Koorui 27E3Q owner here ayyyyeee! Been lovin' this monitor since I got it and had never failed me. Now I'm using it as my second monitor with my new Odyssey G60SD. Even with an OLED monitor beside it, it still demands respect and it definitely earns mine!
Dawid one day can you do a video explaining the color reproduction graphs/charts you use? I might be an idiot but every time I look at them flash up I don't really understand what I am looking at.
Different monitor panels have different capability of displaying true range of colors. "Good" panel can show wide range of colors, while "bad" one's colors are limited and the range is more squished and less colorfull. If you set them side by side you will see that good one is more vibrant and colorful.
I can explain real quick, but I'm not an expert, feel free anyone else to chime in with help if need be. If you go to 10:08 I will try my best to explain all the graphs, so pause the video there. The first chart/graph is a Color Gamut graph, it illustrates how much "coverage" the tested monitor has of 'color spaces', i.e sRGB, AdobeRGB and DCI-P3 are all color spaces. Each color space is different, some are wider than others like sRGB being less wide than DCI-P3, but sRGB is what most consider the bare-bones low end color gamut monitors should meet because it's one of the smallest color spaces. The wider the color space, the more colors that can be produced. If one color space has 10,000 colors and another 250,000, then the second can show not only more colors but a more accurate image as it can display colors the other cannot. The important part to read on the first chart is the bottom where it says "95% of sRGB, 80% AdobeRGB and 82% of P3", what this means is that the monitor tested to display 95% of the sRGB color space, 80% of AdobeRGB and 82% of DCI-P3, this means it can only display a certain percentage of those color spaces, the higher the percentage, the better it can reproduce color spaces and thus has a wider color gamut. In simple language, the monitor can display more colors if the percentage is higher. From memory, the weird thing or shape with all the color in that first chart is the human visual color spectrum, so that's all the colors the human eye can see, so the color space is within that but only showing a portion. The second is a color accuracy chart, what this chart measures is whether the colors being shown are accurate to a reference color sample, so for instance is the monitor showing the color bright "red", or is it showing more of a "muted pink" which is close to bright red, but it's not really red. When a color sensor measures a monitor, it compares the measured sample of color from the monitor with a reference sample, it asks the monitor to display that reference sample color on the screen and if it matches it has a 0 'delta-E', the lower the 'delta-E' the closer the monitor is to the reference color, thus the monitor is more color accurate. So if you read each 'ID' it has a 'patch lab' and a 'result lab' and these are probably better labelled 'Color (ID)', 'Reference Color (patch lab)' and 'Measured Color (result lab)'. Essentially in simple language, it compares each color, red, blue, green, yellow etc and if it gets closer to the expected color, it has a lower 'delta-E'. The lower the delta-E, whether that be on average or for each color(ID), the better the monitor produces accurate colors. The higher the delta-E, the more distorted the colors will be. The third chart is the tone response chart, essentially this measures the "tone" of the image, using something called gamma. I will be honest, I'm not well versed with gamma, but essentially how I understand it is that this chart shows how well your monitor can produce 'grays' and gradients of gray, white and black and such, it also tests the 'white point' of the monitor. I believe the curved green line shows how Gamma 1.8 is measured as a reference and teal is how Gamma 2.2 is measured as a reference. The black line is how the monitor's Gamma was measured. From this image, it appears that the monitor is somewhere between Gamma 1.8 and Gamma 2.2, ideally it should be close or in line with Gamma 2.2. Gamma 2.2 produces "darker" images than Gamma 1.8, because it has more accurate tone because it can reach darker contrast, but TVs and Movies use Gamma 2.4 which is even darker. Basically, the higher the gamma, the more accurate the "tone" of the image can be, rather than being blown out and white when it should be gray or black. This allows for better "tone mapping" kind of like HDR. A great article to google is "What is Gamma" by BenQ and it shows you some reference images of Gamma 1.0 vs 1.8 vs 2.2 vs 2.4 and 2.6 etc. But this chart says the monitor's probably showing Gamma 2.1 which is pretty bad considering I think 2.2 is sort of the minimum these days. The bottom left chart or fourth chart is a screen uniformity chart, this shows how well the screen can display colors across the display and whether the backlight is uniformly bright across the display. Because LCD's are edge-lit, this means some bits of the screen can be "darker" or "brighter" than the others, as maybe there's more LED's on one side or perhaps there's a larger gap between the backlight or the LEDs are darker due to manufacturing or some error, or maybe there's even different amounts of LEDs on the bottom versus the top or sides etc. For whatever the reason may be, LCDs don't always have uniform color and brightness across the display. If you've ever had an LCD on a pure black image in a dark room and you can see that some bits of the screen look more "white" or "gray", rather than "black" it means the screen's not uniform, as ideally you wouldn't be able to tell the difference between one part of the screen as it's supposed to be all the same color. So again, this is measured in 'delta-E', where again the lower the 'delta-E', the better as it means the lower the distortion or the higher the accuracy to the reference. Except this time there's a twist, this time it's only comparing every other subsequent measurement to the first measurement on the monitor. So measurement one, will always be 0.0. So with this chart, the top right that's white measures a 'delta-E' of 0.0 (this is the first measurement) and the bottom right in dark orange measures 3.6. This means that between the top right of the monitor and the bottom right, there was a 'delta-E' of 3.0, meaning the bottom right of the screen is not the same brightness or color to the top right of the screen, despite showing the same image/color. Thus, extrapolate that out to the rest of the screen as these measurements actually are different points on the monitor, thus the top-right measurement is the top right of the monitor, the middle measurement is the middle and so on. In simple terms, this chart measures if the screen is uniformly bright and color accurate across different areas of the display, the lower the 'delta-E' the closer the monitor is to being the same across the display, ideally it should be 0.0 at every point, because if it's showing one color across the whole display, it should always be the same color and brightness at every point you measure on it, whether that be the top right, the middle or the bottom corners, but in reality no LCD monitor is perfect and therefore some parts of the display are brighter or darker than others. OLED or microLED should be perfect 0.0 everywhere as they are not edge-lit, they are per-pixel lit, thus every part of the screen should in theory be the same. But with LCD, some bits of the panel are closer to the backlight or some LEDs are brighter than others just from manufacturing tolerances. I will say I do think Dawid has done the measurement in a unique way as usually you start in the middle and that should be 0.0 and everything else should be some other number, but really where you start is not important because as I said, it should be 0.0 everywhere in an ideal scenario as it's supposed to be the same brightness and color across the display. Lastly is the bottom right chart, which is brightness, contrast and white point at different brightness. This should be the easiest chart to understand, but essentially, 'Setting' means what did Dawid set the brightness to on the monitor, so 25%, 50% and so on. Then 'Brightness' is what "nits" the monitor measured at, so for instance at 100% brightness Dawid measured 311.3 nits, which is fine for an indoor display where you're not in direct sunlight. Anything above 400 nits is required for some sort of HDR experience, albeit a poor one and usually on phones outdoors you need like 1000+ nits to see the screen otherwise it's not bright enough and all you can see is the screen reflection and for true HDR on monitors you need like 1200 nits or above for the very bright highlights. 'Black' I believe refers to the nits of the screen when showing a pure "black" screen. 'Contrast' is well... the contrast ratio or the luminance between different things on the display, ie the difference or ratio between pure black black and pure white, generally 1000:1 as a ratio is the minimum these days, especially for IPS panels, but VA panels perform much better in contrast upwards of 6000:1 contrast ratio sometimes over 10,000:1. With OLEDs the contrast ratio should be infinite as you're getting per-pixel contrast as blacks are supposed to be pure-black as the pixels are turned off (in reality sometimes the coating or type of OLED can impact this contrast ratio like how QD-OLEDs can look "gray" with blacks compared to WOLED where it looks pure black in a bright room). So the higher the contrast ratio, the better. 'White Point' measures the white-point or color temperature in Kelvin, if you've ever bought a light bulb you know those numbers printed on the box of light bulbs that are 6,400K or 9,300K, that refers to the color temperature of the light with the scale going from 1,000K (red) to 10,000K(blue). For reference, 5,000K is pure white temperature meaning the light should create a pure white light, 1,000K being orangey red like a candle and 10,000K should be like the blue flame from a gas stove. So Dawid at 100% brightness measured around 7,600K which is a blue tinted display in this case, meaning the monitor's distorting the image to have a blue tint across all images on that display, no matter the color it will always have a blue tint to it, ideally it should be around 5,000K across all brightnesses to not be considered cool or warm, but rather pure white. I hope this helps.
