Unfortunately, this deal is no longer available
Samsung CJG5 27 Inch 1440p 144Hz QHD Curved Gaming Monitor £239.99 @ Argos (Free Click & Collect)
812° Expired

Samsung CJG5 27 Inch 1440p 144Hz QHD Curved Gaming Monitor £239.99 @ Argos (Free Click & Collect)

£239.99£299.9920%Argos Deals
83
Posted 12th Nov 2019

This deal is expired. Here are some options that might interest you:

Great deal and better than ebuyers EG one (which is currently out of stock) as this is curved and a VA panel, not TN.

£239.99 at argos or you can get it £12 cheaper if bought on ebay with PICKME5 (collection) discount code

Can also apply code, then change to delivery for 231.94 total.
Correction again; it actually works, will show as you paid 243, but on paypal says £12 from "other sources":
Funding Source: Credit Card
Funding Source: -£231.94 GBP - VISA ending in x-****
PAYPAL *EBAY ARGOS EBAY
Funding Source: Voucher
Funding Source: -£12.00 GBP -
Community Updates
MODERATOR
Samsung CJG5 curved gaming monitor lets you play to win with its 1800R curved screen immersing you in the action, WQHD resolution delivering razor-sharp images, and 144 Hz refresh rate ensuring silky-smooth game play.

Featuring Samsung's industry-leading 1800R screen, the CJG52 curves around your field of view to immerse you in all the onscreen gaming action, plus connect your audio through the headphone port. Includes 1x HDMI 1.4 and 1x HDMI 2.0 ports.

Monitor:
  • 27in LED display.
  • Resolution 2560 x 1440 pixels.
  • Full HD Display.
  • Brightness 300cd/m2.
  • Suitable for wall mounting.

Interfaces and connectivity:
  • 2 HDMI ports, 1 Display Port, .

General features:
  • Power saving facility.
  • Size H24.2, W61.4, D46.2cm.
  • Weight 4.3kg.
If you click through or buy, retailers may pay hotukdeals some money, but this never affects which deals get posted. Find more info in our FAQs and About Us page.

Groups

Top comments
Excellent price but only get it if you have a very powerful graphics card to run games at these frame rates.

I got a QHD monitor but running AAA games at 1440p gives me <75fps in nearly all games on a RX5700 which is a ~£350 card. And even spending ~£500 card would give you about 15fps more so achieving 144fps in games is really really difficult in the latest games unless you are happy to play at low or medium settings. But then why not just get a 1080p screen and play at a better quality.
What's all this rubbish about needing a powerful graphics card for 144Hz?

144Hz is the maximum refresh rate, meaning it can show a maximum of 144 frames-per-second before suffering from screen tearing. It doesn't mean you have to run 144fps. It doesn't even mean you have to use the full 144Hz refresh rate all the time.

Most modern games allow you to manually set the refresh rate in-game to a lower value, so on a particularly demanding title you can set it to 2560x1440x60Hz. With vysnc on you're then capping the game at 60fps.

The issue with this monitor isn't 144Hz, it's the lack of Freesync. If it also had Freesync then 144Hz would be a moot point entirely, as you could simply cap the FPS ingame to whatever takes your fancy, be it 144Hz, 60Hz, 30Hz, or any other value your GPU can handle consistently.
83 Comments
Excellent price but only get it if you have a very powerful graphics card to run games at these frame rates.

