Energy Efficient Monitor w/ par I/O 24" 1080p or 29" 1440p

Lfreedomj on 17/03/2024 - 11:06
Last edited 17/03/2024 - 18:05 by 1 other user

edit: sorry for title (first post!). I've updated it again

Originally a comment here

For light-gaming and home office setup, I have never gamed on higher than 60Hz, so while higher is better, I'm sure 75Hz would be a big step up (rocket league, some casual shooters, but from around 25ms ping my biggest issue is not local latency)

I am looking to go down in energy usage from 70W, I'm sure all modern monitors of this spec are less than 30W and only increases with features (higher RR, size, resolution, brightness).

Am I likely to do better than this in the next few months?

Thanks in advance

Computing Computer Peripheral LCD Monitor

Comments

  • Godric on 17/03/2024 - 11:29
    +10

    The heck is that title

  • jackary on 17/03/2024 - 12:06
    +1

    That title is an abomination. But to answer your question, no, you probably won’t get much better than $84.15.

    • freedomj on 17/03/2024 - 17:16

      I'm in Adelaide, so I can't get, $99 delivered is the best deal and the IO sucks so bad I'll have to buy another cable and I'm not a big fan of using two HDMIs out of a gpu with only one out

  • hasher22 on 17/03/2024 - 12:30
    +1

    I have never gamed on higher than 60Hz, so while higher is better, I'm sure 75Hz would be a big step up

    It really isn't, an extra 15 frames isn't that much. You would need minimum 144Hz to see a nice difference, once you go min. 144Hz, you'll never want anything below ever again.

    • plmko on 17/03/2024 - 12:37

      Complete BS you got there. You also don't know what OP's office setup is so 144hz may not even be achievable and a waste of money, let alone the budget to reach for 144hz sacrifices the screen quality.

      • hasher22 on 17/03/2024 - 13:08

        Quote

        I'm sure 75Hz would be a big step up

        I said "It really isn't" and I still stand by it. A "big step up" is going for 144Hz. Even if you're a casual gamer, you may notice a slight difference and your eyes will adjust to 75Hz but it's not a significant factor in OPs buying decision. Even casual gamers can appreciate 144Hz, I am a casual gamer myself and I never regretted jumping from 60 to 144 previously and in the last month or so, I had to replace it cause it died and I got a 165Hz monitor which happens to have that refresh rate and even from 144 to 165 is nothing to be impressed about.

        $149 Kogan 180Hz monitor: whether it's a good monitor for OP, it's up for debate.

        additionally OP wants a energy efficient monitor, the LG monitor OP linked is 22 W when on but a Dell Monitor – E2423H, is only 16 W on. If OP is at their monitor 8 hours a day, 5 days a week, the difference of power consumption of the monitor alone is insignificant of the difference between 22 W vs 16 W over the year. OP would most likely saving more money by switching providers or by not eating out once in the year if OP does buy a higher energy consumption monitor.

        • freedomj on 17/03/2024 - 17:27

          I don't think you quite realise the difference between 75 and 60 is a lot more than "just 15" fps like the difference between 129 and 144. It's a dropoff, and to the point that we settled for 60 as a solid thing to aim for for decades.

          the biggest increase in motion is from 24fps to 30fps - its night and day.

          So yes 75 may be a modest increase, but I suspect it's more than "just" 15fps as you consider (like the difference between erratic and constant frame timings are night and day even when both are 60fps*, — although that might be closer to the difference between 60 & 90)

          (* Consistent frame timings during rendering create a steady rhythm, contrasting with the erratic timing of live recordings due to GPU cycle delays | youtube example, only 60fps but looks smoother)

          • hasher22 on 17/03/2024 - 18:02
            +1

            @freedomj: I actually do notice the jump from 60 to 75 but by all means, it's no "big step up" from what you said.

            • freedomj on 17/03/2024 - 18:05

              @hasher22: I see I did - thanks! appreciate the clarification.

              I've got a hard case of 'could-have-been' from this deal (refurbed):
              https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/834256

              and I'm trying to convince myself I never wanted 180Hz in the first aha

              Also Freesync is new to me, which is similar to evenly distributed frames?

              Seeing as THIS is my current monitor, (Lol! 16ms response!) I can't imagine anything WON'T be a big step up :)

  • Monad on 19/03/2024 - 13:33
    +1

    MSI PRO MP2412, 24" 100hz, FHD, 1ms, HDMI and Displayport: $98 at Centrecom (stock in Adelaide): https://www.centrecom.com.au/msi-pro-mp2412-238-fhd-va-100hz…

    $99 MSY (stock in Adelaide): https://www.msy.com.au/product/msi-23-8in-fhd-va-100hz-adapt…

    $109 delivered eBay Centrecom with coupon MARSAVE: https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/134774166016

    $10 E gift card redemption available.

    • freedomj on 21/03/2024 - 09:59

      Excellent, this fits the spec. Thanks for the reply

      Pros:
      DP in
      100 Hz
      MSI are solid, 3 year warranty

      Cons:
      External Power supply
      VA panel
      No FreeSync

      • Monad on 22/03/2024 - 09:06

        I doubt you'll be able to find a 24"+, 100hz+, DP, FHD, IPS, EPS, FreeSync monitor for <$120. If you keep trawling for bargains, you never know, but it might take some time. You have champagne taste on a beer budget. You might need to go to $160 -$200 for that.

      • Monad on 22/03/2024 - 13:23

        Everything except DP, $99 delivered: https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/837458

        • freedomj on 25/03/2024 - 16:49
          +1

          That's the same deal that I initially replied to. Only one usable input is a deal breaker.

          I went for the MSI PRO MP2412 which definitely looks worse than the LG, but was $10 less with $10 voucher

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join