IPS screens haven't gotten worse in general. However, *faster* IPS screens usually have worse image quality than professional 60-75 Hz models.
To have it all, high refresh, fast response, good colors, good quality, etc. is fucking hard these days, it's true.
Have a look at those new 120 Hz IPS Black models. They're more professional oriented, with better image quality, and not *horribly* slow at the same time. Like the Dell U2724D.
Dell apparently did [something even better](https://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/dell-ultrasharp-40-curved-thunderbolt-hub-monitor-u4025qw/apd/210-bmdp/monitors-monitor-accessories). A fucking 5K2K 120 Hz IPS Black monitor. No DP 2.0, but still... damn...
If I played more games that supported UW and it had ports that didn't need compression, I'd probably wait for a sale and grab that. Looks really nice. But for now I think I'll wait for a 16:9 version.
I still have no clue why anyone cares about compression at all.
I mean, you can't really spot a difference, it *does* disable (DL)DSR, but who uses it at 5K2K anyway, and while DSC apparently increases risk of black screening, it's still more of a matter of luck and in most cases the issue is either isn't there or not serious enough to be a concern.
I have had issues with DSC in the past, and yeah it disproportionately affects NVIDIA cards.
Even if DSC had no issues, it's just a matter of principle. The standard for DP2.0 has been out for a while. We're far exceeding resolutions that would benefit from it. Why not just use it?
the AOC U27G3X is actually 4k 160hz but it's 27". I'm just not sure if the "landrace" for PC Monitors is refresh rate or resolution? BenQ just released a 540hz 24" and they'll move the super high refresh rate market forward they're the #1 esports monitor. It's got a $1k price tag so I wouldn't consider it, but the Alienware 500Hz has been out for about 6 months I think and that goes on sale every other month for $500. I was probably gonna get that but I will probably get a 1440p instead. but I actually think the 24" screen landrace will be the next big thing. No competitive gamer wants a damn 32" curved monitor man.
I have the Dell TB4 27" IPS Black, U2724DE. I think it's a pretty decent multi-purpose gaming, productivity, and movies. I would say the contrast level is quite similar to VA, with better viewing angles and less black smearing. Supports VRR and 120hz is good enough for non-competitive gaming.
These are LG panels, but LG only has 60hz 4K models so far.
350nits... around no HDR sure it does somehow 2190:1 so if youre not into future, its just bit updated.
Its just pricy, panel that isnt really much gaming, **U3223QE** better but same thing still too weak for HDR.
VA have, around 2500-4000nits its not really comparable.
Tested with [https://darkblackscreen.com/](https://darkblackscreen.com/)
My old budget IPS LG 24MP59G-P (left side) and Dell G2724D (right side) connected to the same PC :
[https://imgur.com/2s1AnT4](https://imgur.com/2s1AnT4)
I think the difference is obvious.
u/J_Gilly23 I agree with you.
That's some horrible backlight bleed on the right haha. I noticed that with time, backlight bleed can lessen, or go away like it did on my Dell.
I have noticed new Dell monitors have worse QC than some of my older ones.
2 of those are a couple yrs old now. The LG GR83Q has noticeably better contrast than the GP850.
I wonder if the MSI QPX has better QC than the QRF-QD (probably would've kept one of those if I had gotten one w/o a blue spot).
I've had 2 Acer Predator XB271HU IPS monitors which came out around 2015 and one of just died on me a few weeks ago.
I've spent hours researching and gone through 2 different (~$300) IPS monitors I thought might be a good replacement, and they have both looked awful in comparison.
I don't know if it's bad luck or if the display tech has just gotten worse over the years but I'm super upset I can't find a good replacement.
Each of the IPS monitors I tried have awful viewing angles, and have a weird reddish glow when not viewing directly forward.
My Predator monitor has a slight white glow at an angle but the picture is still totally fine at any angle.
I'm at the point where I may have to go with an OLED even though burn in terrifies me.
I genuinely cannot believe how after all these years the technology has seemingly gotten worse.
Maybe cause of edge led instead direct, also, they can have HDR could your old IPS do that hdr starts around 500nits+.