I got a QHD monitor but running AAA games at 1440p gives me <75fps in nearly all games on a RX5700 which is a ~£350 card. And even spending ~£500 card would give you about 15fps more so achieving 144fps in games is really really difficult in the latest games unless you are happy to play at low or medium settings. But then why not just get a 1080p screen and play at a better quality.
Wall-E12/11/2019 19:50

Excellent price but only get it if you have a very powerful graphics card …Excellent price but only get it if you have a very powerful graphics card to run games at these frame rates.I got a QHD monitor but running AAA games at 1440p gives me <75fps in nearly all games on a RX5700 which is a ~£350 card. And even spending ~£500 card would give you about 15fps more so achieving 144fps in games is really really difficult in the latest games unless you are happy to play at low or medium settings. But then why not just get a 1080p screen and play at a better quality.


anyone wanting to play at 144hz needs a gpu capable of that. 1080p doesnt give better "quality", by the contrary.
Wall-E12/11/2019 19:50

Excellent price but only get it if you have a very powerful graphics card …Excellent price but only get it if you have a very powerful graphics card to run games at these frame rates.I got a QHD monitor but running AAA games at 1440p gives me <75fps in nearly all games on a RX5700 which is a ~£350 card. And even spending ~£500 card would give you about 15fps more so achieving 144fps in games is really really difficult in the latest games unless you are happy to play at low or medium settings. But then why not just get a 1080p screen and play at a better quality.


Some folks would rather have less pixels but more effects, that's why I stayed with 1080p driven by a GTX 1070Ti. Having said that, I'd love this monitor with a more powerful card
Am I right in saying this doesn’t support FreeSync?
Wall-E12/11/2019 19:50

Excellent price but only get it if you have a very powerful graphics card …Excellent price but only get it if you have a very powerful graphics card to run games at these frame rates.I got a QHD monitor but running AAA games at 1440p gives me <75fps in nearly all games on a RX5700 which is a ~£350 card. And even spending ~£500 card would give you about 15fps more so achieving 144fps in games is really really difficult in the latest games unless you are happy to play at low or medium settings. But then why not just get a 1080p screen and play at a better quality.


Interesting. I have a QLED 144hz 1080p Samsung monitor (with a slight curve - using it now) and I always felt it was the sensible choice with a Vega 56.
Thanks for posting. It's good to know I should skip this GPU generation if you are only getting 75 fps on a 5700.
At the same price on Amazon.
I am looking at this one instead
Samsung LC32JG50QQUXEN.


But as mentioned above, these do not have freesync. Therefore I am skipping it.
Edited by: "navisoul02" 12th Nov 2019
Are these any good for spreadsheet work? Any alternative monitor suggestions welcome.
ecreative12/11/2019 20:24

Am I right in saying this doesn’t support FreeSync?


Yes
Rich.Parkes12/11/2019 20:38

Are these any good for spreadsheet work? Any alternative monitor …Are these any good for spreadsheet work? Any alternative monitor suggestions welcome.


I'd rather have a 3440x1440 monitor mounter vertically for that
Wall-E12/11/2019 19:50

Excellent price but only get it if you have a very powerful graphics card …Excellent price but only get it if you have a very powerful graphics card to run games at these frame rates.I got a QHD monitor but running AAA games at 1440p gives me <75fps in nearly all games on a RX5700 which is a ~£350 card. And even spending ~£500 card would give you about 15fps more so achieving 144fps in games is really really difficult in the latest games unless you are happy to play at low or medium settings. But then why not just get a 1080p screen and play at a better quality.


What? Most new games run at over 100 frames on a powerful £500+ graphics card. RD2 runs like a dog because it’s awfully optimised but every test shows decent performance on a mid/high tier GPU.
I have a 5700xt, 2700x. Looking for a 1440p 144hz so this fits the bill, will the lack of freesync make it worthless?
Edited by: "Gertrudes_Cat" 12th Nov 2019
speedfire6612/11/2019 20:45

What? Most new games run at over 100 frames on a powerful £500+ graphics …What? Most new games run at over 100 frames on a powerful £500+ graphics card. RD2 runs like a dog because it’s awfully optimised but every test shows decent performance on a mid/high tier GPU.


