerned that the pixel density might be too low at 32". Anyone have any experience with this?

 

1440p would require a pricy graphics card upgrade on top of a more expensive monitor so that's out.

[Bearskin]

I have a 27" 144Hz 1080P monitor that I used for DCS world with a GTX 970. I decided one day to hook up a 46" 1080P TV and it blew me away with the clarity and just being able to see much more. So the bigger the better and 1080P was great at 46" so it should be great at 32".

 

 

I went the other way though, I was going to get a bigger monitor after using the 46" TV but I went VR instead as the Rift was probably the same price as buying a decent 1440P 32" monitor, and the rift worked pretty good on a GTX 970 and probably even better now the updates are making DCS better. if I did go the monitor route though I would have gone for a 32" 1440P as you can always knock it back to 1080P if your card is not powerful enough.

Edited August 21, 2020 by Bearskin

[gavagai]

Not sure what GPU you have, but DCS runs great with my 1070 and a 32" 1440p freesync display.

 

If you're going to stay at 1080p then 27" is probably the biggest you want.

[Roosterfeet]

I tried downscaled 1440 to see how the frame rate hit went and I went from 50s to 40s over parts of the new Syria map. Need to do some more testing. 32" 1440 might be doable but they're a good $100 dollars more than the 1080p freesync monitors. On the other hand going from 22" to 27" might be a significant and relatively cheap upgrade.

 

Thanks for the thoughts. Keep them coming.

[LucShep]

For DCS at 1080p, I'd say definitely go for the 32'' instead of the 27''. :thumbup:

 

I'm on 32'' 1080P 75Hz monitor (which all do 60Hz equally fine), and pixel density is not a problem at all.

The image is still really crisp, very clear and the bigger size difference makes for a LOT more immersive gaming experience compared to 27''.

Though I'll say that, if you're coming from a 24'' screen and never used a 32'' screen before, you may find better to give it more distance from you (at least an arms lenght), at least initially.

 

From experience, while I agree that 1440P is a better resolution for anything bigger than 27'', it'll definitely require a stronger graphics card (33% more pixels to render is no joke).

If DCS 2.5 is one of your main sim/games, and considering it's very demanding even at 1080P, then I'd NOT jump to a 1440P screen unless you have at least an RTX2060Super or RX5700 equivalent or better graphics card.

Otherwise, you'll find yourself cutting and compromising graphics options to maintain performance (which IMO kind of defeats the purpose of the monitor upgrade).

 

There's another advantage with a 1080P monitor for someone unsure about graphics performance, which is the upscaling and downscaling factor.

If at some point you crave for more resolution in just some games, you can create custom upscaling resolutions. (f.ex, playing games at 4K resolution on a 1080P monitor will look good )

The upscaling does not mess image, it's the opposite (downscaling) that does break the image quality. (f.ex, playing games at 1080P on a 4K monitor will look like crap :thumbdown: )

Edited August 21, 2020 by LucShep

[aleader]

I tried downscaled 1440 to see how the frame rate hit went and I went from 50s to 40s over parts of the new Syria map. Need to do some more testing. 32" 1440 might be doable but they're a good $100 dollars more than the 1080p freesync monitors. On the other hand going from 22" to 27" might be a significant and relatively cheap upgrade.

 

Thanks for the thoughts. Keep them coming.

 

I have a 32" 1440p/75Hz Freesync monitor...this one:

 

https://www.canadacomputers.com/product_info.php?cPath=22_700_1429&item_id=134807&language=en

 

I only paid $269 CDN ($199USD) for it from Costco. It's been a really nice upgrade from my 24" 1080p BENQ as I sit a ways back in my home-built sim chair.

 

My son just bought this one LG 27GL63T-B.ACC:

 

https://www.costco.ca/lg-27gl63t-b.acc---27in.-ultragear-fhd-gaming-monitor-(1920-%c3%97-1080).product.100664794.html

 

It looks fine for games even though it's only 1080p, but it is quite noticeably 'grainier' in pretty much everything else. I've had to drop my resolution to 1080p while I wait for the new cards to arrive and there is a noticeable difference in DCS.

 

I personally wouldn't go any bigger than 27" for 1080p, and would prefer 1440p even for a 27", but you will need at least a 1070 (what I had up until a few days ago) to get decent framerates in DCS with high-ish settings. Your 5600XT should be fine.

Edited August 21, 2020 by aleader

[shu77]

I recently went from a 27" 1080p to a 32" 1440p. I have a 1660ti in my laptop. I lost maybe 5-10 FPS in the process, but I find I can now see the tanker @ 10 NM, and spot a lot of stuff I was missing plus the MFDs are now readable without zooming in. Personally I would suggest 1080p @ 32 will be wasted but if you can get a screen that will support 1440p, when you do get there you will get a big benefit from it. My specs in my sig and the monitor spec if you are interested.

[Leaderface]

https://hardzone.es/noticias/perifericos/xiaomi-mi-34-monitor-gaming/

There are incredible offers on low cost 34" curved monitors.

As said above: you can allways downscale to 1080p (vertical)

I won´t buy anything less than that (and a G2 Vr headset when you can upgrade. Prepare for the future on advance. Just that).

[Roosterfeet]

Thanks for all the feedback. I wound up going with a 32" 1440p with good reviews that I found for a good price. https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gigabyte-g32qc

Not ideal for 1080p but better for other stuff I do and more future proof. And after some tests with the Syria map, I think my machine might be able to handle 1440 well enough for my liking anyway.

[Davee]

[quote=LucShep;4461207

If DCS 2.5 is one of your main sim/games, and considering it's very demanding even at 1080P, then I'd NOT jump to a 1440P screen unless you have at least an RTX2060Super or RX5700 equivalent or better graphics card.