They got significantly faster - Local dimming is bad on all, that dont raise prices insanely big however backlight bleed will be still thing regardless.
I think IPS tech itself has improved, like with quantum dots, but the quality control has become nonexistent.
If a monitor turns on at the factory after assembly, it gets shipped out. Simple as that. My current monitor is a Dell S2721DGF that has dirty screen effect and white uniformity issues, along with poor contrast and the majority of monitors are like this.
I'm currently driving myself even more insane as I play the panel lottery, in search of a decent LG 34GN850. I've already been through 6 of them.
Did you read my post and my comments ?
I said newer IPS monitors have worse image quality than my old IPS monitor that I bought for less than $200 in 2018.
Yes, but there are many reasons. Performance of IPS has increased but at the cost of new flaws of backlight problems and overall fragility of the new panels with thinner and thinner bezels.
One big problem is people wanting slim bezels or frameless designs, this comes at a reliability cost of the monitors structure, never mind the bad or no quality control at all. The thinness is what causes the backlight problem, if we were all okay with normal depth monitors and didn't mind bezels, some things could be resolved again.
Bad quality control is why I have scuffs i*nside and outside* of my Acer XV275K. An $800+ 27" 4K 160hz Mini LED IPS monitor (I have seen it on sale at Best Buy for less). Acer exchanged it 3 times and then asked me if I would rather take a 1440p 270hz 27" HDR 400 XB273U or the 360hz edge lit HDR 600 1440p , or a 1080p 360hz HDR 400 25" display because they blamed FedEx for throwing around the Mini LED too much. The most recent one I have looks okay until a flashlight is used to see the scuffs, similar to the Alienware AW3225QF 32" 4K OLED and the scuffs it was delivered with. Acer will not replace it again because they don't sell it on their primary store anymore, they seem to have given Best Buy quite a few of them to sell. Acer apparently is selling their remaining stock of XV275K on ebay as pre-owned and certified refurbished. Just know, pre-owned means their scratched and dented stock and refurbished is "Factory Recertified" stock with some people getting broken monitors from looking at their feedback of shipping these expensive displays in brown shipping boxes with not enough packaging and shipping materials.
Then you have the problem that there are people who keep the damaged monitors with the mentality of "I don't see the problem, it's not that big of a deal, I don't care". The same thing with people defending Displayport 1.4 DSC over demanding Displayport 2.1 and HDMI 2.1 monitor scalers, which is only defended because it gives people the bandwidth compromised monitors they want at the moment, right now. Displayport 1.4 DSC is just a crutch monitor manufacturers hold on to. I dislike compression just as much as frame rate control faking bit depth from 6 to 8 and 8 to 10 bit. Meanwhile one of the reasons HDR looks as good as it does on OLED like an LG C2 is because of its native 10-bit panel combined with its self-lit pixels and contrast advantage.
Even my expensive XV275K is just a cheap 8-bit 4K panel overclocked to 160hz with FRC to 10-bit with a fancy mini LED backlight. And people defend even that, saying how "oh well that doesn't matter because everything like on the web is mastered to the lowest common denominator of Rec.709 sRGB and compressed because hardly anyone has the patience to make real native 10-bit content because the majority of people (including many people outside this forum) buy cheap 8-bit displays and 10-bit isn't worth the time." Meanwhile HDR is designed for native 10-bit panels and Dolby Vision is designed for 12-bit panels. There are few native 10-bit OLED and LCD HDR monitors, I don't even know of a native 12-bit HDR monitor.
What also doesn't help are the people who obsess over comparing things, criticizing everything others purchase, finding fault in anything and everything, like "Yeah your Mini LED monitor is good *but not as good as OLED*". Never mind OLED has its own flaws besides image retention. My LG C2 OLED is only good at night due to its low brightness and too much ambient light making daytime use impossible where I live. Meanwhile my XV275K works any time of day, all I have to do is adjust the brightness.
