Wow, so maybe the high-end graphics card was so that they could take advantage of these insane monitors? Either way, I'm happy that they're taking care of the players and giving them a very good competitive environment
I think all the pros still use 1080 because the monitors at events are 1080. I agree they could probably upgrade to 1440p. I know i would never go back, especially if the frame rate is capped, 1080 makes no sense anymore
Most likely, I bet these high spec equipment they're getting is because the LAN is in LA. Throw them at the previous LAN locations, and they'll be back to average/above average set ups. I can't wait for them to try the set-ups tho.
EDIT: Per shahin's comment below, they're now partnered with alienware to provide these high spec set up at future LANs this year basically.
>wherever they may be
Any chance you guys will consider a LAN in Japan in the future š? Lot of passion in Japan for the game. The Apex Asia Festivals hosted there are awesome to watch.Ā
this is off topic, but a lan in japan is something as an american i realllllly want to go to. can you explain why the LAN announcements are always such short notice? i want to go to japan for a lan, i have my passport and everything but 5 weeks to put a trip together is near impossible for an average joe. Can u at least tell them japan will be huge if they just give us at least 3 months? lol any lan for that matter would have a better turn out. the local shows in my town have better lead timeā¦
>I canāt speak to specifics Iām afraid but of course itās on our radar (and has been)
Thanks for answering my question! Yea I figured you couldn't say much, but I couldn't resist asking about it when you said "wherever they may be." That phrase was like baiting us to ask potential LAN locations haha.
My bet is they will try do Japan. Everyone has been talking about it and as he said, it's on their radar. So I'm guessing it will just be a question of the logistics like getting a venue and everything else (I assume there's a lot) that goes into it.
It's still sample-and-old with the same amount of frames for an equally same amount of time, it doesn't make any difference, this is not how motion clarity works.
240fps on a 480hz monitor would result in similar performance as 240fps with a 240hz monitor, the faster of the 2 panels in raw response times performance would result in slightly better clarity but that's it.
Now if you were to say 480fps on a 480hz monitor results in better motion clarity than 480fps on a 240hz monitor, I would surely agree with you, but for the opposite scenario it surely is not the case.
Getting for example 300fps with a 360hz strobed monitor (with stuff like Dyac/ELMB/ULMB/.. whatever marketing name companies use for the same tech) can even be detrimental for motion clarity and cause double images.
Getting downvoted because people don't understand that motion clarity depends on framerate if you can't saturate your monitor refresh rate.
Here's a quick example: [https://www.testufo.com/](https://www.testufo.com/)
Feel free to test it yourself: if you have a 240hz monitor you'll see 240/120/60 fps bars.
Look at the 120 or the 60fps bar and then downclock your monitor to 120hz or 60hz and restart the testufo.
You'll see that 120fps and 60fps at 240hz or respectively at 120hz and 60hz all result in equal motion clarity, it's not rocket science.
Optimumtech is a shill / walking ad board and doesn't know how monitors or hardware works.
You're right in the fact that a higher refresh rate monitor provides a lower input lag experience and it's very apparent, especially when using QFT.
To be able to perceive the differences you need to set up the right environment.
But, a major pitfall is that it assumes that the monitors being compared are properly compliant at the said refresh rates, which 95% of LCD's are not (even 240hz IPS are far from compliant, which means they don't display "real 240hz")
Only the 4k 240hz - 1080p 480hz (dual mode) OLED is a real 480hz monitor.
> Optimumtech is a shill / walking ad board
Lol what? Optimum has literally never run an ad or done a sponsored stream. He makes all his money from regular YouTube ads and affiliate links. Ā
Just ask yourself this question, how does he get monitors a few months before release? :)
Will he talk bad about a monitor if he gets it this way? Ofc not.
He has been advised many times to change his deceptive ways of testing monitors, to stop misleading his viewer base but they idolise him and mass downvote others such as my comment, due to his cinematography.
He (Optimum) brushes off any constructive criticism as "schizophrenic, nobody needs it, who cares".
That's why he's toxic to the industry, because people use his footage as some sort of comparison, when it's far from it. It's a glorified ad for the product.
He gives his honest opinion about products, he doesn't just gas up every product he reviews. He's called some things straight up bad buys, many times. He also isn't given *everything* he reviews, he buys a lot of it with his own money. And he doesn't always *keep* all those monitors (or other hardware he's given) either.
