Gaming monitor advice

Forums › Desktop computing › Gaming monitor advice

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

4798 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3660

#3430633 4-Nov-2025 07:29

BTW: Your mileage may vary but I see the Radeon RX 9060XT for high FPS clearly in the HD gaming range, not in the WQHD or 4K range. Sure it will work with higher resolutions, but higher FPS at the same time will ask for more performance.

- NET: FTTH & VDSL, OPNsense, 10G backbone, GWN APs
- SRV: 12 RU HA server cluster, 0.1 PB storage on premise
- IoT: thread, zigbee, tasmota, BidCoS, LoRa, WX suite, IR
- 3D: two 3D printers, 3D scanner, CNC router, laser cutter

Lizard1977

2133 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 624

ID Verified

#3431678 6-Nov-2025 16:14

Thanks for these replies. While it started out as a question about gaming monitors, it's thrown me into a bit of a spin over my choice of GPU. I have never owned a GeForce card and always said I would use that in my next build, but when I looked at GPUs I couldn't see a lot of value in the Nvidia range over AMD, for the same price. In other words, it looked to be about a $300 premium for the 5070Ti vs the 9070XT, with a corresponding difference at the lower tier. As I think I said in my original post, I'm not close to being a hardcore gamer, so I don't need the best or fastest GPU. I figured a 9060XT would be fine for up to 1440p gaming (and plenty for 1080p). On the VR front, again I'm not a hardcore gamer. I'd be connecting a Quest 3 headset (I have a USB-C cable for a wired connection). I'm not planning on playing the latest and greatest PCVR titles, though I'd love to start with HL: Alyx and see where that takes me. But the comments about VR resolutions make sense, and suggest a higher GPU than a 9060XT is required. And then there's the whole question of optimisation difference between AMD and Nvidia (I've seen videos on YT that argue both sides). I really don't know where to go from here. I could look at a 5070Ti to play it safe, but they are around $1700 at the moment, quite a step up from an ~$800 9060XT. The 9070XT is a few hundred cheaper, but if the AMD issue with VR is real, then I've probably spent way more than I need and still not any better off.

andrew75

150 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 80

ID Verified

#3431699 6-Nov-2025 17:09

If you want to do PC VR you want the fastest GPU you can reasonably afford. AMD cards appear to be fine from what I can tell, but they do lag on raytracing performance compared to Nvidia (If you are VR'ing its unlikely you'll have raytracing on because of the performance hit).

Batman

Mad Scientist
30012 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6217

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3431714 6-Nov-2025 18:14

Lizard1977:

Thanks for these replies. While it started out as a question about gaming monitors, it's thrown me into a bit of a spin over my choice of GPU. I have never owned a GeForce card and always said I would use that in my next build, but when I looked at GPUs I couldn't see a lot of value in the Nvidia range over AMD, for the same price. In other words, it looked to be about a $300 premium for the 5070Ti vs the 9070XT, with a corresponding difference at the lower tier. As I think I said in my original post, I'm not close to being a hardcore gamer, so I don't need the best or fastest GPU. I figured a 9060XT would be fine for up to 1440p gaming (and plenty for 1080p). On the VR front, again I'm not a hardcore gamer. I'd be connecting a Quest 3 headset (I have a USB-C cable for a wired connection). I'm not planning on playing the latest and greatest PCVR titles, though I'd love to start with HL: Alyx and see where that takes me. But the comments about VR resolutions make sense, and suggest a higher GPU than a 9060XT is required. And then there's the whole question of optimisation difference between AMD and Nvidia (I've seen videos on YT that argue both sides). I really don't know where to go from here. I could look at a 5070Ti to play it safe, but they are around $1700 at the moment, quite a step up from an ~$800 9060XT. The 9070XT is a few hundred cheaper, but if the AMD issue with VR is real, then I've probably spent way more than I need and still not any better off.

the 50xx cards have DLSS 4 which uses AI to insert frames to give you 4x more FPS (in many but not all games)

SpartanVXL

1498 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 666

#3431943 7-Nov-2025 13:53

Nvidia charges a premium because of their lead in Raytracing and AI upscaling+frame generation technology. AMD are close with FSR4 on the 9000 series but nvidia’s DLSS4 work on all of their cards from 2000-5000 series and arguably ahead in image quality at similar settings.

As long as there are no showstopping issues, the 9060xt would do quite alright in VR. HL Alyx is coming on 6 years old now, and SteamVR has scaling and VRS to lower performance load.

As for your monitor recommendation my previous comment stands; are you after anything in particular aside from 1440p high refresh? Monitor market have been quite stagnant in tech, enough that you are better off getting the cheapest IPS 1440p 120-240Hz panel and not worry about the rest as you would need to step up to OLED or very good mini-LED to get any benefits.

