Monitor(s) seem to be going out soon & I have no idea what to look for D:

[Bowzaa]

Hey guys, Bowzaa here! (or Chris, that works too)

As the topic states, both of my monitors seem to be dying. The right side one takes roughly 4 minutes to turn on, and while it's starting the power light blinks. It turns on/off also while it trys to boot, and eventually a few minutes later it's on and perfectly fine. The left monitor (my main one) takes roughly a minute to start up, so it's not much of a problem except for the fact that my PC boots faster, so while my computer boots after 20 seconds, I'm left staring at blank monitors waiting for them to turn on. They are both LG Flatron L226WTQ-BF monitors, and have been amazing to me. I'm hoping to find something equivalent or better, but have no idea where to start. I'm so used to the 16:10 resolution for the main game I play, osu!, and playing it in fullscreen will be very different if I go from 1680x1050 to 1920x1080.

I know I'd prefer a TN panel, which is what I have now. The thing is, the current monitor I'm looking at is this,

 

 

the ASUS VG248QE Black 24". It's 1920x1080 144Hz and 1ms GTG, but I don't understand what the grey to grey means. What does this mean for other colours? As I stated, osu is my most played game, and if any of you know what it is, it has quite a few colours.

I really hope someone can help me here, and if any other info is needed, feel free to ask!

 

Thanks in advance!

[Sauron]

Grey-to-grey is the standard way of measuring response times. They measure how much it takes to shift from one grey to another. This doesn't affect colour fidelity in any way, don't worry that's a great monitor

 

-edit-

btw @Bowzaa welcome to the forum! Please remember to follow your topics so you're notified when someone answers in my signature you can find a link to the code of conduct (CoC) and the forum's F.A.Q.

[Connor1999]

This is a good question a gray to gray time is how long it take for a monitor to change from one color value to another color value so it is how many milliseconds the monitor lags between color changes. So for gaming a lower gray to gray time is better because all of that information that your GPU is putting out will take less time to display on to your monitor. But I might to disagree with you on keeping a TN monitor, if you go up to an IPS display I think that you would enjoy it much more. The colors are far better on a IPS display, but the gray to gray is generally slightly higher at most being 5ms gray to gray. Also the viewing angles are far better which means that you could have the monitors slightly at a angle, some being up to 170 degrees the colors will be the same and the picture should hot look distorted. You can get them in 120Hz which should be plenty. I do not know your GPU set up but it might not have enough power to drive 2 144Hz displays, if your gnu skips frames as it tries to keep up with the monitor theta frame will still be on the screen until a new one comes. So I would get a monitor what ever size you want that has a IPS panel at 120Hz.

[Bowzaa]

Grey-to-grey is the standard way of measuring response times. They measure how much it takes to shift from one grey to another. This doesn't affect colour fidelity in any way, don't worry that's a great monitor

 

-edit-

btw @Bowzaa welcome to the forum! Please remember to follow your topics so you're notified when someone answers in my signature you can find a link to the code of conduct (CoC) and the forum's F.A.Q.

 

Thanks for the reply, I didn't know that GTG was just a standard and, as you said, was held no differences between other colour shifts, thanks! As for the welcome, thanks! I actually have been around since early February this year (and actually a long bit before that, I just had no account). I just tend to lurk and never reply, usually just expanding my knowledge to hopefully help someone else one day

 

This is a good question a gray to gray time is how long it take for a monitor to change from one color value to another color value so it is how many milliseconds the monitor lags between color changes. So for gaming a lower gray to gray time is better because all of that information that your GPU is putting out will take less time to display on to your monitor. But I might to disagree with you on keeping a TN monitor, if you go up to an IPS display I think that you would enjoy it much more. The colors are far better on a IPS display, but the gray to gray is generally slightly higher at most being 5ms gray to gray. Also the viewing angles are far better which means that you could have the monitors slightly at a angle, some being up to 170 degrees the colors will be the same and the picture should hot look distorted. You can get them in 120Hz which should be plenty. I do not know your GPU set up but it might not have enough power to drive 2 144Hz displays, if your gnu skips frames as it tries to keep up with the monitor theta frame will still be on the screen until a new one comes. So I would get a monitor what ever size you want that has a IPS panel at 120Hz.

 

The colours aren't that much of a problem, it's more so I just don't want any lag time, or ghosting I think it's called.

As for specs, hope this helps a bit. I have my GPU highlighted, though idk why it has so many there. I only have one, and it's an R9 280x Toxic by Sapphire.

[Connor1999]

Ghosting Should not occur even at the lower response time. But it is truly up to you because it is a peripheral and I don't care what you use as long as you are happy with it because in the end it is you who has to live with it not me(hope this didn't come off as rude). If you truly want a TN monitor for some reason then I say go for it. The monitor that you had originally picked is a very good monitor, But in my experiences a IPS display I feel always surpasses the TN displays and if it is lag that you are worried about, I would not fear seeming that we are talking about a thousenth of a second here. And if you have only used TN monitors once you go to IPS I don't think that you will go back. Your graphics card could run both options with out a problem, I feel that for the 24 frames that you will likely not even notice because you are over 100Hz I would go IPS.