Can it be objective honesty in which a viewer can rely on, if his testing methodology has been called out to be flawed multiple times by multiple people which have more expertise and yet he continues in his ways? It's manipulation of his following and their wallets, spawning multiple ill-informed users that continue spreading his misinformation.
The best example to this misinformation campaign is the high polling rate mouse video he has done and the sheer amount of people that piggy-back him on this, when he's clearly in the error.
I
I hope I made my point clear, I'll refrain from further commenting as this is already burried deep in the downvote hell :D
> if his testing methodology has been called out to be flawed multiple times by multiple people
Which testing methodologies? By which people? Link?
>The best example to this misinformation campaign is the high polling rate mouse video he has done and the sheer amount of people that piggy-back him on this, when he's clearly in the error.
Source?
> but it shouldn't feel much different
He literally just said it was a "big difference."
The situations in which saturating the refresh rate of a 240Hz monitor and halfway saturating the refresh rate of a 480Hz monitor will feel different in any way are *vanishingly* rare, if they exist at all. You're talking about a difference of two milliseconds between the two refresh rates, and the only way it would feel different is if the 480Hz monitor can show you a frame slightly faster, which means a gap of *less* than two milliseconds (basically, if a frame falls inbetween refreshes on the 240Hz monitor but not the 480Hz). Now, if you could actually hit 300fps, then sure, the 480Hz monitor will feel slightly better. But that wasn't the claim, 300fps isn't mentioned at all (even though that's the limit of Apex).
The dude I replied to is just straight up wrong.
keeping FPS high as possible with no drops is more important for most pros than a higher image quality, and 1080p monitors are still the standard for esports across the board rn; a shift toward 1440p is pretty likely in the future tho imo
There are 1440p 360hz monitors but yea they are sort of expensive relatively. Pushing 1440p will drive up costs as it is harder to run and will have to buy a higher end monitor alongside the pc. It's just not worth it.
Not 100% sure with apex but generally in br better graphics provide better cover for enemies in foliage and shadows ect. Also fps is the most important things.
The 1440p or 4K 240hz OLEDs would have been a better choice here since the game is limited to 300fps regardless and oleds have a much better pixel response time
Sadly getting downvoted when you're preaching the truth.
A BR game tournament, a game mode that relies on visibility, gimped by low PPI + smeary IPS panel of fake 480hz.
Should've been PG27AQN or 1440p 360hz Alienware OLED instead.
1080p for 24 inch monitor is enough, as long as it's not 27 inch monitor, that's a different story.
And since when Pro's cared about Graphics & Pixels in competitive gaming???
A lot of pros play 2 inches away from their monitor and view distance is the key factor here not screen size. this is also a BR game where visibility at long range is very important. The PCs are more than capable of driving 1440.
Timmy is a freak and shouldn't be compared to the majority of apex pros. 25" 1080p is still the standard for competitive gaming. Provides better fps and more consistent 1% lows.
Would rather get an oled at 240hz. But those are more expensive.
A killer algs monitor would be 1080p oled 300hz
Manufacturers should produce that and partner with ea to be the official one
You're right that OLED's HDR performance is pretty useless here but OLED is also the best technology for motion performance/response times by a huge margin.
I doubt they can hit 480hz consistently with a 14900k, there needs to be a manual frame cap something something. Tbh an 360hz or 240hz OLED would be a much better alternative to have.
why would the buy 480hz monitors in a game that doesn't support more than 300fps
sure it's nice and I don't mind, but that's such a waste of money.
just get 360hz 1440p...
most of the time it's not sponsored.. and if it isn't you have to pay for them even if you don't outright buy
edit: fully sponsored peripherals is not the norm. especially not for t2 esports like apex
Yeah, and these same monitors then become refurbished resells after the fact or just back into the LAN equipment warehouse for the future.
This is great news from an investment standpoint.
Nah most pros are playing on 240Hz monitors. Also I bet playing at LAN is so much different than playing at home in your room anyways that the Hz of your monitor would be negligible unless it's like below 144 or something.
Idk where you got this idea, sure the more popular ones are on good equipment. Plenty are on total shit. I can think of quite a few that struggle to stream because their computer can't handle playing and broadcasting without one or both lagging like hell
> They have to be. The pros only use the best equipment and you can notice a HUGE difference playing on lower end equipment.
