Overclock.net banner
Cancel
Create thread New Forums

31.5" 2560x1440 165 Hz VA G-Sync - LG 32GK850G

7 reading
Jump to Latest
2,221 - 2,240 of 2,608 Posts
#2,221 ·
I bought this monitor a couple weeks ago. I'm liking it quite a bit. It's nice and big and I haven't noticed any issues typical of VA's in the past(blurring/ghosting etc). I'm running it at 144Hz currently.

I also have an Asus MG348Q 34" Ultrawide and Acer 27" 144Hz Gsync for comparison. I'll be selling the Acer 27".
 
Save
Reply Quote Rep+ Rep+
#2,222 ·
how does acer 27" 1440p compare when it comes to PPI ? is the downgrade on LG really noticeable or not that much (especially in gaming) ?
 
Save
Reply Quote Rep+ Rep+
#2,226 ·
Psychoduck said:
People that own 860G/850F do you set your digital vibrance to like 65%-70%? On 650F I need to set it to 70% to get nice "juicy" colors. Also is high Digital Vibrance harmful to the eyes?
Click to expand...
All that does is oversaturate colors using a software filter on the GPU. It's not harmful per se but the image looks like trash. I never use these GPU features, be it denoising, sharpening, vibrance, saturation, gamma, or any other software filter hacks.

gujukal said:
How is this monitor with fast paced games like Overwatch and CS etc? Would it feel sluggish compared to my old Benq XL2420Z with 144hz? My Benq is TN so i guess it would have lower input lag but maybe the old TN's are not much faster than the current VA-panels? I want a more immersive experience but still don't wanna perform worse in fast paced competetive games than with my Benq.
Click to expand...
Keep a 27" TN for competitive games. 31.5" is a bit too big and VA way slow with out of blacks transitions.

smoke2 said:
Why is here recomended 32GK850F? It has probably only wider color gamut, which brings almost nothing for users not doing graphics editing, but beside this. Why it should be a better monitor than 32GK850G?
Click to expand...
Because 850G is plagued with issues: OSD popup, vertical lines, blurry sharpness with no adjustment, ... on 850F at least you can adjust sharpness, it costs less, has wider gamut to try combat the poor color viewing angles of VA as 850G looks washed out around edges and overall the image is bland on standard gamut on it.

At best you probably want PX329 cheap 165Hz but it's standard gamut and US only.

Fanu said:
how does acer 27" 1440p compare when it comes to PPI ? is the downgrade on LG really noticeable or not that much (especially in gaming) ?
Click to expand...
31.5" 1440p is equal to 23.5" 1080p, yes it's a downgrade in PPI and it's what you will see on most common monitors.

The thing is 31.5" is nice one you get used to it after a few days. Still for competitive I would stay at 27" so you can see everything easily. For casual yes 31.5" is better but even for IPS the viewing angles start to be a stretch of it's capabilities let alone for VA.
 
#2,228 ·
JackCY said:
All that does is oversaturate colors using a software filter on the GPU. It's not harmful per se but the image looks like trash. I never use these GPU features, be it denoising, sharpening, vibrance, saturation, gamma, or any other software filter hacks.


Keep a 27" TN for competitive games. 31.5" is a bit too big and VA way slow with out of blacks transitions.


Because 850G is plagued with issues: OSD popup, vertical lines, blurry sharpness with no adjustment, ... on 850F at least you can adjust sharpness, it costs less, has wider gamut to try combat the poor color viewing angles of VA as 850G looks washed out around edges and overall the image is bland on standard gamut on it.

At best you probably want PX329 cheap 165Hz but it's standard gamut and US only.



31.5" 1440p is equal to 23.5" 1080p, yes it's a downgrade in PPI and it's what you will see on most common monitors.

The thing is 31.5" is nice one you get used to it after a few days. Still for competitive I would stay at 27" so you can see everything easily. For casual yes 31.5" is better but even for IPS the viewing angles start to be a stretch of it's capabilities let alone for VA.
Click to expand...
Wide Gamut is worthless in games and does not compensate for anything, especially poor viewing angles... It's useful in image editing and if display + whichever game support HDR, but not for SDR content. It's true that at 165Hz this display suffers from refresh rate vs. response time mismatch, which results in some motion smearing (black transition), but text is just as sharp as on any proper full RGB 4:4:4 panel. At 120Hz and 144Hz there is no oblivious black transition smearing and motion blur is minimal. "Bland" is not a quality term for displays and not something that can be measured with eyes or otherwise. Here's quantitative results of LG32GK850G color accuracy after calibration and aside from blue being slightly off, color accuracy for this display is excellent:
 

Attachments

#2,229 ·
Do a test from user's POV not with a probe stuck at perfect angle right at the display, but oh wait that is too expensive for any review site to implement and closest we get similar to this are rtings measurements.