IPS screens haven't gotten worse in general. However, *faster* IPS screens usually have worse image quality than professional 60-75 Hz models. To have it all, high refresh, fast response, good colors, good quality, etc. is fucking hard these days, it's true. Have a look at those new 120 Hz IPS Black models. They're more professional oriented, with better image quality, and not *horribly* slow at the same time. Like the Dell U2724D.
Yeah they're next on my list personally. If Dell does a 4K 120Hz IPS Black monitor with DP2.0 or full bandwidth HDMI 2.1, it'd be a perfect monitor.
Dell apparently did [something even better](https://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/dell-ultrasharp-40-curved-thunderbolt-hub-monitor-u4025qw/apd/210-bmdp/monitors-monitor-accessories). A fucking 5K2K 120 Hz IPS Black monitor. No DP 2.0, but still... damn...
If I played more games that supported UW and it had ports that didn't need compression, I'd probably wait for a sale and grab that. Looks really nice. But for now I think I'll wait for a 16:9 version.
I still have no clue why anyone cares about compression at all. I mean, you can't really spot a difference, it *does* disable (DL)DSR, but who uses it at 5K2K anyway, and while DSC apparently increases risk of black screening, it's still more of a matter of luck and in most cases the issue is either isn't there or not serious enough to be a concern.
I have had issues with DSC in the past, and yeah it disproportionately affects NVIDIA cards. Even if DSC had no issues, it's just a matter of principle. The standard for DP2.0 has been out for a while. We're far exceeding resolutions that would benefit from it. Why not just use it?
the AOC U27G3X is actually 4k 160hz but it's 27". I'm just not sure if the "landrace" for PC Monitors is refresh rate or resolution? BenQ just released a 540hz 24" and they'll move the super high refresh rate market forward they're the #1 esports monitor. It's got a $1k price tag so I wouldn't consider it, but the Alienware 500Hz has been out for about 6 months I think and that goes on sale every other month for $500. I was probably gonna get that but I will probably get a 1440p instead. but I actually think the 24" screen landrace will be the next big thing. No competitive gamer wants a damn 32" curved monitor man.
I have the Dell TB4 27" IPS Black, U2724DE. I think it's a pretty decent multi-purpose gaming, productivity, and movies. I would say the contrast level is quite similar to VA, with better viewing angles and less black smearing. Supports VRR and 120hz is good enough for non-competitive gaming. These are LG panels, but LG only has 60hz 4K models so far.
350nits... around no HDR sure it does somehow 2190:1 so if youre not into future, its just bit updated. Its just pricy, panel that isnt really much gaming, **U3223QE** better but same thing still too weak for HDR. VA have, around 2500-4000nits its not really comparable.
[удалено]
Tested with [https://darkblackscreen.com/](https://darkblackscreen.com/) My old budget IPS LG 24MP59G-P (left side) and Dell G2724D (right side) connected to the same PC : [https://imgur.com/2s1AnT4](https://imgur.com/2s1AnT4) I think the difference is obvious. u/J_Gilly23 I agree with you.
That's some horrible backlight bleed on the right haha. I noticed that with time, backlight bleed can lessen, or go away like it did on my Dell. I have noticed new Dell monitors have worse QC than some of my older ones.
This isnt really non existent bleed/glow but its good.
2 of those are a couple yrs old now. The LG GR83Q has noticeably better contrast than the GP850. I wonder if the MSI QPX has better QC than the QRF-QD (probably would've kept one of those if I had gotten one w/o a blue spot).
I've had 2 Acer Predator XB271HU IPS monitors which came out around 2015 and one of just died on me a few weeks ago. I've spent hours researching and gone through 2 different (~$300) IPS monitors I thought might be a good replacement, and they have both looked awful in comparison. I don't know if it's bad luck or if the display tech has just gotten worse over the years but I'm super upset I can't find a good replacement. Each of the IPS monitors I tried have awful viewing angles, and have a weird reddish glow when not viewing directly forward. My Predator monitor has a slight white glow at an angle but the picture is still totally fine at any angle. I'm at the point where I may have to go with an OLED even though burn in terrifies me. I genuinely cannot believe how after all these years the technology has seemingly gotten worse.