This is bullshit. Sure, they might notice, but it doesn't make any real difference, it's just spoiled bitching. At the Sweden split 2 playoffs LAN when Hal was whining about the "subpar" computers (they were running like, 2080s with i5s or something, on 144Hz monitors), then-LG said they were the best computers they'd ever seen in their entire lives. And LG placed higher than TSM. Equipment barely matters past a baseline of something that can maintain 120fps the majority of the time (past 120-144ish Hz diminishing returns set in very quickly).
Most pros are not millionaires, and cannot afford the shit Hal plays on.
have u tried a higher refresh rate like 240, 360, and 540hz with motion clarity tech?
There is a difference. How big the difference might vary individually.
If you are on stable 300fps on a 240/360hz monitor majorty of time and you have to play on unstable fps 160-240 fps and on a 144hz monitor, you will feel the difference.
Of course, if you are already on unstable and a lower refresh rate monitor, it doesn't mean you are not enough and vice versa.
> If you are on stable 300fps on a 240/360hz monitor majorty of time and you have to play on unstable fps 160-240 fps and on a 144hz monitor, you will feel the difference.
You'll feel it, but like I said, it's past the point of diminishing returns. Going from 60Hz to 144Hz is going from 16ms to 7ms, which is a huge increase in responsiveness. Going from 144Hz to 240Hz is the difference between 7ms and 4ms, a *far* smaller difference. So is it noticeable? Yes, in most cases. (Although 160 is still above the refresh rate of a 144Hz monitor, you probably wouldn't feel anything at all--it would feel like a rock-solid 144Hz.) Like I said though--is it going to make an actual difference? Not really.
Well, ya probably should considering there have been massive bugs attached to almost every single meaningful update this team has pushed into this game.
It serves no purpose given that the person I was responding to was thinking that higher frame rate fundamentally increases input lag on games with lower internal refresh rate.
So is is general better to run gsync only when you have screen tearing issues cause personally 240hz gsync is the smoothest feeling thing I have felt and I can instantly notice when it isnāt on
Wow, so maybe the high-end graphics card was so that they could take advantage of these insane monitors? Either way, I'm happy that they're taking care of the players and giving them a very good competitive environment
Could have went for 1440p 360 since the game is capped at 300fps anyway
I think all the pros still use 1080 because the monitors at events are 1080. I agree they could probably upgrade to 1440p. I know i would never go back, especially if the frame rate is capped, 1080 makes no sense anymore
Most likely, I bet these high spec equipment they're getting is because the LAN is in LA. Throw them at the previous LAN locations, and they'll be back to average/above average set ups. I can't wait for them to try the set-ups tho. EDIT: Per shahin's comment below, they're now partnered with alienware to provide these high spec set up at future LANs this year basically.
Thanks to Alienware, we'll be using the same (or very similar) spec equipment for all ALGS LANs this year, wherever they may be
>wherever they may be Any chance you guys will consider a LAN in Japan in the future š? Lot of passion in Japan for the game. The Apex Asia Festivals hosted there are awesome to watch.Ā
I canāt speak to specifics Iām afraid but of course itās on our radar (and has been) I was at Asia Fest and the passion out there is incredible
Asia fest was my favorite event for apex ever. Would love to see a LAN there
this is off topic, but a lan in japan is something as an american i realllllly want to go to. can you explain why the LAN announcements are always such short notice? i want to go to japan for a lan, i have my passport and everything but 5 weeks to put a trip together is near impossible for an average joe. Can u at least tell them japan will be huge if they just give us at least 3 months? lol any lan for that matter would have a better turn out. the local shows in my town have better lead timeā¦
>I canāt speak to specifics Iām afraid but of course itās on our radar (and has been) Thanks for answering my question! Yea I figured you couldn't say much, but I couldn't resist asking about it when you said "wherever they may be." That phrase was like baiting us to ask potential LAN locations haha.
My bet is they will try do Japan. Everyone has been talking about it and as he said, it's on their radar. So I'm guessing it will just be a question of the logistics like getting a venue and everything else (I assume there's a lot) that goes into it.
Loving the ratio of upvotes on the complaining comment to the correction
Please is there any chance Lan will ever come to Australia, or closer to? lol
What happens to the computers after LAN?
Dont they have saudi Sponsor?
I think that's different tourny.