Wider gamut is not worthless as sRGB is fairly narrow and having a little over does make even sRGB content look a little better even if it's not professional use accurate.
The overall image saturation is better with wider gamut VA monitors over sRGB ones. Try QD Samsungs or other wider gamut, it's nice to have even for SDR a little wider gamut, not too wide sure but a little is nice. And is a much better alternative to saturate the image more that doesn't ruin image such as software tweaks with vibrance will.

Smearing blacks are fairly unreal on all current 144Hz VA :/ Do I need to post the links to ufotest with the sample colors again that exhibit this a lot?

Or you know just drag these ingame screenshots on your screen, enjoy the VA smearing :(
Sure not everyone is bothered by blacks smearing and will take that disadvantage along with poor viewing angles to not have IPS glow because most IPS monitor sized panels made these days don't have the glow removing filter...
VA is not slow in all transitions, it can be fast in bright ones but in blacks it's bad, really bad to a point where it is easily seen in 24p movies and where I draw the line.

Sharpness on 850G, there you go, or visit lagom, very easy to check. Pretty much all have a blurry image.
My pixel structure image that has the pixel dimming in it.

And my 850G gallery: https://imgur.com/a/bDFVmjz

People also used to use the CoD screenshot to check smearing on VA. And this FC5 bright forehead for vertical lines issue on this LG.
To check banding caused by messed up gamma curves and black levels the modified netflix dell hell I made works and what people liked to use for checking TN's gamma miscalibration and how horrid it will look with dark content when a wrong gamma brightens it up like crazy to see banding in blacks.


---

BTW the 850F is 500 EUR in December now, noticed recently, it finally dropped a bit. Still PX329 for US folks is probably the best deal on this panel for $350-390 it used to be. LG still way overpriced for what it offers and even Samsung can make it look too expensive.
 

Attachments

#2,231 ·
I'm gonna receive an AOC Q3279VWF soon. Someone told me it's basically a better LG 32GK850F, even though it has a lower refresh rate. At the very least, it has a contrast ratio of about 4000:1 and seems to be relatively fast for a 75hz panel.

I'm really curious if it can actually beat the LG. Otherwise, I'm gonna have to wait for the new Acer monitors (as always).
 
#2,232 ·
I doubt that monitor is better than the LG

75Hz points to it being a cheap gaming monitor

and its contrast ratio is 3000:1 as stated by specs on official site:

https://eu.aoc.com/en/products/q3279vwf/specs

also its brightness is lower than on LG
 
Save
Reply Quote Rep+ Rep+
#2,234 ·
12345us3r said:
I'm gonna receive an AOC Q3279VWF soon. Someone told me it's basically a better LG 32GK850F, even though it has a lower refresh rate. At the very least, it has a contrast ratio of about 4000:1 and seems to be relatively fast for a 75hz panel.

I'm really curious if it can actually beat the LG. Otherwise, I'm gonna have to wait for the new Acer monitors (as always).
Click to expand...
Don't know who said that but they are out of their mind probably. The VA variant as far as I know smears and PCM has reviewed it long ago. It is a completely different panel. Yes it has a nice contrast and fairly glossy surface.

I have the Q3279VWFD8 which is it's newer IPS sibling, 1350:1 BOE made IPS ADS, matte, to me it does look better than the AUO VA, has perfect neutral sharpness, gamma 2.2, calibration is quite fine on my unit and it costs 3x less for half the refresh rate with better image quality, viewing angles and better response times. So for a hold over monitor until a sensible 144Hz+ is available, hell why not. No buzzing, no inversion issues and even in test patterns there are only minor special cases that are not what they are supposed to be, unlike 144Hz+ that love to crap out on fine patterns/with inversion. Sure 75Hz is nothing impressive but neither is 144Hz+ with smearing blacks on VAs, smooth and smeary at 3x the cost with worse image... no thanks.

Not sure the original Q3279VWF will be still sold and D8 newer version is not replacing it, maybe eventually it will replace it.

VA is not slow in all transitions and with a good overdrive it's about as fast as IPS except it's often awful with out of blacks and only some VA TVs on rtings so far showed to have decent transition times from blacks if they indeed are consistent enough and their measurements are comparable with monitors they measure. There is an advantage to have faster refresh rate even beyond what the transition times can keep up with.

It's a real shame that most IPS that are sub 10ms transition time for quite some time are often limited with 60Hz electronics and don't have glow removing filter. It's not marketed as 144Hz by panel maker and then monitor makers don't want to use those panels to offer even 100Hz and the highest we get are rare 75Hz options.
 
#2,235 ·
:rolleyes: at someone complaining about 1440p vs 4k. Well obviously, 4k is going to look way better side by side. If you're doing only office work, get a 4k screen. I assume if you're buying a 165hz gsync monitor, you're using it for gaming. In which case, I wouldn't want more than 1440p. It's a trade off, like most things.