Thats a lot of words So Gamut - 100% is better(?), the confusing part is srgb vs argb vs dcip3 Accuracy - 0 is better Gamma - 2.4 is better(?), 2.6 is better? Screen uniformity - 0 is better Nits/Contrast: higher is better Its kinda confusing since the problem with most is they either assume you already know, and they either skip past it or they just blab all the numbers out anyway over 10 mins and maybe say "its good" (or bad if its bad)
@@mahomisawa4172 > Gamut - 100% is better(?), the confusing part is srgb vs argb vs dcip3 Gamut 100% is better than 95% or 50%, yes. sRGB is a very narrow color space, as in it has less colors as a number than AdobeRGB or DCI-P3. DCI-P3 has about 25% more color than sRGB. So if you have 75% of DCI-P3 it should be basically equivalent to 100% of sRGB. I hope that makes sense, they're not really directly comparable since they cover different parts of the visual human spectrum, as in they can start in a different area of the spectrum (the weird shape on the chart with all the colors), but generally 95% AdobeRGB and 90% DCI-P3 are considered better than 100% sRGB which as I said is the bare-bones minimum people expect these days out of their monitor. I suggest you just google sRGB vs DCI-P3 if you want more information. I just told you how to read the chart and color science is extremely difficult to explain in a short paragraph since you don't want a long explanation. > Accuracy - 0 is better Lower delta-E is better, 0 is best. > Gamma - 2.4 is better(?), 2.6 is better? Yes, it means the tone can be better mapped. I consider Gamma 2.2 the absolute minimum these days for any content. 2.4 is better and 2.6 is best but you're not going to really see Gamma 2.6 on any commercial content other than maybe at like IMAX cinemas. > Screen uniformity - 0 is better Lower delta-E is better, 0 is best just like color accuracy. But it's all measured and self-referential to that display, as in each measurement just means comparing to another point on the same display. It doesn't mean it's accurate to a reference sample from another display or something. This just applies to screen uniformity. > Nits/Contrast: higher is better To an extent, yes, but you can also have too bright when it comes to nits. I mean you wouldn't want a 1,000,000 nit display (an exaggerated example), it would hurt your eyes to look at. But definitely higher is better for contrast. > Its kinda confusing since the problem with most is they either assume you already know, and they either skip past it or they just blab all the numbers out anyway over 10 mins and maybe say "its good" (or bad if its bad) Color science and display science as I said earlier is very complex, it requires background knowledge to grasp and understand the charts fully, that's just the reality. I think it's good to give more explanation in a video, but it can be boring for most people and they won't understand it, even if you explain it. Even when I gave you a less in-depth explanation above you said and probably complained that it was a lot of words. Yes, because it's complex to explain. I could yap for hours about color science and data, but people don't want to know they just want an answer, especially Gen-Z who's brains can't even stand longer than 10 seconds of mental stimulation thanks to Tik-tok dopamine cycles. That being said, Dawid mostly gives you the general gist anyways by saying it's "good" or "bad" as do most RUclipsrs who do videos. I will give you an example of where something is a "bad" display, because generally if it's not color accurate but it's fantastic at everything else like motion response or brightness, well I would still consider it a "bad" display as would most people, we want a color accurate picture, we don't want 'green' to look 'blue' for instance. This also applies to screens that may be color accurate or very bright but have poor motion clarity or motion response times, if it's smeary all over with ghosting, it's also a "bad" display, especially for gaming. So generally a display is "good" if it measures well in all metrics across the board. If it gets one thing really wrong, then it's pretty much a bad display. I know "well" or "good" or "bad" are subjective. But Dawid is sensible and pretty tolerant to understanding these are budget products and he will give you a pretty justifiable opinion. I mean by all objective metrics, or at least compared to the other two monitors, the Pixio monitor here sucks, it's nowhere near as color accurate, uniform, nor are the response times as good. Dawid was correct in his evaluation. The Koorui and Amazon Basics are actually decent and good monitors for their price, especially the KOORUI one, based off the data of course. I suggest you read up on this stuff if you want to understand it more. It's what I did and I'm still learning and get things wrong because like I said... color science is complex.
That Amazon Basics 27inch 165hz IPS monitor was being sold for $36 when Prime Day started a couple of weeks ago. It sold out in under 2 minutes, but I was able to snag one to use as my new second monitor.
@@teknoid5878 There was a limit of 1 per person. It was a Lightning Deal that happened right when Prime Day started at 3:00 in the morning lol. Sold out instantly. They were selling the 24 inch version for $32 as well. Then when those sold out, they started selling 27 inch 100hz monitors for $35.
Well dawid. I am in a point in my life where I need a change. I am going back to pc gaming instead of alcohol. I just bought this monitor to plug into my legion 5. I will upgrade later, but oddly you kind of inspired me. And I thank you for that. My legion only has a 1060 in it, but god willing will change!! I love your videos, been watching for years!! Wish me luck!!! I bought the 27E3Q
I chose gaming over drugs a long ass time ago. But decided to switch from console to PC in 2019 and never looked back. Recently built a dreamy mid range pc with a 4070ti. PC gaming is so much better, and the community surrounding it makes console look like a crayon-eating-window-licker
I got a store return LG Ultra Gear 32GP850 earlier this year for 200€. 350€ was street price at the time, can't complain about it for that price. Contrast is its biggest weakness, so I am looking for other options at the moment but I am again looking at store returns and refurbished screens.
That Koorui 27E3Q monitor is retailing into UK from £220-£300 (£300 is Amazon)! That's about $393.01cad to $535.92cad. We are getting so ripped off in the UK.
@@DawidDoesTechStuff Dawid Neither IPS or VA is better than the other, the smearing you are talking about is none existent to the human eye which has an 60fps cap and a reaction time of 13 miliseconds, the smearing doesn't EXIST.
@@02Z7 That's really variable. The first VA panel I used was definitely very noticeable, in fact my first reaction to scrolling a webpage on it was "holy shit why is it ghosting so much?" Unfortunately it arrived the day before I went on holiday so I missed the return window, so I've gotten used to it enough to use on a secondary system, but I am definitely glad I replaced it with an IPS panel for my main rig. Neither VA nor IPS is strictly better, they each have their pros and cons, but a lot of people find the cons of VA worse than the cons of IPS
@@jambutnotoast and still people like dawid doesn't even wanna give them a chance because apparently his eyes hurt from the "smearing" which is none exist?
Same here. He showed that and I am now just confused what he is talking about. Pay attention to the black lines on the red UFO. You can see them on the Pixio.
You can see a darker ghosting trail on the Pixio. It may not look worse than the others in that picture, but from my experience, that's enough to make it look very 'blurry'
I bought a 1440p 144Hz 27" acer monitor 3 years ago for around 330€ and I'm still happy with it, but it's crazy that you get the same experience with a much cheaper monitor these days
I have a very clever 27 inch Philips monitor, it has a sensor array at front and can tell when I am using it as a monitor and it adjusts itself and can tell when I am using it as a telly and again adjusts itself for distance viewing and also boosts the sound in distance mode.
I have gone to AOC monitors both 27 inch, one 4K, IPS 160hz with HDR 400 and the other is 1440p VA at 180hz and love this setup after same 4k and 1440p setup at 32 inch sizes.
LG has been doing crazy good discounts on UG refurbished displays. I work at a micro center and just picked up a 32” LG UG 165hz 1440p HDR 10 monitor for $100.
I bought my koorui 24e3 1080p 165hz ips monitor about a year ago for roughly $95. Still works like a charm to this day. Planning to get the 27e3q as well when i upgrade my gpu. The 27e3q can go as low as $160 during sales in my country 🇵🇭
That 280hz monitor has raised blacks out of the box (indicated by very bad contrast), they do it because slowest color on LCD VA and IPS is pure black, so you make black lighter, making panel skip slowest transitions, like you said this panel is probably 144-170hz forced to do 280Hz.
Wait, is THAT why all my IPS screens have everything from about 16RGB on down crunched into a single indistinguishable near-black? Either way, it's ironic that the panels whose entire selling point is having darker black levels have to turn the brightness of blacks up to avoid slow refresh.