Do look at QD-OLED monitors when they go on sale, they regularly go for 15% or so discount and dip below $1000. The contrast and colour quality have no competition aside from microLED which are not widely available yet.

shakedown14

74 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 8

ID Verified

#3431950 7-Nov-2025 15:28

Oled are really starting to get affordable!

https://www.pbtech.co.nz/product/MONSAM82750/Samsung-Odyssey-OLED-G5-27-QHD-180Hz-OLED-Gaming-M

That’s the size I want but I do want TV level HDR to watch movies/anime.

Dell

Shop now for Dell laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

Lizard1977

2133 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 624

ID Verified

#3431982 7-Nov-2025 20:48

SpartanVXL:

Nvidia charges a premium because of their lead in Raytracing and AI upscaling+frame generation technology. AMD are close with FSR4 on the 9000 series but nvidia’s DLSS4 work on all of their cards from 2000-5000 series and arguably ahead in image quality at similar settings.

As long as there are no showstopping issues, the 9060xt would do quite alright in VR. HL Alyx is coming on 6 years old now, and SteamVR has scaling and VRS to lower performance load.

As for your monitor recommendation my previous comment stands; are you after anything in particular aside from 1440p high refresh? Monitor market have been quite stagnant in tech, enough that you are better off getting the cheapest IPS 1440p 120-240Hz panel and not worry about the rest as you would need to step up to OLED or very good mini-LED to get any benefits.

Do look at QD-OLED monitors when they go on sale, they regularly go for 15% or so discount and dip below $1000. The contrast and colour quality have no competition aside from microLED which are not widely available yet.

I've been giving this some thought, and I think I could stretch to the 9070XT, especially if there is a chance of a price decrease around Black Friday. At Labour Weekend they had a 9070XT down at $1250 which looked like a steal, so fingers crossed.

That leads me on the monitor question - I don't have anything particular in mind. I've aimed at 1440p because it would be a step up from 1080, but as I said my gaming ambitions aren't all that high. From my perusals on YT, the refresh rates seem to range from 120hz all the way up to 240 and beyond, but I don't see much value in going that high. Anything around 160-180hz would be plenty for my needs, especially if there isn't a lot of price difference from the 120hz models.

I'll also be using the monitor for productivity/office work, so I wasn't sure that OLED would be a good idea, in terms of the risk of burn in.

So the angles I'm weighing up are:

Stick at 1440p, or step up all the way to 4k?
27" or 32"?
IPS or OLED?

If I go to 4k, then OLED is way out of my price range. But if OLED is indeed the wrong call for a mixed use/office setup, then I could scratch OLED from my list.

That would leave me with these options if I went 4k:

https://www.pbtech.co.nz/product/MONAOC62732/AOC-U32G4-315-4K-UHD-160Hz-Gaming-Monitor---3840x2 $749

https://www.pbtech.co.nz/product/MONAS64276/ASUS-ROG-Strix-XG27UCS-27-4K-UHD-160Hz-Fast-IPS-Ga $749

There are lots of choices stepping down to 1440p but these two jumped out at me:

https://www.pbtech.co.nz/product/MONLGL33276/LG-UltraGear-32GS75Q-B-32-QHD-180Hz-IPS-Gaming-Mon $549

https://www.pbtech.co.nz/product/MONSAM72543/Samsung-Odyssey-G5-32-QHD-180Hz-Flat-IPS-Gaming-Mo $439 with Black Friday early bird deal

And then I start to wonder about the curved ultrawide monitors again, because they look cool/distinctive and I wonder what it might be like (given my two monitors right now are in a pseudo-curved setup and it's a bit more natural than have two monitors side by side and flat...)

I don't know that I'm any closer to resolving this question.

Qazzy03

545 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 492

#3432081 8-Nov-2025 09:28

Lizard1977:

I've been giving this some thought, and I think I could stretch to the 9070XT, especially if there is a chance of a price decrease around Black Friday. At Labour Weekend they had a 9070XT down at $1250 which looked like a steal, so fingers crossed.

Just FYI NotBadTech has a Gigabyte RX 9070 XT Gaming 16GB $1225 + Shipping from $14 (Bank Transfer Price)

https://www.cheapies.nz/node/53667#comment-279150

I went from a 1080p to 4k monitor, then I went from a 6600XT GPU to a 7900XTX.... I got down the rabbit hole of if I just spend a bit more lol.

Happy with purchase tho, NVDIA at the time had a ~$400 premium on their 40XX series and I was like, sure I don't get DLSS and great ray tracing but for $1699 I was sold on the power I did get.

