Never said pc , I said monitor , I was looking for one for my ps5
Intel’s new Core i9-14900KS arrives today for $699 with boosts up to 6.2GHz
- Thread starter John Elden Ring
- Start date
The problem with a 4K TV is you're always going to be relegated to a 16:9 aspect ratio and a max refresh rate of 120. My monitor is 21:9 with a 1000r curve and 165hz, it eats your entire viewpoint from left to right so that kind of goes out the window.
I'll give you the HDR thing though, monitors are definitely getting better at that but it's still not up to the same snuff that TV's are. The other aspect of monitors that they are greatly superior in is response time which plays a large role in online gaming particularly shooters.
I mean my TV is great, but for the platform I find it to be an overall inferior experience especially as KB/m kind of loses its luster away from a desk which forces use of controllers.
I think ultrawide is kinda wack tbh. It always looks weird in most games because devs don't account for it. Also modern TVs are 144
But monitors are usually used for pcs. And that's why the 4k monitors are expensive, bc barely anyone buys them
Well I decided to check them out because I don't watch TV so I thought they'd be less expensive since all I wanted to use it for was gaming but nope they're obviously taking advantage of the market
I've yet to see a game that looks weird on this display, every developer accounts for it now even Sony.
That is why I don't game at very high fps. I have a 144hz but in a game like Helldivers 2 I cap it at 72fps to minimize fluctuation, I'm fine playing at 60fps too if the game is more demeaning and if I'm playing with a gamepad I can easily go down to 50 or 40 as well.
You're comparing probably ultra wide forced into 16:9 to what's being explained to you here. I don't game on PC but yeah that wide angle without the funny look of being forced into 16:9 is pretty good for gaming. I still prefer my TV though, just explaining @rinzler point.
My monitor has freesync, I much rather cap my frames in pretty much any situation and I still benefit from freesync if I'm not hitting my target cap.
I don't play any competitive game where any latency difference would matter.
That defeats the entire purpose and benefit of the technology lol
I don't think you understand what a frame cap is. I just don't allow the frame rate to go a above a certain target because I don't want a game fluctuating it's fps all the time but in the case I fail to hit that target I will still benefit from freesync.
Most people recommenced you to cap your framerates bellow your monitor max range anyway, I don't know where you are coming from.
I play PS5 on my 4K HDR TV that's from 2016 and still looks great. I also use it for PC and photo/video editing and it's pretty color-accurate (Sony). Also good for Netflix, OSN+, and other streaming apps.
I would recommend even the cheapest 4K TV from Sony that does 120Hz as it would most likely look better than most monitors.
I don't think you understand what frame synchronization is. What you're doing while owning a freesync display doesn't make any sense.
Explain to me the benefit of artificially limiting your framerate when you have a setup with frame synchronization capability.
I don't want my GPU working at 100% most of the time, I don't want excessive fluctuating frame rates and I don't care if the game is running above a certain target FPS. I'll decide my target according to the game I'm playing and what I feel like my GPU can handle well.
Stability seems a lot more desirable to me than a wild fluctuating frame rate.
Don't have any money for a new TV , I'm using a Sony bravia I bought back in 2013 I recently tried my ps5 with my sister's monitor which has a high refresh rate which made me wavy to look for them but it's stupidly expensive