You can have a look here for 1440p performance for a £500 card and in most AAA games, its hardly about 90fps and that is for current games or older.
Click here

And new games like Red Dead Redemption 2 cant even run at 1440p 60fps on a 2080 which is like a £1000 card so you need a very powerful card to play all games at ultra on a QHD monitor at more than 75fps.
Most of these will turn up with a dead pixel or two, not noticable though
Gertrudes_Cat12/11/2019 20:51

I have a 5700xt, 2700x. Looking for a 1440p 144hz so this fits the bill, …I have a 5700xt, 2700x. Looking for a 1440p 144hz so this fits the bill, will the lack of freesync make it worthless?



Depends on the particular game and how bad tearing and the like is. Personally I'd rather spend a bit more for one with Freesync, these aren't known ot have the best VA panels to begin wtih.
Wall-E12/11/2019 19:50

Excellent price but only get it if you have a very powerful graphics card …Excellent price but only get it if you have a very powerful graphics card to run games at these frame rates.I got a QHD monitor but running AAA games at 1440p gives me <75fps in nearly all games on a RX5700 which is a ~£350 card. And even spending ~£500 card would give you about 15fps more so achieving 144fps in games is really really difficult in the latest games unless you are happy to play at low or medium settings. But then why not just get a 1080p screen and play at a better quality.


1080p is not better quality than 1440p.

A 5700 should be ample to play games at 1440p and the 144hz is just the refresh rate, you don't have to constantly hit that to be having a nice 1440p experience. Especially with freesync enabled.
EmperorRosko12/11/2019 21:46

1080p is not better quality than 1440p.A 5700 should be ample to play …1080p is not better quality than 1440p.A 5700 should be ample to play games at 1440p and the 144hz is just the refresh rate, you don't have to constantly hit that to be having a nice 1440p experience. Especially with freesync enabled.


You don't need ultra settings too.. Drop a little to get closer to 144hz. My gigabyte 5700 xt is coming on Friday
EmperorRosko12/11/2019 21:46

1080p is not better quality than 1440p.A 5700 should be ample to play …1080p is not better quality than 1440p.A 5700 should be ample to play games at 1440p and the 144hz is just the refresh rate, you don't have to constantly hit that to be having a nice 1440p experience. Especially with freesync enabled.


Sorry what i meant was that you can play at medium at QHD or at high or ultra at 1080p and so the 1080p looks better quality.

I know you dont have to play at 144fps but thats my point, you will just be fine with a QHD 75Hz panel since its difficult to get games higher than that anyway in most AAA titles.

Obviously, if someone plays Overwatch or Fortnite, this does not apply.
Josh_millen12/11/2019 21:48

You don't need ultra settings too.. Drop a little to get closer to 144hz. …You don't need ultra settings too.. Drop a little to get closer to 144hz. My gigabyte 5700 xt is coming on Friday


I try to play at very high or ultra as what is the point of playing on PC and a good monitor if I cant get good visual fidelity. If i just have t play at a higher resolution, I can just use the Xbox One X to play all games at dynamic 4K on my 4K telly in HDR.
With a RX 5700Xt, you will be about 10% faster than my RX 5700, so there is no way you can reach 144Hz unless you drop to medium or low. And if you play games like Metro Exodus, Shadow of the Tomb Raider, Red Dead Redemption 2 etc, then you can forget even reaching 100fps
Edited by: "Wall-E" 12th Nov 2019
Wall-E12/11/2019 21:55

I try to play at very high or ultra as what is the point of playing on PC …I try to play at very high or ultra as what is the point of playing on PC and a good monitor if I cant get good visual fidelity. If i just have t play at a higher resolution, I can just use the Xbox One X to play all games at dynamic 4K on my 4K telly in HDR.With a RX 5700Xt, you will be about 10% faster than my RX 5700, so there is no way you can reach 144Hz unless you drop to medium or low. And if you play games like Metro Exodus, Shadow of the Tomb Raider, Red Dead Redemption 2 etc, then you can forget even reaching 100fps