@@stevethepocket For the IPS screens, that's almost certainly the backlight bleedthrough, which will turn anything past a certain level of darkness to the same blackish grey, not just pure black. They've never had very good black levels, that's why there was so much hype around OLED's black levels. Most displays by that point were IPS LCDs and struggled with the darkest colors. I remember showing this to my step-mom with my Galaxy S6's AMOLED compared to her iPhone 6's Retina LCD. VA panels on the other hand generally have better black levels, but they tend to be sluggish and don't scale as well to larger sizes past 40". There are good VA panels, but cheap VA panels are generally worse overall than equally cheap IPS displays. I had a Lenovo work laptop that had an incredibly nice and vibrant VA panel, but I've seen many more terrible ones.
@@charles-antoinemartel-roy Well the funny thing is that even TN panels were better about low-end contrast. My cheapo 2010 Dell TN monitor aces this test-making it a lot easier to see in dimly-lit areas in games-even though obviously the black level itself is worse.
@stevethepocket yeah IPS was a dead-end technology. It had great color reproduction, it was bright, it was cheap to produce, and it was easy to scale to big sizes, which is why it became the norm. It also timed perfectly with people upgrading their burned-in plasma flat-screens.
@@stevethepocket If you are using nvidia (can also work on AMD) and HDMI check your settings (in drivers control panel) on Limited RGB range that is 16-235 instead of 0-255, either this or you have panel that is cheated to go faster, because IPS is not he best at showing black but it should not crush multiple values to look the same.
Your review convinced me-I'm taking a shot on the Koorui! I've been hunting for an inexpensive home office monitor, and am excited to see how it performs.
Dell has a 280hz monitor that’s frequently $170ish, and if you can find it refurbished at Best Buy or Amazon sometimes it’s as cheap as 140 or 150. Tilton rotation adjustment on the stand, no internal speakers, but who is using their monitor speakers. I’ve been using it for the last year and it has been wonderful
I have the KTC H27T22, which is a 27-inch 1440p/165 Hz IPS monitor (it has a 170 Hz mode but enabling it disables FreeSync) that I got for about $180. For the price, you get really solid motion rendering, a stand with the full range of adjustment, and two DisplayPort plus two HDMI 2.0 inputs.
I bought a koori monitor last year. I just wanted a secound monitor for youtube videos, chat and so on. but this thing is really good. I was surprised. I never heard of koori before.
As a owner of a 32" 1440p 165hz HDR VA LG monitor (400 nits peak brightness), I can confirm the motion clarity is ass... 150$ mistake.... (Bought "refurbished" on eBay with 0 signs of usage, 0 scuffs, 0 stuck pixels, 0 hours of usage reported by the OSD at the time of purchase) OLED is the next step for me. No substitutions.
I have a 32" LG ULTRAGEAR 165Hz VA monitor and have no complaints. It's HDR capable and the image quality is more than satisfactory. I don't get the hate he has for VA panels. I got it on sale for $189.00.
I have a Gigabyte M32QC with the same specs. They're probably using the same panel. I paid $230 for it, but it also has a KVM switch. The same monitor without that costs about the same as your LG. It's been flawless, except for when my son's cat did a header into it and I had to send it for repair. Gigabyte serviced it under warranty, even though it was due to damage caused and not a fault in the monitor.
I got a pixio px248 pro (1080p 24in 165hz ips) for $130 a little over a year ago. I really like it, it has pixel response times slightly better then the amazon basics display, 90% dcip-3 coverage (tested by a reviewer. I'm not just going off of marketing), and a contrast ratio of about 1,100 to one.
I've gotten a 27inch 1080p monitor at 165hz. I only paid a little more than what I managed to sell my old one for. And as someone who thinks 1080p is perfectly fine, I love it. It's also my first ips panel so I enjoy the more lively colors
When you showed the OSD on one of the monitors at 8:59, I was thinking it looked a bit familiar. So I checked my monitor (a 2560 x 1440 170hz Acer XV272U V) and it is near enough the damn same OSD, same layout for the sub menus on the right hand side, 90% of the same options in the sub-menu, heck - ever the same on screen aim point options. so my guess is that monitor is a just using re-branded or closed-shift parts from the same factory. So for the price saving - I'd say its a killer monitor if it indeed uses the exact same panel as the one I'm using right now.
I have one of those Koououuuoouri monitors from amazon (the 75hz 27" 1080p one) and it's surprisingly good for the roughly $150cdn I paid for it. Absolutely fantastic value. I'm going to buy another fom them for sure!
I got a 27 inch Acer 1440p 180hz .5 ms monitor for just shy of 200 usd awhile back and it's been very nice to game on. Even has a dead pixel but the pixel density is so good I never even notice it unless there's a scene where the screen goes entirely black.
It's been 12 years since I bought a new monitor! Back then there was a hype going on with "overclockable", Korean 27" 1440p IPS monitors without any scalers or OSD's, which supposedly lead to minimal input lag. They used the same LG panel that the Apple Cinema Display had. After a while I chose a Crossover 27QLED with fully metal structure (excl. stand), no OSD and just a slightly higher price point than some of the cheaper options. That was mainly due to "pixel perfect" panel and a very detailed pixel warranty. It was $450 back then with shipping. It turned out that my example was unable to be driven at any higher refresh rates than 60 Hz. And I think Crossover wasn't known for its OC abilities. IIRC, some other brands would churn up to over 90 Hz but I guess there were some actual issues that weren't mentioned that much. In the recent times I've noticed that my monitor has multiple flickering vertical lines that can be mostly seen on gray areas. I also bet my eyes have gotten used to them. Also quite recently when I used the screen in a vertical orientation, I noticed that the bottom of the screen is way dimmer than the top. Once again a thing that my eyes have gotten used to... I have't owned a graphics card strong enough since I bought this damn thing to enjoy any "playable" fps, though I do occasionally play things, just with "cinematic" levels of refresh rates. In the recent years I've wondered what would be a good budget option with at least 27" 1440p and over 120Hz, but preferably a bit less IPS glow and/or better contrast.
You should look into the Mini monitors that connect via usb c. I got this phenomenal effort from Aliexpress dirt cheap which i use as a 3rd monitor in work
Now you have to do a video on cheap VESA mounts to go with your cheap monitors. There is a misconception that they are expensive when you can actually snag one for $30. I have purchased 3 North Bayou arms over the past 4 years and have been genuinely impressed by how conservative they are with their ratings. The most intense use-cases I use them on are on my 32in OLED and on my 22 inch Pen Display. The pen display in particular impresses me as it can easily handle the weight of the monitor and my arm as I draw. Been using it for that use-case specifically for 3-4 years now and it has held up great. There is a little wobble, but it is perfectly acceptable for the price and has never bugged me. They are rated for 4.4-19.8lbs but have handled worse abuse in my personal use-case over the years. They are technically $50, but they are constantly on sale for around $30. I do not recall a single time I did not see them on sale. The quality has also been recently upgraded. A few years ago the body had a plastic shell and an ugly logo that I had to paint over. Now the body is fully metal and the logo is far less intrusive.
I am surprised the Pixio did so poorly. I own the PX275h which was marketed as a creative and gaming hybrid display. At the time of release, it was the best 27in 1440p IPS display that covered 95% DCI-P3 that also had the bonus of a few extra hz(95). The stand was non adjustable but was not wobbly and the OSD is certainly obtuse (it will even lock you out by turning the device off if it does not detect an input on the input you are currently set to). But the colors and performance seemed quite nice for $260 back around 2019/2020 when I ordered it.
Koorui also have 27" 1440p 240hz IPS monitor, Koorui 27e3qk . I've been using it now about 7 months and it cost me around 300€ from the german amazon. It is 250 usd. I'm really happy abouy it
it makes sense old machines making the old screens stops working so you need to use the slightly newer machines, it takes the same amount of material to make the screen as it did before so it is really just a question of the raw cost of materials and how much that has gone up. however you video does prove a good point high refresh rates can be cheated by just cranking the panel way beyond what it should and really you should just stick to more standard speeds like 120 and 144 hz.
I agree that budget monitors got crazy good! Personally I use AOC Gaming Q24G2A/BK 23.8" 1440p 165Hz monitor. I actually suggest to do a follow up video with monitors which are 24 with 1440p, and then with 27" which have 4K resolution. The pixel density makes everything look better.
Budget monitors have gone through a lot of innovation for even lower prices, VA used to be a common place in this price point but nowadays it's mostly IPS
I picked up a Dell 32"'4K curved monitor for less than $250 off their website. It's still a 60hz monitor, but the colors are vibrant and motion blur is pretty smooth. Sure it's not great for ultra fast pro gaming, but for casual gaming and watching movies it's great!