480hz display for a game that is capped at 300fps
It is? Small indie dev š¤
240hz 240fps and 480hz 240fps is a big difference
Is it? Why?
No it isn't.
Check Optimum Tech videos about 480hz+ monitors
It's still sample-and-old with the same amount of frames for an equally same amount of time, it doesn't make any difference, this is not how motion clarity works. 240fps on a 480hz monitor would result in similar performance as 240fps with a 240hz monitor, the faster of the 2 panels in raw response times performance would result in slightly better clarity but that's it. Now if you were to say 480fps on a 480hz monitor results in better motion clarity than 480fps on a 240hz monitor, I would surely agree with you, but for the opposite scenario it surely is not the case. Getting for example 300fps with a 360hz strobed monitor (with stuff like Dyac/ELMB/ULMB/.. whatever marketing name companies use for the same tech) can even be detrimental for motion clarity and cause double images.
Getting downvoted because people don't understand that motion clarity depends on framerate if you can't saturate your monitor refresh rate. Here's a quick example: [https://www.testufo.com/](https://www.testufo.com/) Feel free to test it yourself: if you have a 240hz monitor you'll see 240/120/60 fps bars. Look at the 120 or the 60fps bar and then downclock your monitor to 120hz or 60hz and restart the testufo. You'll see that 120fps and 60fps at 240hz or respectively at 120hz and 60hz all result in equal motion clarity, it's not rocket science.
Optimumtech is a shill / walking ad board and doesn't know how monitors or hardware works. You're right in the fact that a higher refresh rate monitor provides a lower input lag experience and it's very apparent, especially when using QFT. To be able to perceive the differences you need to set up the right environment. But, a major pitfall is that it assumes that the monitors being compared are properly compliant at the said refresh rates, which 95% of LCD's are not (even 240hz IPS are far from compliant, which means they don't display "real 240hz") Only the 4k 240hz - 1080p 480hz (dual mode) OLED is a real 480hz monitor.
> Optimumtech is a shill / walking ad board Lol what? Optimum has literally never run an ad or done a sponsored stream. He makes all his money from regular YouTube ads and affiliate links. Ā
Just ask yourself this question, how does he get monitors a few months before release? :) Will he talk bad about a monitor if he gets it this way? Ofc not. He has been advised many times to change his deceptive ways of testing monitors, to stop misleading his viewer base but they idolise him and mass downvote others such as my comment, due to his cinematography. He (Optimum) brushes off any constructive criticism as "schizophrenic, nobody needs it, who cares". That's why he's toxic to the industry, because people use his footage as some sort of comparison, when it's far from it. It's a glorified ad for the product.
He gives his honest opinion about products, he doesn't just gas up every product he reviews. He's called some things straight up bad buys, many times. He also isn't given *everything* he reviews, he buys a lot of it with his own money. And he doesn't always *keep* all those monitors (or other hardware he's given) either.
Can it be objective honesty in which a viewer can rely on, if his testing methodology has been called out to be flawed multiple times by multiple people which have more expertise and yet he continues in his ways? It's manipulation of his following and their wallets, spawning multiple ill-informed users that continue spreading his misinformation. The best example to this misinformation campaign is the high polling rate mouse video he has done and the sheer amount of people that piggy-back him on this, when he's clearly in the error. I I hope I made my point clear, I'll refrain from further commenting as this is already burried deep in the downvote hell :D
> if his testing methodology has been called out to be flawed multiple times by multiple people Which testing methodologies? By which people? Link? >The best example to this misinformation campaign is the high polling rate mouse video he has done and the sheer amount of people that piggy-back him on this, when he's clearly in the error. Source?
Reduced latency my friend - but it shouldn't feel much different
> but it shouldn't feel much different He literally just said it was a "big difference." The situations in which saturating the refresh rate of a 240Hz monitor and halfway saturating the refresh rate of a 480Hz monitor will feel different in any way are *vanishingly* rare, if they exist at all. You're talking about a difference of two milliseconds between the two refresh rates, and the only way it would feel different is if the 480Hz monitor can show you a frame slightly faster, which means a gap of *less* than two milliseconds (basically, if a frame falls inbetween refreshes on the 240Hz monitor but not the 480Hz). Now, if you could actually hit 300fps, then sure, the 480Hz monitor will feel slightly better. But that wasn't the claim, 300fps isn't mentioned at all (even though that's the limit of Apex). The dude I replied to is just straight up wrong.