I'd rather knock Ultra settings to High, and play at 1440p than 1080p. On a 27" monitor, 1080p is horrible. Sharpness is also a major factor of visual fidelity.
Wall-E12/11/2019 21:55

I try to play at very high or ultra as what is the point of playing on PC …I try to play at very high or ultra as what is the point of playing on PC and a good monitor if I cant get good visual fidelity. If i just have t play at a higher resolution, I can just use the Xbox One X to play all games at dynamic 4K on my 4K telly in HDR.With a RX 5700Xt, you will be about 10% faster than my RX 5700, so there is no way you can reach 144Hz unless you drop to medium or low. And if you play games like Metro Exodus, Shadow of the Tomb Raider, Red Dead Redemption 2 etc, then you can forget even reaching 100fps



Multiplayer games mate, not expecting that on single player lol.
navisoul0212/11/2019 20:37

At the same price on Amazon.I am looking at this one instead Samsung …At the same price on Amazon.I am looking at this one instead Samsung LC32JG50QQUXEN. But as mentioned above, these do not have freesync. Therefore I am skipping it.


That's 30 more
Most people that want 144hz monitors don't play aaa games. They play pubg, fortnite, apex etc. Which hit 144fps on a 1060/1070
Gertrudes_Cat12/11/2019 20:51

I have a 5700xt, 2700x. Looking for a 1440p 144hz so this fits the bill, …I have a 5700xt, 2700x. Looking for a 1440p 144hz so this fits the bill, will the lack of freesync make it worthless?


Yes
Is this future proofed enough to get the most out of the PS5 when it's released?

I'm currently rocking a 24 inch 60hz monitor on my PS4 which won't be sufficient for the PS5 release.
Johnny_S13/11/2019 02:27

Is this future proofed enough to get the most out of the PS5 when it's …Is this future proofed enough to get the most out of the PS5 when it's released?I'm currently rocking a 24 inch 60hz monitor on my PS4 which won't be sufficient for the PS5 release.


Well according to the leaks the PS5 will be capable of 8K and possibly 120hz (albeit most likely not at the same time). I would imagine the mainstream games will still have a 4K 60hz target.

So not really.

The PS4/Pro doesn't even support a system resolution of 1440p like the Xbox One S/X do.

If I was you, and you play mainly console, I'd get a nice 4K 60hz monitor, like an LG IPS model. Maybe check out the LG 27UD range or the 27UK range. They can get pretty expensive when HDR gets mentioned, but if it's future proofing you want and you want the monitor now, then 4K 60hz. But there's still no solid info on what PS5 is going to be able to handle.

My guess is that 8K is way off target. Considering they are using an APU from AMDs current 7nm tech, there's not a single desktop CPU/GPU combo that can output that resolution. Even 4K 120hz is alot to ask, so these high resolution and high refresh games will be few and far between.
EmperorRosko13/11/2019 07:12

Well according to the leaks the PS5 will be capable of 8K and possibly …Well according to the leaks the PS5 will be capable of 8K and possibly 120hz (albeit most likely not at the same time). I would imagine the mainstream games will still have a 4K 60hz target.So not really.The PS4/Pro doesn't even support a system resolution of 1440p like the Xbox One S/X do.If I was you, and you play mainly console, I'd get a nice 4K 60hz monitor, like an LG IPS model. Maybe check out the LG 27UD range or the 27UK range. They can get pretty expensive when HDR gets mentioned, but if it's future proofing you want and you want the monitor now, then 4K 60hz. But there's still no solid info on what PS5 is going to be able to handle.My guess is that 8K is way off target. Considering they are using an APU from AMDs current 7nm tech, there's not a single desktop CPU/GPU combo that can output that resolution. Even 4K 120hz is alot to ask, so these high resolution and high refresh games will be few and far between.