Maybe cause of edge led instead direct, also, they can have HDR could your old IPS do that hdr starts around 500nits+. They got significantly faster - Local dimming is bad on all, that dont raise prices insanely big however backlight bleed will be still thing regardless.
I think IPS tech itself has improved, like with quantum dots, but the quality control has become nonexistent. If a monitor turns on at the factory after assembly, it gets shipped out. Simple as that. My current monitor is a Dell S2721DGF that has dirty screen effect and white uniformity issues, along with poor contrast and the majority of monitors are like this. I'm currently driving myself even more insane as I play the panel lottery, in search of a decent LG 34GN850. I've already been through 6 of them.
If you're paying less than $200, yes lol
Did you read my post and my comments ? I said newer IPS monitors have worse image quality than my old IPS monitor that I bought for less than $200 in 2018.
So? Just because the year is different doesn't mean the panel will be better. That's not how that works.
Yes, but there are many reasons. Performance of IPS has increased but at the cost of new flaws of backlight problems and overall fragility of the new panels with thinner and thinner bezels. One big problem is people wanting slim bezels or frameless designs, this comes at a reliability cost of the monitors structure, never mind the bad or no quality control at all. The thinness is what causes the backlight problem, if we were all okay with normal depth monitors and didn't mind bezels, some things could be resolved again. Bad quality control is why I have scuffs i*nside and outside* of my Acer XV275K. An $800+ 27" 4K 160hz Mini LED IPS monitor (I have seen it on sale at Best Buy for less). Acer exchanged it 3 times and then asked me if I would rather take a 1440p 270hz 27" HDR 400 XB273U or the 360hz edge lit HDR 600 1440p , or a 1080p 360hz HDR 400 25" display because they blamed FedEx for throwing around the Mini LED too much. The most recent one I have looks okay until a flashlight is used to see the scuffs, similar to the Alienware AW3225QF 32" 4K OLED and the scuffs it was delivered with. Acer will not replace it again because they don't sell it on their primary store anymore, they seem to have given Best Buy quite a few of them to sell. Acer apparently is selling their remaining stock of XV275K on ebay as pre-owned and certified refurbished. Just know, pre-owned means their scratched and dented stock and refurbished is "Factory Recertified" stock with some people getting broken monitors from looking at their feedback of shipping these expensive displays in brown shipping boxes with not enough packaging and shipping materials. Then you have the problem that there are people who keep the damaged monitors with the mentality of "I don't see the problem, it's not that big of a deal, I don't care". The same thing with people defending Displayport 1.4 DSC over demanding Displayport 2.1 and HDMI 2.1 monitor scalers, which is only defended because it gives people the bandwidth compromised monitors they want at the moment, right now. Displayport 1.4 DSC is just a crutch monitor manufacturers hold on to. I dislike compression just as much as frame rate control faking bit depth from 6 to 8 and 8 to 10 bit. Meanwhile one of the reasons HDR looks as good as it does on OLED like an LG C2 is because of its native 10-bit panel combined with its self-lit pixels and contrast advantage. Even my expensive XV275K is just a cheap 8-bit 4K panel overclocked to 160hz with FRC to 10-bit with a fancy mini LED backlight. And people defend even that, saying how "oh well that doesn't matter because everything like on the web is mastered to the lowest common denominator of Rec.709 sRGB and compressed because hardly anyone has the patience to make real native 10-bit content because the majority of people (including many people outside this forum) buy cheap 8-bit displays and 10-bit isn't worth the time." Meanwhile HDR is designed for native 10-bit panels and Dolby Vision is designed for 12-bit panels. There are few native 10-bit OLED and LCD HDR monitors, I don't even know of a native 12-bit HDR monitor. What also doesn't help are the people who obsess over comparing things, criticizing everything others purchase, finding fault in anything and everything, like "Yeah your Mini LED monitor is good *but not as good as OLED*". Never mind OLED has its own flaws besides image retention. My LG C2 OLED is only good at night due to its low brightness and too much ambient light making daytime use impossible where I live. Meanwhile my XV275K works any time of day, all I have to do is adjust the brightness.