I do use it for all my office work though - work at home 8 hours a day on it. I'm used to it. I think a 4k screen would be nicer. But it's a compromise I'm willing to make so I don't need two separate screens. I used to have a XL2720z (1080p 27") - compared to that, this screen looks amazingly sharp :).

I use 165Hz + "fast" response time and haven't seen vertical lines yet. Fingers crossed.

I use the screen for OW, and competitive fighting games, without any problems. If you're a pro gamer, get the 240hz tn screens. It will look bad but it's the fastest thing available.
 
#2,236 ·
What you might see past 60hz isn't enough to Justify the Prices to me lol.
 
Save
Reply Quote Rep+ Rep+
#2,237 ·
JackCY said:
Do a test from user's POV not with a probe stuck at perfect angle right at the display, but oh wait that is too expensive for any review site to implement and closest we get similar to this are rtings measurements.

Wider gamut is not worthless as sRGB is fairly narrow and having a little over does make even sRGB content look a little better even if it's not professional use accurate.
The overall image saturation is better with wider gamut VA monitors over sRGB ones. Try QD Samsungs or other wider gamut, it's nice to have even for SDR a little wider gamut, not too wide sure but a little is nice. And is a much better alternative to saturate the image more that doesn't ruin image such as software tweaks with vibrance will.

Smearing blacks are fairly unreal on all current 144Hz VA :/ Do I need to post the links to ufotest with the sample colors again that exhibit this a lot?

Or you know just drag these ingame screenshots on your screen, enjoy the VA smearing :(
Sure not everyone is bothered by blacks smearing and will take that disadvantage along with poor viewing angles to not have IPS glow because most IPS monitor sized panels made these days don't have the glow removing filter...
VA is not slow in all transitions, it can be fast in bright ones but in blacks it's bad, really bad to a point where it is easily seen in 24p movies and where I draw the line.

Sharpness on 850G, there you go, or visit lagom, very easy to check. Pretty much all have a blurry image.
My pixel structure image that has the pixel dimming in it.

And my 850G gallery: https://imgur.com/a/bDFVmjz

People also used to use the CoD screenshot to check smearing on VA. And this FC5 bright forehead for vertical lines issue on this LG.
To check banding caused by messed up gamma curves and black levels the modified netflix dell hell I made works and what people liked to use for checking TN's gamma miscalibration and how horrid it will look with dark content when a wrong gamma brightens it up like crazy to see banding in blacks.


---

BTW the 850F is 500 EUR in December now, noticed recently, it finally dropped a bit. Still PX329 for US folks is probably the best deal on this panel for $350-390 it used to be. LG still way overpriced for what it offers and even Samsung can make it look too expensive.
Click to expand...

Games are developed with sRGB standard, unless HDR is involved and the idea for color accuracy is to accurately reproduce the image game creators saw as they development the game. It's a standard to which professional studios adhere to be on the same page, although I think most use IPS displays and the idea of accuracy is questionable when it comes to contrast ratio, but not colorspace...

Lagom.nl is not a site any professional uses. There are specific measure/test patterns that exist to verify common aspects, such as:
- white clipping
- black clipping
- sharpness & overscan
- grayscale gradient

Here's one of the basic sharpness tests and this display passes it with flying colors - https://drive.google.com/file/d/1C1POjE_HBwUL_lF2kBvQYhI0oqPJVsNg/view?usp=sharing .

When it comes to PC monitor review sites, the information is not that accurate, not even TFT Central gets it right. For example, I don't which of such sites even uses ColorChecker to verify accuracy. The 100% saturated red, green, blue and the overall "sRGB coverage" means almost nothing. Colorspace can cover it alright, but its the accuracy within it that matters. You can have 2 monitors that cover sRGB space 100%, but they may show entirely different skin and sky tones. That's why ColorChecker exists - to verify accuracy of the most commonly used colors (in both films and cinematic games). In fact, in professional world of display calibration, the 100% sRGB coverage is not as important as accuracy 75% coverage because films and most games don't utilize those most saturated levels - 75-100%.

If you want actual accurate knowledge, ask questions on AVS forums, where you have developers, scientists and people who make a living off calibrating displays.
 
#2,238 ·
#2,239 ·
MonarchX said:
That's very good contrast ratio for a VA monitor, but there is no G-Sync for that monitor...
Click to expand...
Gsync is just a proprietary rip off of VESA adaptive sync, uses the very same technology but is software locked by Nvidia to their own products = undesirable.

Your link is not a sharpness test pattern. It's more of a CRT era general test pattern. As a video on YouTube it's definitely messed up to 4:2:0 subsampling and compression making the whole sharpness test completely useless with it even if the pattern was worth anything. Even downloaded it's 4:2:0 of a blurry anti-aliased pattern at 100% scaling on a neutral sharpness monitor. So good luck making that look sharp and worth testing with at all on anything let alone blurry 850G or almost all M270DAN2.x based monitors. Antialiased = blurried test pattern to test for sharpness... ridiculous.
 