It took Linus 4 GPUs to run 8k....he was lucky to even get 20fps!!. It's a long way off.
Edited by: "Madraver_81" 13th Nov 2019
VA panel so beware of blur/ghosting.
EmperorRosko13/11/2019 07:12

Well according to the leaks the PS5 will be capable of 8K and possibly …Well according to the leaks the PS5 will be capable of 8K and possibly 120hz (albeit most likely not at the same time). I would imagine the mainstream games will still have a 4K 60hz target.So not really.The PS4/Pro doesn't even support a system resolution of 1440p like the Xbox One S/X do.If I was you, and you play mainly console, I'd get a nice 4K 60hz monitor, like an LG IPS model. Maybe check out the LG 27UD range or the 27UK range. They can get pretty expensive when HDR gets mentioned, but if it's future proofing you want and you want the monitor now, then 4K 60hz. But there's still no solid info on what PS5 is going to be able to handle.My guess is that 8K is way off target. Considering they are using an APU from AMDs current 7nm tech, there's not a single desktop CPU/GPU combo that can output that resolution. Even 4K 120hz is alot to ask, so these high resolution and high refresh games will be few and far between.


The 8k claim by the PS5 is a load of marketing tosh. The only reason they are getting away with it is because the console will support HDMI 2.1, which can transfer data at speeds great enough to achieve 8k at 60hz.

In reality the console will never be able to render games at 8k though.
Wall-E12/11/2019 19:50

Excellent price but only get it if you have a very powerful graphics card …Excellent price but only get it if you have a very powerful graphics card to run games at these frame rates.I got a QHD monitor but running AAA games at 1440p gives me <75fps in nearly all games on a RX5700 which is a ~£350 card. And even spending ~£500 card would give you about 15fps more so achieving 144fps in games is really really difficult in the latest games unless you are happy to play at low or medium settings. But then why not just get a 1080p screen and play at a better quality.


Lol
ZachThomas13/11/2019 08:51

The 8k claim by the PS5 is a load of marketing tosh. The only reason they …The 8k claim by the PS5 is a load of marketing tosh. The only reason they are getting away with it is because the console will support HDMI 2.1, which can transfer data at speeds great enough to achieve 8k at 60hz. In reality the console will never be able to render games at 8k though.


Yep, agreed. I'm sick of Microsoft and Sony even mentioning 8K, and even 120hz for that matter.

I want them to scrap anything to do with those buzz words and get every single game that hits the PS5/Scarlett to run at 4K and a solid perfectly paced 60 frames per second. 13.3ms frame time. I don't care that a hand full of TVs can support freesync, the majority need to have vsync locked at 60hz.

Once they can establish that sort of consistency, then we can talk about cranking the settings up higher.

If I see anything targeting 30fps on next gen, I'm out!
Wall-E12/11/2019 19:50

Excellent price but only get it if you have a very powerful graphics card …Excellent price but only get it if you have a very powerful graphics card to run games at these frame rates.I got a QHD monitor but running AAA games at 1440p gives me <75fps in nearly all games on a RX5700 which is a ~£350 card. And even spending ~£500 card would give you about 15fps more so achieving 144fps in games is really really difficult in the latest games unless you are happy to play at low or medium settings. But then why not just get a 1080p screen and play at a better quality.


It's worth it buying it for a GTX 1080 Windforce?
Hoping this goes well with my brand new GT 1030. I'm told the Ray Tracing on this card is out of this world.
What's all this rubbish about needing a powerful graphics card for 144Hz?

144Hz is the maximum refresh rate, meaning it can show a maximum of 144 frames-per-second before suffering from screen tearing. It doesn't mean you have to run 144fps. It doesn't even mean you have to use the full 144Hz refresh rate all the time.

Most modern games allow you to manually set the refresh rate in-game to a lower value, so on a particularly demanding title you can set it to 2560x1440x60Hz. With vysnc on you're then capping the game at 60fps.