SpartanVXL

1498 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 666

#3432200 8-Nov-2025 15:19

It depends how much static content is involved in your office work. If you are doing it more than 4 hours a day then perhaps it’s not a good idea for OLED despite the improvements in burn-in mitigation. Doing an hour or two is not harmful enough, especially with dark mode and screensavers. If it is still 80% if the time viewing media or gaming then it’s fine, you will have enough dynamic usage that you won’t get anything noticeable.

Ultrawides are quite nice, most are however VA panels so will smear a bit in dark scenes.

The screens you’ve linked are all good options around the $500 mark. 27” will have higher pixel density, if you have the monitor closer and your eyesight is okay you will notice the 27” will have a bit more clarity at the same distance.

Batman

Mad Scientist
30012 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6217

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3432204 8-Nov-2025 16:13

Windows has fixed the OLED pixel shape issue. When i first had my OLED monitor the text looked barely readable due to diagonal pixel issues.

Magically it's completely fine now. They must have fixed the software side of things. It's fine now.

No burn in but I don't leave my monitor on all the time.

I got the 27" because 32" gave me a headache (16:9).

I got 1440p because that's the max my 4090 card could render at 240 FPS in low-medium graphics. LOW MEDIUM!

Tinkerisk

4798 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3660

#3432225 8-Nov-2025 18:20

Just got my hands on a new Sapphire Pulse RX 9070XT for €520 (NZ$1068). However, this includes a discount voucher for a new ISP, which I will be switching to in a few days. This should be a good price/performance ratio for a GPU, although there are of course faster ones available at a higher price.

But the AMD ticks all (my) boxes as a combo with the UWQHD display mentioned before. ☕️

Geekzone support

Support Geekzone with one-off or recurring donations Donate via PressPatron.

Lizard1977

2133 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 624

ID Verified

#3433344 11-Nov-2025 13:45

shakedown14:

Oled are really starting to get affordable!

https://www.pbtech.co.nz/product/MONSAM82750/Samsung-Odyssey-OLED-G5-27-QHD-180Hz-OLED-Gaming-M

That’s the size I want but I do want TV level HDR to watch movies/anime.

I think I've settled on 27" based on my desk space, and also wanting to get a decent pixel density. I've flip flopped a lot between 1440p vs 4k. For IPS displays the cost difference is around $100 which is manageable. If I streetch a little more, I can just about afford the 1440p OLED panel above. But I can't seem to find any reviews online. There are plenty of reviews for the G5 27" IPS panel, but not the OLED.

So my struggle now is whether an OLED panel at 1440p is worth the price difference of a 4k IPS panel. It sounds like OLED would make for a stunning picture especially for single-player games, and from what others have mentioned here, the burn-in issues are manageable with Office work. But would the extra resolution make more of an impact than going from IPS to OLED? And does anyone have any reviews of the G5 27" OLED monitor?

shakedown14

74 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 8

ID Verified

#3433548 11-Nov-2025 21:31

I’ll go OLED as a monitor when they will be as good as a TV for HDR. I don’t really won’t to compromise when you see prices of OLED.

According to my research you want a monitor that HDR1000 for it to be good in HDR.

I dont play competitive games and I use my monitor mainly for Movies/solo games so image quality for me is the top criteria.

This monitor seems to be what I look for while OLED is maturing:

https://www.mwave.com.au/product/aoc-q27g40xmn-27-180hz-qhd-1ms-adaptive-sync-hdr1000-qdminiled-gaming-monitor-ac85528

Not available in NZ yet but Mwave ship to NZ.

Batman

Mad Scientist
30012 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6217

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3433549 11-Nov-2025 21:36

HDR1000 lol

My OLED monitor is plenty bright enough at 200 Nits - any higher and my face will start to get tanned (yes it goes much much higher but i set it to 200 nits because that's what my eyes can handle)

I don't know how reviewers still have retinas watching 1000 nits all day

SpartanVXL

1498 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 666

#3434057 13-Nov-2025 11:21

To clarify why HDR1000 doesn’t matter much is because OLED has effectively infinite contrast which is far more noticeable for image quality. The peak brightness of 1000 nits is very bright, try to find a comparison to a led lightbulb and you will see why it is not overly necessary, especially for full panel ratings. I.e. it is a very bright lightbulb.

What you want to look at are reviews on how well the panel tracks in brightness levels to the source and if there is any crush or loss of details because of that. Unfortunately you need a in depth review to find this out and cant rely on the labels of the box.

For OP, your best bet is seeing if your local shop has any display models out for 4k vs 1440p but TV’s might be your only comparison if you want to see IPS vs OLED out on the floor.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4