I have a 27 inch curved 280 hz monitor made by Aoc that I love. I’d definitely recommend checking it out. I paid about 160 for it so it’s not even expensive
It scares me how low priced high refresh rate monitors are nowadays . . I'm still really have a lot affection for the monitor im using now 'GL2780' with how clean it looks and surprisingly smooth it is but that Kurooi is looking really appealing . .
perfect timing I have been looking to upgrade my msi pro mp2412 screen and have seen a few reviews of Koorui branded screens but wasn't to sure, but after seeing this i think the Koorui 27E3Q is going be new daily and if i get on ok with it might even replace my dual screen setup with these
Got myself a lenovo 27" 1080p /165 Hz a few days ago - because my 20 year old LG Flatron 60 Hz VGA(RIP friend) decided to quit on me. Enjoying it so far, although it was around 145 $(ELgiganten). So a fair bit more expensive than Amazon, but thats kinda normal in Denmark. Can highly recommend upgrading with the prices in this vid, epic value.
I got myself an IPS 34" ultrawide earlier this year.. I was looking for a curved screen at a sensible price (so no OLED!) , but they were all VA panels (and as you mention, they sure as hell don't put that fact front and centre and some amazon listings don't say what the panel tech is at all).. I ended up going with flat panel piXL IPS 165Hz unit for under 300 quid. I'm surprised there isn't something similar on the other side of the pond.
I got a refurbished 27in 1080p 100hz ips monitor off of Amazon for about $80 and it's great for slower-paced gaming and watching RUclips. If I look around too fast, it just turns into a blur. That may just be colorblindness.
I’d like to see Dawid do a review on the AOC Q27G3XMN; the most hyped budget VA Quantum Dot panel that according to a lot of reviewers beats many IPS panels in terms of color, HDR and response times.
I've gotten so used to a large 40+ inch 4K TV as monitor I just simply can't do without. I know it is only 60hz, I know its slow as heck, but I just simply refuse to give up all that screen real state for a couple extra hz. Maybe one day I would be able to buy anything above 60hz on a large 4K screen. I can dream.
I bought a budget 27-inch 1440p 180hz monitor on Amazon for $140, and it shocked me. The brand is called ARZOPA, and it's a super bright IPS panel. It blows my old $300 MSI VA monitor out of the water.
When we started getting more refresh rate on 1080p for me personally "upgrading monitor" started to mean more refresh rate rather than more resolution.
Bought a AOC 24G4 but weirdly there are not much reviews on the market. Been using it for about a month and its exceptional for the price it costs (about 11k INR or 120-130 USD). it easily beats the every 'budget' 24 inch gaming monitors out there including LG Ultragear, MSI, Gigabyte, etc etc.
Koorui is kind of an in house brand for a Chinese lcd panel manufacturer. I don't know if the Amazon one is actually an LG or if they are just ripping off the ultra gear styling with that red ring on the back but the Amazon basics stuff I've had has been surprisingly good. Pixio and viewsonic tend to suck. Koorui, KTC, AOC and sometimes bigger names like MSI, Gigabyte or Dell make some really good budget monitors.
Koorui 27e6qc a 1440p/165hz. I bought it brand new during a sale for only 95USD! Using it for 6 months now no issue no ghosting with AMD freesync premium too, yeah it does not have HDR but for the price it was still a win for me
MSI has been selling 24.5 inch 1080p 180Hz IPS panels for 99 euros (that's including 20% VAT) for a little while here in Europe. It's crazy how cheap IPS panels have become.
About a month ago I got a LG Ultra Gear 27GS75Q for around 170 euro straight from their website and this is a really good monitor. 27inch 1440p 200hz monitor that is IPS and has very good color accuracy and no ghosting
That is definitely untrue when it comes to dark transitions. There are a few select VA panels that are very fast, the vast majority of them is not though - specifically because VA is often used in more cost-effective products.
I got me an M27Q (1440p 170Hz IPS) almost 3 years ago now for €240, which was a steal at the time. I'm glad to see that unlike Nvidia's every attempt at convincing everyone in the tech market that things should cost twice as much as they are truly worth, monitors are still going in the right direction.
I'm happy with my budget G34WQC- A ($320 CAD on sale).... Smearing doesn't seem to bother me I suppose (at least I can't say I notice it). And the pair of side kick G24F-2 screens ($170 CAD each on sale) are quite excellent once tuned (160hz native or one can turn on the 180hz overclock mode which works well). Sure seems like there is a good quantity of decent quality budget screens on the market these days.
Koorui 27E3Q owner here ayyyyeee! Been lovin' this monitor since I got it and had never failed me. Now I'm using it as my second monitor with my new Odyssey G60SD. Even with an OLED monitor beside it, it still demands respect and it definitely earns mine!
i have the 25e3q the same panel just smaller and cheaper it’s great i can fully recommend it to anyone looking for a 170hz 1440p monitor
I've seen a korean review of that KOORUI 27E3Q that shows that it has unusually high input lag. Did you find that bothersome?
@@WrexBF must be just their panel, i have the same, tested with a calibration machine to be 3ms
iv'e got the 27e6qc, can confirm that they make some great monitors
I have one just like it. Can't beat the value.
Dawid one day can you do a video explaining the color reproduction graphs/charts you use? I might be an idiot but every time I look at them flash up I don't really understand what I am looking at.
i feel like that could be a nice 1-2minute short
Different monitor panels have different capability of displaying true range of colors. "Good" panel can show wide range of colors, while "bad" one's colors are limited and the range is more squished and less colorfull. If you set them side by side you will see that good one is more vibrant and colorful.
I can explain real quick, but I'm not an expert, feel free anyone else to chime in with help if need be. If you go to 10:08 I will try my best to explain all the graphs, so pause the video there.
The first chart/graph is a Color Gamut graph, it illustrates how much "coverage" the tested monitor has of 'color spaces', i.e sRGB, AdobeRGB and DCI-P3 are all color spaces. Each color space is different, some are wider than others like sRGB being less wide than DCI-P3, but sRGB is what most consider the bare-bones low end color gamut monitors should meet because it's one of the smallest color spaces. The wider the color space, the more colors that can be produced. If one color space has 10,000 colors and another 250,000, then the second can show not only more colors but a more accurate image as it can display colors the other cannot. The important part to read on the first chart is the bottom where it says "95% of sRGB, 80% AdobeRGB and 82% of P3", what this means is that the monitor tested to display 95% of the sRGB color space, 80% of AdobeRGB and 82% of DCI-P3, this means it can only display a certain percentage of those color spaces, the higher the percentage, the better it can reproduce color spaces and thus has a wider color gamut. In simple language, the monitor can display more colors if the percentage is higher. From memory, the weird thing or shape with all the color in that first chart is the human visual color spectrum, so that's all the colors the human eye can see, so the color space is within that but only showing a portion.
The second is a color accuracy chart, what this chart measures is whether the colors being shown are accurate to a reference color sample, so for instance is the monitor showing the color bright "red", or is it showing more of a "muted pink" which is close to bright red, but it's not really red. When a color sensor measures a monitor, it compares the measured sample of color from the monitor with a reference sample, it asks the monitor to display that reference sample color on the screen and if it matches it has a 0 'delta-E', the lower the 'delta-E' the closer the monitor is to the reference color, thus the monitor is more color accurate. So if you read each 'ID' it has a 'patch lab' and a 'result lab' and these are probably better labelled 'Color (ID)', 'Reference Color (patch lab)' and 'Measured Color (result lab)'. Essentially in simple language, it compares each color, red, blue, green, yellow etc and if it gets closer to the expected color, it has a lower 'delta-E'. The lower the delta-E, whether that be on average or for each color(ID), the better the monitor produces accurate colors. The higher the delta-E, the more distorted the colors will be.