The issue with this monitor isn't 144Hz, it's the lack of Freesync. If it also had Freesync then 144Hz would be a moot point entirely, as you could simply cap the FPS ingame to whatever takes your fancy, be it 144Hz, 60Hz, 30Hz, or any other value your GPU can handle consistently.
dansax13/11/2019 09:55

What's all this rubbish about needing a powerful graphics card for …What's all this rubbish about needing a powerful graphics card for 144Hz?144Hz is the maximum refresh rate, meaning it can show a maximum of 144 frames-per-second before suffering from screen tearing. It doesn't mean you have to run 144fps. It doesn't even mean you have to use the full 144Hz refresh rate all the time. Most modern games allow you to manually set the refresh rate in-game to a lower value, so on a particularly demanding title you can set it to 2560x1440x60Hz. With vysnc on you're then capping the game at 60fps.The issue with this monitor isn't 144Hz, it's the lack of Freesync. If it also had Freesync then 144Hz would be a moot point entirely, as you could simply cap the FPS ingame to whatever takes your fancy, be it 144Hz, 60Hz, 30Hz, or any other value your GPU can handle consistently.


Its not rubbish. Spending extra money for a 144Hz monitor when you only have the capability to run at 75Hz is rubbish and waste of money that can otherwise be spend on something else in your build.

75Hz QHD monitor will be far cheaper than a 144Hz QHD and if you dont have the capability to run at 144Hz dont waste your money on one is my point.
Proof_8913/11/2019 09:14

It's worth it buying it for a GTX 1080 Windforce?


I think its about the same performance as a RX5700 and so I would say a QHD 75Hz makes more sense. Ofcourse, if you have the money go for anything you fancy
cbflazaro112/11/2019 20:44

I'd rather have a 3440x1440 monitor mounter vertically for that



...do you even have a clue what a spreadsheet actually is!?
Wall-E13/11/2019 10:04

Its not rubbish. Spending extra money for a 144Hz monitor when you only …Its not rubbish. Spending extra money for a 144Hz monitor when you only have the capability to run at 75Hz is rubbish and waste of money that can otherwise be spend on something else in your build.75Hz QHD monitor will be far cheaper than a 144Hz QHD and if you dont have the capability to run at 144Hz dont waste your money on one is my point.


So you "need" a powerful graphics card for a 144Hz monitor?

No, you definitely don't, and the price difference between this and a 75Hz 1440p monitor isn't exactly astronomical.

You also have a potential library of PC games dating back to the 80s, quite a lot of them will run at 144fps on a potato. If I was e.g. replaying Half-Life 1, it would be a much better experience at 144Hz.
dansax13/11/2019 10:21

So you "need" a powerful graphics card for a 144Hz monitor?No, you …So you "need" a powerful graphics card for a 144Hz monitor?No, you definitely don't, and the price difference between this and a 75Hz 1440p monitor isn't exactly astronomical.You also have a potential library of PC games dating back to the 80s, quite a lot of them will run at 144fps on a potato. If I was e.g. replaying Half-Life 1, it would be a much better experience at 144Hz.


Well a 75Hz QHD will cost less than £150 so its about £100 difference so that is quite a lot for me personally.

Sorry I am playing latest current games (mostly AAA titles) on my rig and if I played the old Half life 2 back again there is absolutely no reason i would want to play an old single player campaign with aging graphics at 144Hz. But yeah if you like doing that, then makes sense for you to get a 144Hz monitor.
Wall-E13/11/2019 10:26

Well a 75Hz QHD will cost less than £150 so its about £100 difference so t …Well a 75Hz QHD will cost less than £150 so its about £100 difference so that is quite a lot for me personally.Sorry I am playing latest current games (mostly AAA titles) on my rig and if I played the old Half life 2 back again there is absolutely no reason i would want to play an old single player campaign with aging graphics at 144Hz. But yeah if you like doing that, then makes sense for you to get a 144Hz monitor.



If £100 is too much for you, could you not just stick with your xbox360?

It would save us all from listening to this borefest
Post a comment
Avatar
@
    Text