Horizon: Zero Dawn
- Thread starter Bandwagon
- Start date
Evernothing
Bronze Baronet of the Realm
- 4,663
- 8,446
Feels pretty smooth, I had to increase the in game mouse sensitivity a bit to match my presets on my mouse.
Aazrael
Silver Baronet of the Realm
- 2,492
- 8,655
No monitor to support better res sadly, might purchase one when I get the new GPU.
Mist
Eeyore Enthusiast
- 30,370
- 22,143
Aazrael
Silver Baronet of the Realm
- 2,492
- 8,655
Thanks for the tip! Prices are really fucked in Europaland, that monitor is 170bucks more over here. Will keep an eye out for some sale on it during the holidays/black friday.
Vorph
Bronze Baronet of the Realm
- 10,996
- 4,717
- 7,915
- 12,566
The game is awesome and I don't regret paying full price one bit. I never got into it on PS, because I don't like aiming with a controller.
I had pretty shoddy performance on a i7700, 1080gtx and 16 gb ram.
Updating my nvidia drivers really helped performance, it is fine now. Even at 1080p the game looks great, anything above that is just impressive.
6 hours in or so, not a single crash. Even tabbing out isn't an issue.
I had pretty shoddy performance on a i7700, 1080gtx and 16 gb ram.
Updating my nvidia drivers really helped performance, it is fine now. Even at 1080p the game looks great, anything above that is just impressive.
6 hours in or so, not a single crash. Even tabbing out isn't an issue.
- 1
Szlia
Member
- 6,559
- 1,317
Can you do the cliff notes version of the talk ? I might upgrade my PC in a near future and absolutely do not follow the PC tech trends.
- 1
Vorph
Bronze Baronet of the Realm
- 10,996
- 4,717
Ideally you want a 34-35" 3440x1440. I wouldn't recommend 2560x1080 unless your GPU absolutely cannot handle the higher resolution, but should anyone buy one of these still get a 34" and not a 29". The pixels might be a tad large and you'll notice jaggies more, but I've used a 29" and it's like a slightly wider/slightly shorter 25".
Minimum reqs would be a good IPS panel, 60-75Hz (some 100Hz for little/no price increase these days too), Freesync 2 and/or Gsync depending on whether you're team red or team green. Some people will tell you to get 120-144Hz, and I'm sure it's nice, but if you play mostly new games and don't buy the absolute highest end GPU available odds are you're not hitting 100+ fps at 3440x1440. If your thing is MP games that aren't very demanding but benefit from 21:9 and very high fps, then maybe it's worth it to you.
HDR? Well, it will be on the box, but unless you spend an ungodly amount of money on the monitor it's almost certainly just marketing bullshit. Not only is Windows' implementation still broken trash, only really high end panels have enough brightness to do actual HDR to begin with.
Curved vs. flat is completely down to personal preference. I would recommend trying out a curved one before buying though.
As for specific models, I haven't really kept up since the Alienware AW3418DW finally depleted all the remaining stock and was replaced by the 3420. The new one is still a great monitor from what I've heard, but it's really expensive compared to the crazy deals you could get on the 3418 towards the end. With you being in EU I wouldn't know what models are available locally anyhow. Your best bet would be to check r/ultrawidemasterrace and see what people are recommending these days.
Edit: I would also add that you should buy from a place you can return it to no questions asked and no restocking fees. Nobody should tolerate even 1 dead/stuck pixel in 2020.
Last edited:
- 2
Mist
Eeyore Enthusiast
- 30,370
- 22,143
seems to be the go-to unless you want to spend an ungodly amount on the 38 or 49 inch ultrawide.
1k is still a lot of money.
