most of the good monitors that are coming out this year have actually already launched. There are two more that I'm really looking forward to and should have reviews out on those soon. But yeah, thought it was time to do a bit of a recap of what I would currently go for. We'll start with the rank one monitor on my list, which might not be a surprise to many of you, but it is the LG 32gs 95 U. This is an insane monitor. It's a 32in 4K OLED, which can switch between 4K 240 HZ and 1080p 480 HZ with a single bu. I honestly still can't get over how insane this is. Like, I've seen a lot of people talking about it like it's a bonus feature, but for me, it's almost the entire reason why I use this monitor. The fact that I can switch between 4K editing and ranked Esports games at 480 HZ and not feel any compromise for either of those tasks, it's honestly been

the biggest upgrade for my setup in a very long time. Now, Asus recently launched a monitor which can do the exact same thing. It can switch between these two modes effectively. It's using the exact same panel. It's actually this monitor right here. I was going to do a full review on it, but it's like 95% the same experience as the LG, so I thought I would just skip it. Same brightness levels, very similar color and HDR tuning, and the same dual mode switching feature with a button at the bottom. The only real differences worth noting between them is that the Asus doesn't have built-in speakers, whereas the LG has some extremely usable ones that I find myself switching to every day. The Asus also has an ELMB mode, whereas the LG does not. So basically, on the Asus, you can get a reduction in motion blur if you're okay with cutting your refresh rate in half. Definitely a nice feature to have for those lower refresh rate games, and I did notice that the gamma is slightly boosted on the Asus, particularly those mid shadows are just

a little bit brighter than usual. The Asus also has the same semi-matte finish over the top, just like the LG. Personally, I'm okay with that. I mean, I kind of prefer that matte finish for my setup to avoid reflections. Some people get really passionate about this glossy versus matte topic. I've seen some people on the internet who are, you know, borderline neurotic over what coating is on their monitor. For me, it's really not that deep, and the monitor specs are always way more important. I'll also just repeat that the matte coatings on these monitors are not like your normal gaming monitor, which has like a film-like hazy texture to it. These, on the other hand, actually look kind of glossy from certain angles. If you do really prefer that glossy surface, though, and maybe you're mainly interested in the 4K 240Hz experience here, then I'd probably recommend the QD OLED version of this monitor instead. The HDR is also a little bit better on those monitors and the MSI model in particular.

is quite a bit cheaper, around $900 versus the LG dual mode, which is currently $1100. The text clarity on those monitors is slightly worse though, with a little bit more color fringing, and the black levels can rise quite a bit if you have a lot of ambient lighting. Speaking of QD OLEDs from MSI though, they currently make a 1440p 360 HZ model for $750, and that easily gets my number two spot specifically here. It's the combination of the 0 millisecond response times with no ghosting or artifacting while at 360 HZ, while being at 1440p. It's hard to imagine that you'd ever need anything more than this, and it's kind of the best of everything. There's honestly no game that feels bad on this monitor. Glossy coating on this one, which some people might prefer. The text clarity is not amazing, but definitely something that you can get used to. And like all OLEDs, the max brightness is honestly pretty average, 250 to 260 n.

like I mentioned before with QD OLEDs, if you have a lot of ambient light in your room, the black levels can rise a pretty extreme amount, and I'm not going to sugarcoat it; it looks pretty bad. So yeah, especially if you plan on playing darker games, you might want to adjust the lighting at your setup. This won't be an issue though on the upcoming 1440p 480 Hz OLEDs because those will be using a W OLED panel, not a QD OLED panel. That also means that there will be pretty much no color fringing on the text on those monitors because they're using a nicer sub-pixel layout. They're also going to be very expensive. Now for my number three spot, I was going to put the 1440p 240 Hz OLEDs from last year. They've come down in price quite a bit. They are though still within striking distance of the newer 360 Hz models, especially the MSI one. So I would honestly just save a

little bit more and get that higher 360 HZ refresh rate potentially. Though, if you are looking for a monitor within that $400 to $500 range, buying one of these 1440p 240 HZ OLEDs used on eBay, for example, it's actually not a terrible idea. The Burn-in risk is actually way lower than what most people think, and technically all of those monitors, at least at the time of filming now, will still be under Burn-in warranty. The number three monitor on my list, though, is something that I'm honestly probably going to get memed on for, but I don't care because I really like this panel, and it is the 540 HZ TN from Asus or Zoi. This monitor does not make much sense at all. It is $1,000 for a 1080p TN monitor in 2024. Saying that out loud just sounds bizarre, but honestly, it offers the most surreal, lifelike, smoothest motion that I've ever seen for competitive games where that and latency is pretty much

all that matters. They are objectively the best tool for that job. I would agree that 480 HZ OLED is pretty damn close, but being able to keep up with fast-paced motion is just a bit easier on a smaller 25in display. And with Daak 2 or UL MB2, if you prefer the Asus model, it does technically deliver the smoothest and clearest motion currently out. It can also do something that OLEDs can't do, which is get really, really bright, especially the Asus model, which can reach 450 nits. Don't get me wrong, there are a ton of drawbacks with these monitors. They're not good at all as everyday monitors, but I do really like that they're hyper-focused on doing one thing, which is being the most pay-to-win monitors out there. They've got bad contrast, average colors, low resolution, the list goes on. They're very expensive, but if my life was on the line and for some reason I needed to win as many games as possible, this is what I'd be using. Two more monitors, which I'm really

Keen to check out before the end of the year. First is the 1440p 480 HZ wed from LG and Asus, which I mentioned earlier. I should have a review unit for those pretty soon. The second one, though, is the xg2700 160 HZ and 1080p 320 HZ. Honestly, no idea whether it's going to be good. It's been a long time since I've reviewed a non-oled monitor, but especially as a mid-range option, it does look really promising, especially because it's going to be cheaper than a lot of these oads. Yeah, I think we need to take a step back and actually just appreciate how good monitors are right now. They've taken a massive jump over the past year and a half. If for some reason you're looking to throw a bunch of cash at your setup and upgrade something, and you haven't already tried an OLED monitor, then that is something that I can easily recommend.

My top 3 gaming monitors right now.

My top 3 gaming monitors right now.

스크립트