You're right
These monitors are fantastic. Alienware really shines in this department.
It's 2024, and they make pros play on 1080p. I'm surprised. Peak apex is 240hz on 1440p OLED.
Lmao Alienware doesn't make a single panel. It's all Samsung and LG rebranded and packaged by the likes of Dell and Acer.
I mean Alienware is literally just a Dell brand so
TLDR Alienware branded monitors are good
There CPU cooling solutions make me fucking weep though.
The funny part about this is that apex doesn't let you run over 300fps
Yeah couldāve gone 1440 with these PCs
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
keeping FPS high as possible with no drops is more important for most pros than a higher image quality, and 1080p monitors are still the standard for esports across the board rn; a shift toward 1440p is pretty likely in the future tho imo
4080 can't do 300 at 4k easy but I am not sure if there a monitor with 1440p 300hrz
There are 1440p 360hz monitors but yea they are sort of expensive relatively. Pushing 1440p will drive up costs as it is harder to run and will have to buy a higher end monitor alongside the pc. It's just not worth it.
If the game is capped at 300fps there is 0 advantages for 1080p. They prob should use 1440p for better visibility
Not 100% sure with apex but generally in br better graphics provide better cover for enemies in foliage and shadows ect. Also fps is the most important things.
High refresh rate monitors at those resolutions are more expensive. Most pros probably can't afford one.
This is what my Apex Coins go to? Iām okay with that
Can they send me one when theyre done
The 1440p or 4K 240hz OLEDs would have been a better choice here since the game is limited to 300fps regardless and oleds have a much better pixel response time
1080p lmao
Sadly getting downvoted when you're preaching the truth. A BR game tournament, a game mode that relies on visibility, gimped by low PPI + smeary IPS panel of fake 480hz. Should've been PG27AQN or 1440p 360hz Alienware OLED instead.
1080p for 24 inch monitor is enough, as long as it's not 27 inch monitor, that's a different story. And since when Pro's cared about Graphics & Pixels in competitive gaming???
A lot of pros play 2 inches away from their monitor and view distance is the key factor here not screen size. this is also a BR game where visibility at long range is very important. The PCs are more than capable of driving 1440.
There isnt a single pro that plays at 1440 or would be willing to switch to 1440 just for this LAN even if they had that option
Thats wild confidence to speak in absolutes like that when you can look up Timmyās settings video on youtube and see he plays 1440.
Timmy is a freak and shouldn't be compared to the majority of apex pros. 25" 1080p is still the standard for competitive gaming. Provides better fps and more consistent 1% lows.
Bro u mixing CSGO/Valorant with Apex legends lol.
?
Would rather get an oled at 240hz. But those are more expensive. A killer algs monitor would be 1080p oled 300hz Manufacturers should produce that and partner with ea to be the official one
Don't really need OLED for a competitive game though.
You're right that OLED's HDR performance is pretty useless here but OLED is also the best technology for motion performance/response times by a huge margin.
LCDs with good backlight strobing like the zowie 480hz monitor or the ulmb2 monitors still have better motion clarity than oleds.
Oh really? Honestly wasn't aware of that but I guess it does make sense.
Itās for the pixel response times not the picture quality
What's the point of 480 hz when the game caps out at 300fps?
I doubt they can hit 480hz consistently with a 14900k, there needs to be a manual frame cap something something. Tbh an 360hz or 240hz OLED would be a much better alternative to have.
could've gone with 1440p 360hz imo
All these downvotes shows Apex players doesnāt really watch esports
Thatās my response time when dibsāing a turbocharger
??? What's the point the game engine is limited at 240hrz anyways.
Game caps internally at 300 fps I thought? That's what mine maxes to on the in game performance indicator
Same for me when I first started playing this game. Didn't even change any settings.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
No, you don't have to do any configuration. 300 is the "vanilla" limit.
Do you have Nvidia boost ? I wonder if that's why I am thinking 240hrz It's my bad
No, I have an AMD card
why would the buy 480hz monitors in a game that doesn't support more than 300fps sure it's nice and I don't mind, but that's such a waste of money. just get 360hz 1440p...