The third chart is the tone response chart, essentially this measures the "tone" of the image, using something called gamma. I will be honest, I'm not well versed with gamma, but essentially how I understand it is that this chart shows how well your monitor can produce 'grays' and gradients of gray, white and black and such, it also tests the 'white point' of the monitor. I believe the curved green line shows how Gamma 1.8 is measured as a reference and teal is how Gamma 2.2 is measured as a reference. The black line is how the monitor's Gamma was measured. From this image, it appears that the monitor is somewhere between Gamma 1.8 and Gamma 2.2, ideally it should be close or in line with Gamma 2.2. Gamma 2.2 produces "darker" images than Gamma 1.8, because it has more accurate tone because it can reach darker contrast, but TVs and Movies use Gamma 2.4 which is even darker. Basically, the higher the gamma, the more accurate the "tone" of the image can be, rather than being blown out and white when it should be gray or black. This allows for better "tone mapping" kind of like HDR. A great article to google is "What is Gamma" by BenQ and it shows you some reference images of Gamma 1.0 vs 1.8 vs 2.2 vs 2.4 and 2.6 etc. But this chart says the monitor's probably showing Gamma 2.1 which is pretty bad considering I think 2.2 is sort of the minimum these days.
The bottom left chart or fourth chart is a screen uniformity chart, this shows how well the screen can display colors across the display and whether the backlight is uniformly bright across the display. Because LCD's are edge-lit, this means some bits of the screen can be "darker" or "brighter" than the others, as maybe there's more LED's on one side or perhaps there's a larger gap between the backlight or the LEDs are darker due to manufacturing or some error, or maybe there's even different amounts of LEDs on the bottom versus the top or sides etc. For whatever the reason may be, LCDs don't always have uniform color and brightness across the display. If you've ever had an LCD on a pure black image in a dark room and you can see that some bits of the screen look more "white" or "gray", rather than "black" it means the screen's not uniform, as ideally you wouldn't be able to tell the difference between one part of the screen as it's supposed to be all the same color. So again, this is measured in 'delta-E', where again the lower the 'delta-E', the better as it means the lower the distortion or the higher the accuracy to the reference. Except this time there's a twist, this time it's only comparing every other subsequent measurement to the first measurement on the monitor. So measurement one, will always be 0.0. So with this chart, the top right that's white measures a 'delta-E' of 0.0 (this is the first measurement) and the bottom right in dark orange measures 3.6. This means that between the top right of the monitor and the bottom right, there was a 'delta-E' of 3.0, meaning the bottom right of the screen is not the same brightness or color to the top right of the screen, despite showing the same image/color. Thus, extrapolate that out to the rest of the screen as these measurements actually are different points on the monitor, thus the top-right measurement is the top right of the monitor, the middle measurement is the middle and so on. In simple terms, this chart measures if the screen is uniformly bright and color accurate across different areas of the display, the lower the 'delta-E' the closer the monitor is to being the same across the display, ideally it should be 0.0 at every point, because if it's showing one color across the whole display, it should always be the same color and brightness at every point you measure on it, whether that be the top right, the middle or the bottom corners, but in reality no LCD monitor is perfect and therefore some parts of the display are brighter or darker than others. OLED or microLED should be perfect 0.0 everywhere as they are not edge-lit, they are per-pixel lit, thus every part of the screen should in theory be the same. But with LCD, some bits of the panel are closer to the backlight or some LEDs are brighter than others just from manufacturing tolerances. I will say I do think Dawid has done the measurement in a unique way as usually you start in the middle and that should be 0.0 and everything else should be some other number, but really where you start is not important because as I said, it should be 0.0 everywhere in an ideal scenario as it's supposed to be the same brightness and color across the display.
Lastly is the bottom right chart, which is brightness, contrast and white point at different brightness. This should be the easiest chart to understand, but essentially, 'Setting' means what did Dawid set the brightness to on the monitor, so 25%, 50% and so on. Then 'Brightness' is what "nits" the monitor measured at, so for instance at 100% brightness Dawid measured 311.3 nits, which is fine for an indoor display where you're not in direct sunlight. Anything above 400 nits is required for some sort of HDR experience, albeit a poor one and usually on phones outdoors you need like 1000+ nits to see the screen otherwise it's not bright enough and all you can see is the screen reflection and for true HDR on monitors you need like 1200 nits or above for the very bright highlights. 'Black' I believe refers to the nits of the screen when showing a pure "black" screen. 'Contrast' is well... the contrast ratio or the luminance between different things on the display, ie the difference or ratio between pure black black and pure white, generally 1000:1 as a ratio is the minimum these days, especially for IPS panels, but VA panels perform much better in contrast upwards of 6000:1 contrast ratio sometimes over 10,000:1. With OLEDs the contrast ratio should be infinite as you're getting per-pixel contrast as blacks are supposed to be pure-black as the pixels are turned off (in reality sometimes the coating or type of OLED can impact this contrast ratio like how QD-OLEDs can look "gray" with blacks compared to WOLED where it looks pure black in a bright room). So the higher the contrast ratio, the better. 'White Point' measures the white-point or color temperature in Kelvin, if you've ever bought a light bulb you know those numbers printed on the box of light bulbs that are 6,400K or 9,300K, that refers to the color temperature of the light with the scale going from 1,000K (red) to 10,000K(blue). For reference, 5,000K is pure white temperature meaning the light should create a pure white light, 1,000K being orangey red like a candle and 10,000K should be like the blue flame from a gas stove. So Dawid at 100% brightness measured around 7,600K which is a blue tinted display in this case, meaning the monitor's distorting the image to have a blue tint across all images on that display, no matter the color it will always have a blue tint to it, ideally it should be around 5,000K across all brightnesses to not be considered cool or warm, but rather pure white.
I hope this helps.
Thats a lot of words
So
Gamut - 100% is better(?), the confusing part is srgb vs argb vs dcip3
Accuracy - 0 is better
Gamma - 2.4 is better(?), 2.6 is better?
Screen uniformity - 0 is better
Nits/Contrast: higher is better
Its kinda confusing since the problem with most is they either assume you already know, and they either skip past it or they just blab all the numbers out anyway over 10 mins and maybe say "its good" (or bad if its bad)
@@mahomisawa4172 > Gamut - 100% is better(?), the confusing part is srgb vs argb vs dcip3
Gamut 100% is better than 95% or 50%, yes.
sRGB is a very narrow color space, as in it has less colors as a number than AdobeRGB or DCI-P3. DCI-P3 has about 25% more color than sRGB. So if you have 75% of DCI-P3 it should be basically equivalent to 100% of sRGB. I hope that makes sense, they're not really directly comparable since they cover different parts of the visual human spectrum, as in they can start in a different area of the spectrum (the weird shape on the chart with all the colors), but generally 95% AdobeRGB and 90% DCI-P3 are considered better than 100% sRGB which as I said is the bare-bones minimum people expect these days out of their monitor. I suggest you just google sRGB vs DCI-P3 if you want more information. I just told you how to read the chart and color science is extremely difficult to explain in a short paragraph since you don't want a long explanation.
> Accuracy - 0 is better
Lower delta-E is better, 0 is best.
> Gamma - 2.4 is better(?), 2.6 is better?
Yes, it means the tone can be better mapped. I consider Gamma 2.2 the absolute minimum these days for any content. 2.4 is better and 2.6 is best but you're not going to really see Gamma 2.6 on any commercial content other than maybe at like IMAX cinemas.
> Screen uniformity - 0 is better
Lower delta-E is better, 0 is best just like color accuracy. But it's all measured and self-referential to that display, as in each measurement just means comparing to another point on the same display. It doesn't mean it's accurate to a reference sample from another display or something. This just applies to screen uniformity.
> Nits/Contrast: higher is better
To an extent, yes, but you can also have too bright when it comes to nits. I mean you wouldn't want a 1,000,000 nit display (an exaggerated example), it would hurt your eyes to look at. But definitely higher is better for contrast.
> Its kinda confusing since the problem with most is they either assume you already know, and they either skip past it or they just blab all the numbers out anyway over 10 mins and maybe say "its good" (or bad if its bad)
Color science and display science as I said earlier is very complex, it requires background knowledge to grasp and understand the charts fully, that's just the reality. I think it's good to give more explanation in a video, but it can be boring for most people and they won't understand it, even if you explain it. Even when I gave you a less in-depth explanation above you said and probably complained that it was a lot of words. Yes, because it's complex to explain. I could yap for hours about color science and data, but people don't want to know they just want an answer, especially Gen-Z who's brains can't even stand longer than 10 seconds of mental stimulation thanks to Tik-tok dopamine cycles.