Crone
Bronze Baronet of the Realm
- 9,707
- 3,210
I'm not at all against the idea of going with a single ultra-wide screen, such as the one Mist posted above, but let's get real here, what's the benefit? From a purely technical standpoint, for less than $1k, I can get two 27" displays, 144hz, 1440p res, G-Sync, bezel-less so while they are 2 screens you can make it pretty close to 1? Why go ultra-wide when this is an option? Because of the games that support ultra-wide resolutions, it's bad ass? I mean if that's it, I get it, but I guess everyone is just going to have to decide if that's worth it because it doesn't seem like much other reason.
Also, I looked up UW screens on Amazon and the resolutions are all over the place. That's very confusing. It doesn't seem to be as set in stone as non UW screens, so 3440x1440 is the sweet spot for resolution? regardless of size?
Vorph
Bronze Baronet of the Realm
- 10,996
- 4,717
21:9:
Curved, if that's your bag.
21:9 support is still somewhat hit/miss. 32:9 is significantly more so.
More compact. To add to that, a 2x1 VESA stand or arm is a non-trivial additional expense. I personally don't have room for 2 27" horizontally, but I find 2 21:9 monitors in a vertical stack to be ideal. You get the ability to have a web browser open with tabbing out of the game while still keeping ultrawide.
16:9 x2:
32:9 is even better in games which support it. Also requires considerably more GPU power to drive it though. And you need to sit back a bit in order to really see all of a screen that wide. Fine for gamepad games, can be a problem with m/k depending on your desk size.
On the other hand, you have the option to run games that don't support ultrawide on a single screen without stupid ass pillarboxing. How you deal with the display being off center is another question though.
Bezel-less in my experience is still a bit of a misnomer. There's always a gap. Whether or not it's enough to bother someone is up to them, but it annoys me.
More real estate for non-gaming purposes. This does have a minor downside though, in that when you watch movies shot in 2.35:1 aspect they are true fullscreen on a 21:9, but you're back to pillarboxing on a 32:9 (and again, the gap).
Can be cheaper (especially for 144Hz setups) if you skimp on the VESA mount. Not a good idea imo, but you can do it if you have to.
As far as resolution, it should be pretty much all 3440x1440 now. 2560x1080 is still available but most will be older models. I don't think 5Kx2K has really caught on yet, but I expect it will sooner or later. That's what I'm holding out for before I shell out a major pile of cash on one again. Obviously we need massively better GPUs for that too, when current stuff barely handles 4K at 16:9 in many games (like HZD).
Curved, if that's your bag.
21:9 support is still somewhat hit/miss. 32:9 is significantly more so.
More compact. To add to that, a 2x1 VESA stand or arm is a non-trivial additional expense. I personally don't have room for 2 27" horizontally, but I find 2 21:9 monitors in a vertical stack to be ideal. You get the ability to have a web browser open with tabbing out of the game while still keeping ultrawide.
16:9 x2:
32:9 is even better in games which support it. Also requires considerably more GPU power to drive it though. And you need to sit back a bit in order to really see all of a screen that wide. Fine for gamepad games, can be a problem with m/k depending on your desk size.
On the other hand, you have the option to run games that don't support ultrawide on a single screen without stupid ass pillarboxing. How you deal with the display being off center is another question though.
Bezel-less in my experience is still a bit of a misnomer. There's always a gap. Whether or not it's enough to bother someone is up to them, but it annoys me.
More real estate for non-gaming purposes. This does have a minor downside though, in that when you watch movies shot in 2.35:1 aspect they are true fullscreen on a 21:9, but you're back to pillarboxing on a 32:9 (and again, the gap).
Can be cheaper (especially for 144Hz setups) if you skimp on the VESA mount. Not a good idea imo, but you can do it if you have to.
As far as resolution, it should be pretty much all 3440x1440 now. 2560x1080 is still available but most will be older models. I don't think 5Kx2K has really caught on yet, but I expect it will sooner or later. That's what I'm holding out for before I shell out a major pile of cash on one again. Obviously we need massively better GPUs for that too, when current stuff barely handles 4K at 16:9 in many games (like HZD).