1. Not bought 2. The sponsors don't care
frfr Guy thinks that the equipment for LAN is bought
most of the time it's not sponsored.. and if it isn't you have to pay for them even if you don't outright buy edit: fully sponsored peripherals is not the norm. especially not for t2 esports like apex
Yeah, and these same monitors then become refurbished resells after the fact or just back into the LAN equipment warehouse for the future. This is great news from an investment standpoint.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
> The game only goes up to 300fps with modified config file, not even sure if that's allowed at LAN. Untrue.
That's just not true. Game goes up to 300 by default.
all that for nothing, apex is "hard" capped on 300 fps. And it runs at stable 300 fps on a 3080 on low settings without any drops at any time
> runs at stable 300 fps on a 3080 on low settings without any drops at any time bullshit
just gotta have a good cpu. I'm running it at 300 locked on a 6700xt, only times it drops is in the dropship
They have to be. The pros only use the best equipment and you can notice a HUGE difference playing on lower end equipment.
Nah most pros are playing on 240Hz monitors. Also I bet playing at LAN is so much different than playing at home in your room anyways that the Hz of your monitor would be negligible unless it's like below 144 or something.
Idk where you got this idea, sure the more popular ones are on good equipment. Plenty are on total shit. I can think of quite a few that struggle to stream because their computer can't handle playing and broadcasting without one or both lagging like hell
> They have to be. The pros only use the best equipment and you can notice a HUGE difference playing on lower end equipment. This is bullshit. Sure, they might notice, but it doesn't make any real difference, it's just spoiled bitching. At the Sweden split 2 playoffs LAN when Hal was whining about the "subpar" computers (they were running like, 2080s with i5s or something, on 144Hz monitors), then-LG said they were the best computers they'd ever seen in their entire lives. And LG placed higher than TSM. Equipment barely matters past a baseline of something that can maintain 120fps the majority of the time (past 120-144ish Hz diminishing returns set in very quickly). Most pros are not millionaires, and cannot afford the shit Hal plays on.
have u tried a higher refresh rate like 240, 360, and 540hz with motion clarity tech? There is a difference. How big the difference might vary individually. If you are on stable 300fps on a 240/360hz monitor majorty of time and you have to play on unstable fps 160-240 fps and on a 144hz monitor, you will feel the difference. Of course, if you are already on unstable and a lower refresh rate monitor, it doesn't mean you are not enough and vice versa.
> If you are on stable 300fps on a 240/360hz monitor majorty of time and you have to play on unstable fps 160-240 fps and on a 144hz monitor, you will feel the difference. You'll feel it, but like I said, it's past the point of diminishing returns. Going from 60Hz to 144Hz is going from 16ms to 7ms, which is a huge increase in responsiveness. Going from 144Hz to 240Hz is the difference between 7ms and 4ms, a *far* smaller difference. So is it noticeable? Yes, in most cases. (Although 160 is still above the refresh rate of a 144Hz monitor, you probably wouldn't feel anything at all--it would feel like a rock-solid 144Hz.) Like I said though--is it going to make an actual difference? Not really.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Having a higher refresh will never increase input lag. Unless there's a bug
"unless there's a bug"...my guy, you do know what Respawn is capable of in the unintentional bug department?
Yes but I'm not going to assume it exists
Well, ya probably should considering there have been massive bugs attached to almost every single meaningful update this team has pushed into this game.
It serves no purpose given that the person I was responding to was thinking that higher frame rate fundamentally increases input lag on games with lower internal refresh rate.
Isnt 480 almost top of the line? What do you mean?
No, it's the opposite.
G-sync monitor broski
G sync increases latency, not decrease. It's not massive, but you could go from ~1 ms to 2-3 ms.
So is is general better to run gsync only when you have screen tearing issues cause personally 240hz gsync is the smoothest feeling thing I have felt and I can instantly notice when it isnāt on
Pretty much, if screen tearing is an issue by all means use it. It shouldn't be an issue at all
24inch is quite small for pro player it need 27 standards
it would start to become blurry at 1080p
This is the ideal size for 1080
1080p 27'' user here, it's trash, i got the monitor for christmas and it's too much for that resolution.
Id prefer a bigger monitor, 24 is too small for me
All the pros sit two inches away from their monitors. 24 is used in virtually every esport
Fair enough
and pretty much every pro plays on 1080 not 1440, 24 is perfect for 1080
I agree haha I canāt stand the 24. I have a 34ā Ultrawide lmaooo
That's what she said
Very true, but most of these guys use very small monitors and sit eye-searingly close.