Weird that they have plans for 1080p 27" and 1440p 24"?? So is this what will beat Acer? "In the 23.8" space a new LM238WQ1 IPS panel has gone in to production as of March this year. This offers a 2560 x 1440 resolution, 14ms G2G response time, 1000:1 contrast ratio, 300 cd/m2 brightness, sRGB gamut and 178/178 viewing angles. There is also a LM238WQ2 version coming in Q2, but the specs listed are the same so it remains to be seen if it will differ."

Now they're all jumping aboard. I wonder when LG will start to put Fsync / Gsync into those screens.

Now they're all jumping aboard. I wonder when LG will start to put Fsync / Gsync into those screens.

LG has some Freesync screens, and panels can start refresh at any time within its specification, so it should be ready. I would much more like to have passive 3D on it as a bonus. But I can live without it since at end of this year I expect SteamVR/Oculus.

LG has some Freesync screens, and panels can start refresh at any time within its specification, so it should be ready. I would much more like to have passive 3D on it as a bonus. But I can live without it since at end of this year I expect SteamVR/Oculus.

I should clarify, I meant the 144Hz IPS panels 🙂 As I'm not too crazy about 3D at all (neither in cinemas nor for gaming) I'm unsure, what does passive 3D mean? It works without glasses? Because then I might get interested in that topic.

Sad that the latency is so high. I wonder when OLED panels will become cheaper, so that this LED LCD phase can die down and we get proper panels with proper blacks and proper response times.

I should clarify, I meant the 144Hz IPS panels 🙂 As I'm not too crazy about 3D at all (neither in cinemas nor for gaming) I'm unsure, what does passive 3D mean? It works without glasses? Because then I might get interested in that topic.

Not without glasses, it uses circular polarized filter on glasses which are light. Are not preventing light from passing through to one eye at time way active shutter do. (you can perceive this shuttering) On screen is similar circular filter where each odd line goes to one eye and even to another eye, so it effectively cuts vertical resolution in half which was small problem on 1080p screens as there is perceivable loss of detail. But in games I realized that having 1920x540 per eye gives better experience due to depth perception than 1920x1080 flat image same for both eyes. (even with minor artifacts from lack of resolution) With 1440p screen one gets nearly same amount of pixels per eye as you get for both together on 1080p. And as for main difference for me with Active vs Passive: Since I could see dimming effect on nVidia Vision glasses, my 3D experience was considerably worse than with passive. Images often lost depth. And main issue was that active gave me headache in 5 minutes, but with passive I had many 2~8 hours sessions with movies/games and I was not even tired from it. As far as glasses-less 3D, one friend has nintendo 3DS and another has new 3DS . With old one you have to have eyes in perfect alignment. New one traces your eyes and adjust parallax barrier accordingly, so you have much better experience even if you move device around. (it is single user thing, and I hope they'll come with TVs/monitors doing same even if only for one user) Edit: HH, why is 3DS with dot "." directly behind banned sequence? had to put space in bold text to keep it.

With those response times no thanks, even IF it was 144hz

I'm starting to think my AOC 144Hz TN was a bad purchase.

Whomever starts making 27" IPS, 1440p, 144hz monitors at a reasonable price, are going to make billions.

Not without glasses, it uses circular polarized filter on glasses which are light. Are not preventing light from passing through to one eye at time way active shutter do. (you can perceive this shuttering) On screen is similar circular filter where each odd line goes to one eye and even to another eye, so it effectively cuts vertical resolution in half which was small problem on 1080p screens as there is perceivable loss of detail. But in games I realized that having 1920x540 per eye gives better experience due to depth perception than 1920x1080 flat image same for both eyes. (even with minor artifacts from lack of resolution) With 1440p screen one gets nearly same amount of pixels per eye as you get for both together on 1080p. And as for main difference for me with Active vs Passive: Since I could see dimming effect on nVidia Vision glasses, my 3D experience was considerably worse than with passive. Images often lost depth. And main issue was that active gave me headache in 5 minutes, but with passive I had many 2~8 hours sessions with movies/games and I was not even tired from it. As far as glasses-less 3D, one friend has nintendo 3DS and another has new 3DS . With old one you have to have eyes in perfect alignment. New one traces your eyes and adjust parallax barrier accordingly, so you have much better experience even if you move device around. (it is single user thing, and I hope they'll come with TVs/monitors doing same even if only for one user) Edit: HH, why is 3DS with dot "." directly behind banned sequence? had to put space in bold text to keep it.

Ah, thanks 😉

Whomever starts making 27" IPS, 1440p, 144hz monitors at a reasonable price, are going to make billions.

The only point is, nobody will go way below what they're sold now. Until the technology is around for a while (years from now), it won't see major price drops I'm afraid.