That being said, Dawid mostly gives you the general gist anyways by saying it's "good" or "bad" as do most RUclipsrs who do videos. I will give you an example of where something is a "bad" display, because generally if it's not color accurate but it's fantastic at everything else like motion response or brightness, well I would still consider it a "bad" display as would most people, we want a color accurate picture, we don't want 'green' to look 'blue' for instance. This also applies to screens that may be color accurate or very bright but have poor motion clarity or motion response times, if it's smeary all over with ghosting, it's also a "bad" display, especially for gaming. So generally a display is "good" if it measures well in all metrics across the board. If it gets one thing really wrong, then it's pretty much a bad display. I know "well" or "good" or "bad" are subjective. But Dawid is sensible and pretty tolerant to understanding these are budget products and he will give you a pretty justifiable opinion. I mean by all objective metrics, or at least compared to the other two monitors, the Pixio monitor here sucks, it's nowhere near as color accurate, uniform, nor are the response times as good. Dawid was correct in his evaluation. The Koorui and Amazon Basics are actually decent and good monitors for their price, especially the KOORUI one, based off the data of course. I suggest you read up on this stuff if you want to understand it more. It's what I did and I'm still learning and get things wrong because like I said... color science is complex.
That Amazon Basics 27inch 165hz IPS monitor was being sold for $36 when Prime Day started a couple of weeks ago. It sold out in under 2 minutes, but I was able to snag one to use as my new second monitor.
36? grab 2!
@@teknoid5878 There was a limit of 1 per person. It was a Lightning Deal that happened right when Prime Day started at 3:00 in the morning lol. Sold out instantly. They were selling the 24 inch version for $32 as well. Then when those sold out, they started selling 27 inch 100hz monitors for $35.
@@teknoid5878 i'd have bought two for sure if i knew
That’s insane. At that price, I’d buy one despite not even needing it.
That is absolutely mental. I remember paying through the roof for a monitor with those specs in 2018.
Well dawid. I am in a point in my life where I need a change. I am going back to pc gaming instead of alcohol. I just bought this monitor to plug into my legion 5. I will upgrade later, but oddly you kind of inspired me. And I thank you for that. My legion only has a 1060 in it, but god willing will change!! I love your videos, been watching for years!! Wish me luck!!! I bought the 27E3Q
One day at a time, one frag at a time!
@@LabCat I appreciate that bud, thank you so much!!
@@VonKerman8328cant have the buds anymore, youre quitting the booze remember?
I chose gaming over drugs a long ass time ago. But decided to switch from console to PC in 2019 and never looked back. Recently built a dreamy mid range pc with a 4070ti. PC gaming is so much better, and the community surrounding it makes console look like a crayon-eating-window-licker
Bro best of luck. I wish my father would follow after you. Good life choice right there.
Got a certified acer refurbished 1440p 180hz 27” Nitro XV271UM3 off eBay for $150 USD a few short weeks ago. Refurbished is never a bad idea too
I got a store return LG Ultra Gear 32GP850 earlier this year for 200€. 350€ was street price at the time, can't complain about it for that price. Contrast is its biggest weakness, so I am looking for other options at the moment but I am again looking at store returns and refurbished screens.
@@Lumilicious I got a brand new Dell G2724D (1440p/165Hz) for £170 in a sale a few months ago.
I got a returned LG 27" 1440P 144HZ monitor for a whopping 70 USD, easily the best value part on my pc
dayum
I scored a free 768p projector from my aunts house
The Koorui 165hz 1080p 24E4 monitor I had was $115 new and kicked ass….until it just randomly died right after the return window.
I can remember that model name because both Optimum Tech and Techless recommending it, that's so sad for you
@@phucnguyen0110 I bought it after watching several reviews of it, it was a perfect monitor in my opinion, was.
@@phucnguyen0110 thats the 24e3 which is ips, the 24e4 is va.
did the warranty work?
Did you try your chances with the 3 year warranty?
That Koorui 27E3Q monitor is retailing into UK from £220-£300 (£300 is Amazon)! That's about $393.01cad to $535.92cad. We are getting so ripped off in the UK.
@@Thurgosh_OG Oh wow! That's so much more. Sorry to hear that. 😔
@@DawidDoesTechStuff Dawid Neither IPS or VA is better than the other, the smearing you are talking about is none existent to the human eye which has an 60fps cap and a reaction time of 13 miliseconds, the smearing doesn't EXIST.
@@02Z7 That's really variable. The first VA panel I used was definitely very noticeable, in fact my first reaction to scrolling a webpage on it was "holy shit why is it ghosting so much?"
Unfortunately it arrived the day before I went on holiday so I missed the return window, so I've gotten used to it enough to use on a secondary system, but I am definitely glad I replaced it with an IPS panel for my main rig.
Neither VA nor IPS is strictly better, they each have their pros and cons, but a lot of people find the cons of VA worse than the cons of IPS
@@jambutnotoast and still people like dawid doesn't even wanna give them a chance because apparently his eyes hurt from the "smearing" which is none exist?
I grabbed my 27E3Q for £180.00 on sale, still very happy with it, though those CAD and USD prices are insane!
I bought a 27" INNOCN 1440p 180hz monitor and it costs $160. I think it's the best value and the colors/gamut are remarkable.
Just me that thinks the pixio has the clearest ufo test at 9:39?
Same here. He showed that and I am now just confused what he is talking about. Pay attention to the black lines on the red UFO. You can see them on the Pixio.
I literally cannot tell which is worse they all look more or less the same
Pixio is definitely clearer so I'm not sure what Dawid is talking about here.
yeah looks the best to me too. maybe the editor labeled them wrong?
You can see a darker ghosting trail on the Pixio. It may not look worse than the others in that picture, but from my experience, that's enough to make it look very 'blurry'
I bought a 1440p 144Hz 27" acer monitor 3 years ago for around 330€ and I'm still happy with it, but it's crazy that you get the same experience with a much cheaper monitor these days
A surprisingly high amount of value for a 11:40 minutes video. Dawid does value stuff: 😊
Nice to know that KOORUI does some decent hardware for the price. Thanks for testing them out. I usually stick to name brands to be safe.
I have a very clever 27 inch Philips monitor, it has a sensor array at front and can tell when I am using it as a monitor and it adjusts itself and can tell when I am using it as a telly and again adjusts itself for distance viewing and also boosts the sound in distance mode.
I have gone to AOC monitors both 27 inch, one 4K, IPS 160hz with HDR 400 and the other is 1440p VA at 180hz and love this setup after same 4k and 1440p setup at 32 inch sizes.
LG has been doing crazy good discounts on UG refurbished displays. I work at a micro center and just picked up a 32” LG UG 165hz 1440p HDR 10 monitor for $100.
It's not a true gaming experience without dealing with an onslaught of flesh eating bacteria! 😎
you have convinced me to buy the kooriu for my first set up which I will be buying anyyyy day now.
I bought my koorui 24e3 1080p 165hz ips monitor about a year ago for roughly $95. Still works like a charm to this day. Planning to get the 27e3q as well when i upgrade my gpu. The 27e3q can go as low as $160 during sales in my country 🇵🇭
That 280hz monitor has raised blacks out of the box (indicated by very bad contrast), they do it because slowest color on LCD VA and IPS is pure black, so you make black lighter, making panel skip slowest transitions, like you said this panel is probably 144-170hz forced to do 280Hz.
Wait, is THAT why all my IPS screens have everything from about 16RGB on down crunched into a single indistinguishable near-black? Either way, it's ironic that the panels whose entire selling point is having darker black levels have to turn the brightness of blacks up to avoid slow refresh.
@@stevethepocket For the IPS screens, that's almost certainly the backlight bleedthrough, which will turn anything past a certain level of darkness to the same blackish grey, not just pure black. They've never had very good black levels, that's why there was so much hype around OLED's black levels. Most displays by that point were IPS LCDs and struggled with the darkest colors. I remember showing this to my step-mom with my Galaxy S6's AMOLED compared to her iPhone 6's Retina LCD.
VA panels on the other hand generally have better black levels, but they tend to be sluggish and don't scale as well to larger sizes past 40". There are good VA panels, but cheap VA panels are generally worse overall than equally cheap IPS displays. I had a Lenovo work laptop that had an incredibly nice and vibrant VA panel, but I've seen many more terrible ones.
@@charles-antoinemartel-roy Well the funny thing is that even TN panels were better about low-end contrast. My cheapo 2010 Dell TN monitor aces this test-making it a lot easier to see in dimly-lit areas in games-even though obviously the black level itself is worse.
@stevethepocket yeah IPS was a dead-end technology. It had great color reproduction, it was bright, it was cheap to produce, and it was easy to scale to big sizes, which is why it became the norm. It also timed perfectly with people upgrading their burned-in plasma flat-screens.