Otherwise, you'll find yourself cutting and compromising graphics options to maintain performance (which IMO kind of defeats the purpose of the monitor upgrade).

 

DCS runs just fine 32" on all maps at 1440 all settings full with a GTX 1080 oc.

[aleader]

Thanks for all the feedback. I wound up going with a 32" 1440p with good reviews that I found for a good price. https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gigabyte-g32qc

Not ideal for 1080p but better for other stuff I do and more future proof. And after some tests with the Syria map, I think my machine might be able to handle 1440 well enough for my liking anyway.

 

That's a pretty good monitor from the reviews I've seen. I'm curious to know how you like it if you'd like to come back and post in a few months after you've used it for a while?

[LucShep]

Thanks for all the feedback. I wound up going with a 32" 1440p with good reviews that I found for a good price. https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gigabyte-g32qc

Not ideal for 1080p but better for other stuff I do and more future proof. And after some tests with the Syria map, I think my machine might be able to handle 1440 well enough for my liking anyway.

 

Looks like it's a pretty good monitor! Nicely done.

 

DCS runs just fine 32" on all maps at 1440 all settings full with a GTX 1080 oc.

 

Ok. :) I think we just have different definitions for what is "fine" then.

Edited August 23, 2020 by LucShep

[Davee]

Looks like it's a pretty good monitor! Nicely done.

 

 

 

Ok. :) I think we just have different definitions for what is "fine" then.

 

No, I think we have different experiences. Like I said, full settings, high fps. Super clear, no stutters, no lag just iIMHO, perfect. Maybe you missed the OC part?

 

No sense in misdirecting a person to a higher than required card.

[LucShep]

No, I think we have different experiences. Like I said, full settings, high fps. Super clear, no stutters, no lag just iIMHO, perfect. Maybe you missed the OC part?

 

No sense in misdirecting a person to a higher than required card.

 

 

So, DCS 2.5.6 at 1440P, on FULL settings, no stutter, high fps (which must mean constantly above 60), and on ALL maps? ...with a GTX1080? hmmkay

 

Been overclocking for quite a bit and never heard of any GTX1080 gaining more than 12% (at best?) with an OC, watercooled or not (unless on LN2?).

Sorry, I call it BS. Even people with RTX2070Super / GTX1080Ti / RX5700XT will have a hard time running DCS 2.5.6 fully maxxed @1440P (imagine it at Syria or The Channel maps), let alone a GTX1080, OC'ed or not...

Edited August 23, 2020 by LucShep

[Leaderface]

So, DCS 2.5.6 at 1440P, on FULL settings, no stutter, high fps (which must mean constantly above 60), and on ALL maps? ...with a GTX1080? hmmkay

 

Been overclocking for quite a bit and never heard of any GTX1080 gaining more than 12% (at best?) with an OC, watercooled or not (unless on LN2?).

Sorry, I call it BS. Even people with RTX2070Super / GTX1080Ti / RX5700XT will have a hard time running DCS 2.5.6 fully maxxed @1440P (imagine it at Syria or The Channel maps), let alone a GTX1080, OC'ed or not...

It may depends on the settings the user is comfortable with.

Good monitor choice @Roosterfeet.

There are incredible monitor offers right now!

[aleader]

It depends almost exclusively on what the AA is set at really. I ran it without stutter at 1440p on my 1070, but I could only manage 2X MSAA with the other AA turned off. My low though fps was 37 (down low on the map), 40 - 72fps (I have it capped) up higher and over cities. A 1080 would be probably 10 fps better? That would be good enough for me too. That's on an NVME drive, R5 3600, everything else up high. I would have to turn the shadows to flat over heavily treed areas (i.e. mission 2 of the Ka 50 Deployment campaign, trees at 85%) to smooth it out.

[LucShep]

It may depends on the settings the user is comfortable with.

It depends almost exclusively on what the AA is set at really (...)

Not going to disput that it depends on what settings the user is comfortable with, that is beyond obvious. :)

The point is, and if you read again, the guy said his game is at full settings, quoting:

Like I said, full settings, high fps. Super clear, no stutters, no lag just iIMHO, perfect. Maybe you missed the OC part?

 

DCS 2.5.6 at maxxed settings and 1440P res, high fps, no stutters?

...yeah, that ain't happening with a GTX1080, even if overclocked at the brink of VRMs explosion. ;)

[BitMaster]

Imho as well.

 

No way, even with a 1080ti you have to make more than one compromise to keep the fps above 60 in almost all conditions.

 

You can have many things at high, but some you got to cut down.

[BuzzU]

Just a quick question. I don't want to mess with my system. I get good fps and it runs nice and smooth at my settings. The question is my monitor is 1080 but only 20" I'm old and blind as a bat. I bigger monitor will help. If I go to a bigger 1080 monitor. Will it affect my fps?

[Svsmokey]

Umm...no .

[BuzzU]

Thanks.

[rss0900]

I just setup CQ32G1 - triple screen 32 inch monitors , these are 1440P and I'm amazed at the quality. The only complaint so far is the brightness but with some adjustment can get it to the correct level. If you are gaming only I highly recommend the AOC 32" monitors on amazon or 27" if 32's are too big for you, they are curved and wow what a difference that makes in immersion in triplescreen. Running them in 1080P or 1440P I see no ghosting or clarity issues

[BuzzU]

I have lots of room. A curved 32" would be great compared to what I have now.

[72westy]

https://www.costco.com/samsung-32%22-class-fhd-curved-monitor.product.100416413.html

[BuzzU]

Only $200 at Walmart. I thought it would be more. :)