#2,240 ·
Show me a native 1440p sharpness test that this display can't pass. I'm going to be a bit off-topic in this reply to make more sense.

Usually, when/if post-processing is disabled, sharpness can't be adjusted via display controls on most LED/LCD displays, be they monitors or TV's. Sharpness is post-processing, adjust either through display OSD (hardware) or tools like ReShade/NVidia CP (software). Post-processing adds to input lag. "Neutral sharpness" is 0 sharpness, no adjustment at all. Without processing, hardware/technology-based display image is 1:1 RGB mode with 4:4:4 sub-sampling. It is achieved by disabling all gimmicks, like sharpness, black stabilizer, dynamic contrast, certain "game" modes. Once all that is turned off and display is calibrated, you get to witness hardware-based image and only then assess quality.

Example: OLED with true and almost infinite static contrast ratio, beautiful deep blacks, will outshine some LED/LCD display with a gimmick known as "dynamic contrast ratio" of 10000000000000000000:1 if both display a standard image without gimmicks enabled, but poorly calibrated OLED may show dim ugly images compared to some bright crap LED LCD with high brightness and "vibrant mode". That's what HT enthusiasts know. If you don't believe me, check out AVS forums. It's why it makes so much more sense to keep up with display technology and specific models than to visit BestBuy and look at TV's.

Another example: Plasma TV's were and still are with superior image quality (compared to LED LCD's, not OLED's) and still superior in motion, but due to brightness, in stores, they looked dim and awful compared to bright LED LCD's, which was one of the reasons plasma was abandoned. Clueless average shoppers killed it along with store employees who demonstrated them in bright light environments. In dark, movie-theater-like environment, plasma's were un-matched in image quality until OLED and HDR.

G-Sync has reliability and input lag advantages over FreeSync and as such it can't be used with post-processing or all post-processing integrated into the panel, unlike FreeSync, which can. Lack or reduced post-processing means advantage for input lag reduction, stability and reliability, but disadvantage for those who like post-processing. You can look at comparison here - https://gapintelligence.com/system/pictures/1141/content_freesync_vs_g-sync.jpg . I don't want to be offensive in the spirit of holidays, but given how such advantages are undesirable to you and sharpness post-processing is desirable along with more vibrant (often called Dynamic/Vibrant or Cartoon mode on TV's), yet inaccurate colors, there can't possibly be a monitor better than the one you think is the best at any point and time. There's no standard for you, only pure preference, your opinion has nothing objective in it, it can't be validated with quantitative or qualitative data. Both panels are the same with G-Sync/FreeSync being the #1 difference. It is that G-Sync vs. FreeSync difference that doesn't allow G-Sync version to have sharpness controls. It's pre-set/forced at 0/neutral. If G-Sync panel, in your opinion, has sharpness issues, then so does FreeSync version, but it allows post-processing changes, such as sharpness manipulation and wider gamut support. Wider colorspace does not improve image quality either. Non-HDR films and games stick to sRGB / Rec. 709 colorspace. If a developed tried to draw a life-like apple with unsaturated reds, seeing it with saturated bright reds due to wider gamut simply makes you NOT see what developer intended for you to see. If you don't care for that, then the concept of color accuracy is meaningless to you, no reason to even look into it. There nothing wrong with that either - look at how many ReShade / SweetFX presets there are that change game visuals to where you definitely don't see the game as developers made it, regardless of display calibration and color accuracy. Thing is, you never know whether those ReShade presets would even be created if their creators had good displays with accurate colors. Perhaps, they were just trying to compensate for incorrect gamma and grayscale. I want to see films and games the way developers made them, so I can at least judge them with less bias. You obviously don't.

I prefer better hardware without gimmicks, for which I can compensate with known tools, such as ReShade for post-processing, something I used regardless of display to enforce DisplayCAL 3DLUT's, and for example, mix LumaSharpen with NVidia's blurry TXAA to get rid of aliasing and retain good sharpness. For playback, I use madVR that comes with a ton of high quality post-processing no display hardware can even mimic. High quality hardware + high quality software = win-win :D. I can't make any of it any clearer than that. It is what it is.
 
2,221 - 2,240 of 2,608 Posts
About this Discussion
2.6K Replies
208 Participants
Last post:
tvshacker
Overclock.net
posts
28M
members
562K
Since
2004
The premier forum for overclocking experts and enthusiasts. Discuss hardware optimization, custom builds, benchmarking, cooling solutions, and pushing the boundaries of computing performance. From beginner guides to extreme overclocking, join our technical community to master system tuning.
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
Intel CPUs Hardware News NVIDIA PC Gaming Water Cooling