@@stevethepocket If you are using nvidia (can also work on AMD) and HDMI check your settings (in drivers control panel) on Limited RGB range that is 16-235 instead of 0-255, either this or you have panel that is cheated to go faster, because IPS is not he best at showing black but it should not crush multiple values to look the same.
I bought my 27" koorai 144hz 1440p cost me 127 CAD on sale and has been exceptional for over a year now. Would highly recommend
I have had a 1440p Koorui for almost 2 years now. Still holding up strong and lookin gooooood!
Your review convinced me-I'm taking a shot on the Koorui! I've been hunting for an inexpensive home office monitor, and am excited to see how it performs.
i have the koorui monitor and i was suprised at how good it stacked up against my way more expensive msi monitor
I have one of their wireless mechanical keyboards and it's fantastic. Koorui makes some good stuff for reasonable prices.
I picked up a new 24inch IPS 1080p@165hz for $90 new absolute steal.
Dell has a 280hz monitor that’s frequently $170ish, and if you can find it refurbished at Best Buy or Amazon sometimes it’s as cheap as 140 or 150. Tilton rotation adjustment on the stand, no internal speakers, but who is using their monitor speakers. I’ve been using it for the last year and it has been wonderful
Which model exactly?
@@Zimzim-v2x the G2524H, you’ve got to catch it on sale though otherwise it’s like 220-230
I managed to buy four 27" 1440p 170hz monitors for $309 (AUD) at auction a while ago. So like just over $75 per monitor. Was pretty happy with that.
Yeah monitor prices have gone down quite a bit. Found a samsung odyssey d4 240hz one in my local shop for 180€
There's this Koorui brand that sells 24" 1440p monitors, which my tiny desk just loves.
I have the KTC H27T22, which is a 27-inch 1440p/165 Hz IPS monitor (it has a 170 Hz mode but enabling it disables FreeSync) that I got for about $180. For the price, you get really solid motion rendering, a stand with the full range of adjustment, and two DisplayPort plus two HDMI 2.0 inputs.
I like your channel so much that I never skip the sponsor segment. 👍 thank you for another satisfying video!
I bought a koori monitor last year. I just wanted a secound monitor for youtube videos, chat and so on. but this thing is really good. I was surprised. I never heard of koori before.
Can you make a video giving us some context on what is good colour accuracy / monitor stuff?
good positive message here - do more of these performance tweaks - (cheap but solid) nvme raid plus 10g deals would be my algo picks
Literally was debating on upgrading my cheap 60hz 1080p monitor last night. Thanks Dawid, you're the best!
As a owner of a 32" 1440p 165hz HDR VA LG monitor (400 nits peak brightness),
I can confirm the motion clarity is ass... 150$ mistake.... (Bought "refurbished" on eBay with 0 signs of usage, 0 scuffs, 0 stuck pixels, 0 hours of usage reported by the OSD at the time of purchase)
OLED is the next step for me. No substitutions.
I have a 32" LG ULTRAGEAR 165Hz VA monitor and have no complaints. It's HDR capable and the image quality is more than satisfactory. I don't get the hate he has for VA panels. I got it on sale for $189.00.
I have a Gigabyte M32QC with the same specs. They're probably using the same panel. I paid $230 for it, but it also has a KVM switch. The same monitor without that costs about the same as your LG. It's been flawless, except for when my son's cat did a header into it and I had to send it for repair. Gigabyte serviced it under warranty, even though it was due to damage caused and not a fault in the monitor.
Recently moved abroad and this is my EXACT monitor! Nice!
I love my Koorui 24" 1440p, 165hz monitor. it was pretty cheap and is very good.
"Miiiiiiiicro Ceeeeeeenteeeer"
Was conspicuously absent from this sponsor section and that made me a sad panda.
I got a pixio px248 pro (1080p 24in 165hz ips) for $130 a little over a year ago. I really like it, it has pixel response times slightly better then the amazon basics display, 90% dcip-3 coverage (tested by a reviewer. I'm not just going off of marketing), and a contrast ratio of about 1,100 to one.
Koorui 27e3q owner also! Great monitor I've been using it for a while now and it's great
I've gotten a 27inch 1080p monitor at 165hz. I only paid a little more than what I managed to sell my old one for. And as someone who thinks 1080p is perfectly fine, I love it. It's also my first ips panel so I enjoy the more lively colors
Got a 32" 4k LG LCD for work and the image is stunning. Less than £200 gets you so much these days.
When you showed the OSD on one of the monitors at 8:59, I was thinking it looked a bit familiar. So I checked my monitor (a 2560 x 1440 170hz Acer XV272U V) and it is near enough the damn same OSD, same layout for the sub menus on the right hand side, 90% of the same options in the sub-menu, heck - ever the same on screen aim point options. so my guess is that monitor is a just using re-branded or closed-shift parts from the same factory. So for the price saving - I'd say its a killer monitor if it indeed uses the exact same panel as the one I'm using right now.
Please come back in a month or two months and retest the Amazon Basics and the Kurooi monitors and give us an update.
I have one of those Koououuuoouri monitors from amazon (the 75hz 27" 1080p one) and it's surprisingly good for the roughly $150cdn I paid for it. Absolutely fantastic value. I'm going to buy another fom them for sure!
I got a 27 inch Acer 1440p 180hz .5 ms monitor for just shy of 200 usd awhile back and it's been very nice to game on. Even has a dead pixel but the pixel density is so good I never even notice it unless there's a scene where the screen goes entirely black.
Brilliant timing dawid my 16 month old son just fell asleep as this was released so i have an excuse not to do anything but watch this video.
It's been 12 years since I bought a new monitor! Back then there was a hype going on with "overclockable", Korean 27" 1440p IPS monitors without any scalers or OSD's, which supposedly lead to minimal input lag. They used the same LG panel that the Apple Cinema Display had. After a while I chose a Crossover 27QLED with fully metal structure (excl. stand), no OSD and just a slightly higher price point than some of the cheaper options. That was mainly due to "pixel perfect" panel and a very detailed pixel warranty. It was $450 back then with shipping.
It turned out that my example was unable to be driven at any higher refresh rates than 60 Hz. And I think Crossover wasn't known for its OC abilities. IIRC, some other brands would churn up to over 90 Hz but I guess there were some actual issues that weren't mentioned that much.
In the recent times I've noticed that my monitor has multiple flickering vertical lines that can be mostly seen on gray areas. I also bet my eyes have gotten used to them. Also quite recently when I used the screen in a vertical orientation, I noticed that the bottom of the screen is way dimmer than the top. Once again a thing that my eyes have gotten used to...
I have't owned a graphics card strong enough since I bought this damn thing to enjoy any "playable" fps, though I do occasionally play things, just with "cinematic" levels of refresh rates.
In the recent years I've wondered what would be a good budget option with at least 27" 1440p and over 120Hz, but preferably a bit less IPS glow and/or better contrast.
You should look into the Mini monitors that connect via usb c. I got this phenomenal effort from Aliexpress dirt cheap which i use as a 3rd monitor in work
Wow, I was just thinking about switching to a 1440 monitor, and along comes this video. Thanks Dawid
I bought a 51risc 1440p 165hz monitor for 140 dollars, never thought I would be running 1440p even half a year ago
Now you have to do a video on cheap VESA mounts to go with your cheap monitors. There is a misconception that they are expensive when you can actually snag one for $30.
I have purchased 3 North Bayou arms over the past 4 years and have been genuinely impressed by how conservative they are with their ratings. The most intense use-cases I use them on are on my 32in OLED and on my 22 inch Pen Display. The pen display in particular impresses me as it can easily handle the weight of the monitor and my arm as I draw. Been using it for that use-case specifically for 3-4 years now and it has held up great. There is a little wobble, but it is perfectly acceptable for the price and has never bugged me.
They are rated for 4.4-19.8lbs but have handled worse abuse in my personal use-case over the years.
They are technically $50, but they are constantly on sale for around $30. I do not recall a single time I did not see them on sale.
The quality has also been recently upgraded. A few years ago the body had a plastic shell and an ugly logo that I had to paint over. Now the body is fully metal and the logo is far less intrusive.
I picked up some IPS 1080p 24” 170hz MSI monitors for $104 each for my kids awhile back. They are great for the price paid.