[Glenwing]

Grey-to-grey is not a standard at all.  Grey-to-grey is as opposed to black and white.  In color terms, any shade of color other than black and white is considered a "grey".  The GTG response time is just the shortest amount of time it takes for some unspecified color to change to another unspecified color.  There is no standard whatsoever on what color are chosen, it is just whatever two colors the manufacturer can find that give the lowest numbers (response time is not a uniform number, it depends on what the starting and ending color are).  This makes it pretty pointless to compare response time since they aren't all measuring the same thing, even from the same manufacturer, they are under no obligation to keep their methodology consistent.  One 8ms monitor might actually be faster than someone else's 5ms monitor.  Another 5ms monitor might be different from both of those in reality.  It's a fairly useless spec, and best ignored, like dynamic contrast ratio.

 

Response time is not a measurement of input lag if that's what you are worried about (the delay between pressing a button and seeing it happen on-screen), that's not related to response time.  Response time only affects motion blur, and any modern display won't have a problem with it at all.  Back in the older days when IPS monitors had 50ms response times, yes we used to say IPS is not good for gaming, and TN is the way to go (which at the time had 14-16ms response times).  Now, anything is fine for gaming except for super hardcore professional level twitch-shooter gaming, if you're really serious.

 

Like the others I would also recommend IPS.  The Dell P2314H or P2414H are good options, solid all-around with high quality construction and some of the lowest input lag out there.

[Bowzaa]

Ghosting Should not occur even at the lower response time. But it is truly up to you because it is a peripheral and I don't care what you use as long as you are happy with it because in the end it is you who has to live with it not me(hope this didn't come off as rude). If you truly want a TN monitor for some reason then I say go for it. The monitor that you had originally picked is a very good monitor, But in my experiences a IPS display I feel always surpasses the TN displays and if it is lag that you are worried about, I would not fear seeming that we are talking about a thousenth of a second here. And if you have only used TN monitors once you go to IPS I don't think that you will go back. Your graphics card could run both options with out a problem, I feel that for the 24 frames that you will likely not even notice because you are over 100Hz I would go IPS.

 

I was looking at the 144Hz because right now, I experience a lot of screen tearing with my current monitors as 60Hz so I have to use VSync. And nah, you didn't come off as rude at all lol.

Grey-to-grey is not a standard at all.  Grey-to-grey is as opposed to black and white.  In color terms, any shade of color other than black and white is considered a "grey".  The GTG response time is just the shortest amount of time it takes for some unspecified color to change to another unspecified color.  There is no standard whatsoever on what color are chosen, it is just whatever two colors the manufacturer can find that give the lowest numbers (response time is not a uniform number, it depends on what the starting and ending color are).  This makes it pretty pointless to compare response time since they aren't all measuring the same thing, even from the same manufacturer, they are under no obligation to keep their methodology consistent.  One 8ms monitor might actually be faster than someone else's 5ms monitor.  Another 5ms monitor might be different from both of those in reality.  It's a fairly useless spec, and best ignored, like dynamic contrast ratio.

 

Response time is not a measurement of input lag if that's what you are worried about (the delay between pressing a button and seeing it happen on-screen), that's not related to response time.  Response time only affects motion blur, and any modern display won't have a problem with it at all.  Back in the older days when IPS monitors had 50ms response times, yes we used to say IPS is not good for gaming, and TN is the way to go (which at the time had 14-16ms response times).  Now, anything is fine for gaming except for super hardcore professional level twitch-shooter gaming, if you're really serious.

 

Like the others I would also recommend IPS.  The Dell P2314H or P2414H are good options, solid all-around with high quality construction and some of the lowest input lag out there.

 

I would count osu! as sorta twitchy. I'm not worried about input lag at all, I'm more worried about things being where they should be and not looking like it's in the same place 3 times like in this gif

 

As stated earlier, I have a lot of screen tearing currently with 60Hz and I have Vsync on for every game. If possible, could you recommend the best possible monitor for $250? Again, I'm no photo editor so I don't need colour accuracy, I just want quality, which is partially why I was looking at the ASUS and the LG monitors. Do you know anything about this?

 

[Glenwing]

That looks like the Dell U2312HM which has essentially been replaced by the P2314H.

 

The VG248QE is a decent 144Hz monitor if you want to go that route.

[Bowzaa]

That looks like the Dell U2312HM which has essentially been replaced by the P2314H.

 

The VG248QE is a decent 144Hz monitor if you want to go that route.

 

I made the picture a link, I probably should have stated that. It's a Dell UltraSharp U2412M. It's also only 60Hz. I guess the main thing I'm looking for is high refresh rate and low response rate, which is most likely why I went with the ASUS VG248QE.

 

From the feedback here, I looked at IPS panels but none of them (within my price range) are over 60Hz it seems. Thanks for all the feedback, I'm going to probably go with two of the ASUS VG248QE monitors once both of these die. Unless someone else has a better recommendation, this looks like the best one @ <$300

[Glenwing]

I made the picture a link, I probably should have stated that. It's a Dell UltraSharp U2412M. It's also only 60Hz. I guess the main thing I'm looking for is high refresh rate and low response rate, which is most likely why I went with the ASUS VG248QE.

 

From the feedback here, I looked at IPS panels but none of them (within my price range) are over 60Hz it seems. Thanks for all the feedback, I'm going to probably go with two of the ASUS VG248QE monitors once both of these die. Unless someone else has a better recommendation, this looks like the best one @ <$300

 

There is no such thing as a true 120Hz/144Hz IPS panel, the technology doesn't switch color fast enough for that.  If you want fast refresh then probably the VG248QE is the best way to go.  If you had very high budget I would have had you look at the EIZO FG2421 which is a VA panel (inbetween TN and IPS in terms of color, but with deeper blacks than either one) that runs at 120Hz (when they say 240Hz, they mean 120Hz) but it is very pricey.