At 9:30, isnt the Kurooi the "smeariest" of them all? Looks like the Pixio is pretty good, unless the labels are misplaced
Picked up a 1440P MSI monitor at Costco for 159.99 it's fantastic
I am surprised the Pixio did so poorly. I own the PX275h which was marketed as a creative and gaming hybrid display. At the time of release, it was the best 27in 1440p IPS display that covered 95% DCI-P3 that also had the bonus of a few extra hz(95). The stand was non adjustable but was not wobbly and the OSD is certainly obtuse (it will even lock you out by turning the device off if it does not detect an input on the input you are currently set to). But the colors and performance seemed quite nice for $260 back around 2019/2020 when I ordered it.
7:12 the gigabyte m34wq is an ips ultrawide for 350
Koorui also have 27" 1440p 240hz IPS monitor, Koorui 27e3qk . I've been using it now about 7 months and it cost me around 300€ from the german amazon. It is 250 usd. I'm really happy abouy it
it makes sense old machines making the old screens stops working so you need to use the slightly newer machines, it takes the same amount of material to make the screen as it did before so it is really just a question of the raw cost of materials and how much that has gone up.
however you video does prove a good point high refresh rates can be cheated by just cranking the panel way beyond what it should and really you should just stick to more standard speeds like 120 and 144 hz.
I have a old Dell with a refresh rate of 75hz. Kind of weird. Might upgrade soon. Videos like these are always great.
I agree that budget monitors got crazy good! Personally I use AOC Gaming Q24G2A/BK 23.8" 1440p 165Hz monitor. I actually suggest to do a follow up video with monitors which are 24 with 1440p, and then with 27" which have 4K resolution. The pixel density makes everything look better.
Budget monitors have gone through a lot of innovation for even lower prices, VA used to be a common place in this price point but nowadays it's mostly IPS
I picked up a Dell 32"'4K curved monitor for less than $250 off their website. It's still a 60hz monitor, but the colors are vibrant and motion blur is pretty smooth. Sure it's not great for ultra fast pro gaming, but for casual gaming and watching movies it's great!
I have a 27 inch curved 280 hz monitor made by Aoc that I love. I’d definitely recommend checking it out. I paid about 160 for it so it’s not even expensive
It scares me how low priced high refresh rate monitors are nowadays . .
I'm still really have a lot affection for the monitor im using now 'GL2780' with how clean it looks and surprisingly smooth it is but that Kurooi is looking really appealing . .
perfect timing I have been looking to upgrade my msi pro mp2412 screen and have seen a few reviews of Koorui branded screens but wasn't to sure, but after seeing this i think the Koorui 27E3Q is going be new daily and if i get on ok with it might even replace my dual screen setup with these
My KTC 24in 1080p monitor with 165 hz , FreeSync and g-sync was only $106 free shipping , it's wonderful and definitely don't need anything else
Got myself a lenovo 27" 1080p /165 Hz a few days ago - because my 20 year old LG Flatron 60 Hz VGA(RIP friend) decided to quit on me. Enjoying it so far, although it was around 145 $(ELgiganten). So a fair bit more expensive than Amazon, but thats kinda normal in Denmark. Can highly recommend upgrading with the prices in this vid, epic value.
The amazon Basics monitor is almost EXACTLY the same as the Onn 24" monitor from walmart for the same price
I AM SIMPLE MAN. I SEE DAWID, I CLICK DAWID. I AM SIMPLE MAN.
I got myself an IPS 34" ultrawide earlier this year.. I was looking for a curved screen at a sensible price (so no OLED!) , but they were all VA panels (and as you mention, they sure as hell don't put that fact front and centre and some amazon listings don't say what the panel tech is at all).. I ended up going with flat panel piXL IPS 165Hz unit for under 300 quid. I'm surprised there isn't something similar on the other side of the pond.
I'm really interested in that KOORUI after seeing this. 27 inches has been a requirement for me since owning one.
Please do curve monitors with no ghosting but great color!!!! lol been looking for one
I got a refurbished 27in 1080p 100hz ips monitor off of Amazon for about $80 and it's great for slower-paced gaming and watching RUclips. If I look around too fast, it just turns into a blur. That may just be colorblindness.
I’d like to see Dawid do a review on the AOC Q27G3XMN; the most hyped budget VA Quantum Dot panel that according to a lot of reviewers beats many IPS panels in terms of color, HDR and response times.
Wow nice, i just browsing budget monitor and your video was uploaded 1 hour ago
The KTC HT27T22 is a good 1440p 170hz monitor. I got mine for $161 with a coupon two months ago and love it.
I've gotten so used to a large 40+ inch 4K TV as monitor I just simply can't do without. I know it is only 60hz, I know its slow as heck, but I just simply refuse to give up all that screen real state for a couple extra hz. Maybe one day I would be able to buy anything above 60hz on a large 4K screen. I can dream.
Great video Dawid!! - I opted for an Iiyama Red Eagle G-Master G2770QSU and I don't think you can get anywhere near it for price/performance.
I got myself an AOC 24G4 for 100 quid flat and it's bloody brilliant! IPS, 180Hz, G-sync compatable... monitors have come a LONG way lol
If you're not chasing OLED or 4Kish high refresh rate, there are a lot of good options in the budget space.
I bought a budget 27-inch 1440p 180hz monitor on Amazon for $140, and it shocked me. The brand is called ARZOPA, and it's a super bright IPS panel. It blows my old $300 MSI VA monitor out of the water.
When we started getting more refresh rate on 1080p for me personally "upgrading monitor" started to mean more refresh rate rather than more resolution.
Bought a AOC 24G4 but weirdly there are not much reviews on the market. Been using it for about a month and its exceptional for the price it costs (about 11k INR or 120-130 USD). it easily beats the every 'budget' 24 inch gaming monitors out there including LG Ultragear, MSI, Gigabyte, etc etc.
Koorui is kind of an in house brand for a Chinese lcd panel manufacturer. I don't know if the Amazon one is actually an LG or if they are just ripping off the ultra gear styling with that red ring on the back but the Amazon basics stuff I've had has been surprisingly good. Pixio and viewsonic tend to suck. Koorui, KTC, AOC and sometimes bigger names like MSI, Gigabyte or Dell make some really good budget monitors.
Koorui 27e6qc a 1440p/165hz. I bought it brand new during a sale for only 95USD! Using it for 6 months now no issue no ghosting with AMD freesync premium too, yeah it does not have HDR but for the price it was still a win for me
you can also check titan quest and ktc
The KOORUI Monitor, 27" is $290 here in Sweden right now haha. Sweden is always expensive with the Electrics.
I love my curved 1440p 165hz VA panels. I never noticed motion rendering issues if your 120fps or more.
that shirt needs to be in the store...
MSI has been selling 24.5 inch 1080p 180Hz IPS panels for 99 euros (that's including 20% VAT) for a little while here in Europe. It's crazy how cheap IPS panels have become.
About a month ago I got a LG Ultra Gear 27GS75Q for around 170 euro straight from their website and this is a really good monitor. 27inch 1440p 200hz monitor that is IPS and has very good color accuracy and no ghosting
2:20 VA monitors have improved, and they don't have ghosting anymore (the recent ones).
not in the budget range
Even the cheap ones?
@@basshead. Gigabyte GS27QC for example, 200$ is pretty budget but the specs are great
@@lucutes2936 Rtings says that it's crap for gaming.
That is definitely untrue when it comes to dark transitions. There are a few select VA panels that are very fast, the vast majority of them is not though - specifically because VA is often used in more cost-effective products.
Awesome video. I'm in desperate need of a budget monitor since I still game on a 60hz monitor.
Gawfolk is another good budget brand. I got the last 24.5 in June. Check them out if you’re interested.
I used to have a kurui one it's amazing and display is awesome 👍 color volume is awesome
"maybe watch another one" bro I almost saw everything thats on the channel lmao 🗣️🔥👍
I got me an M27Q (1440p 170Hz IPS) almost 3 years ago now for €240, which was a steal at the time. I'm glad to see that unlike Nvidia's every attempt at convincing everyone in the tech market that things should cost twice as much as they are truly worth, monitors are still going in the right direction.
I'm happy with my budget G34WQC- A ($320 CAD on sale).... Smearing doesn't seem to bother me I suppose (at least I can't say I notice it). And the pair of side kick G24F-2 screens ($170 CAD each on sale) are quite excellent once tuned (160hz native or one can turn on the 180hz overclock mode which works well). Sure seems like there is a good quantity of decent quality budget screens on the market these days.
I have a koorui 240hz 27in 1440p monitor specifically for CS2 it's a great value and works wonderfully