Witch monitor for heavy gaming PC with GTX780

[Glenwing]

But the Dell P2314H Not big price then 23" u13?

 

The P2314H is a better and cheaper version of the U2312HM.

[bottenfield125]

I would recommend trying to get a 2560x1440 panel. It would be around 350$ for a Korean one or 550$ for the asus one

[ItzikCPU]

I would recommend trying to get a 2560x1440 panel. It would be around 350$ for a Korean one or 550$ for the asus one

But in futre in new games like in 2016 i can't run in 2560X1440 monitor with games! because the GTX780 will be not good with the time!

 

no?

[aithos]

I would strongly recommend against an IPS for gaming, the picture quality isn't that much better (especially if you don't go with 1440p) and you'll get significant amounts of input lag with *most* IPS panels.  Input/Processing lag will make most multiplayer online games significantly worse than a fast TN panel and that isn't even considering the difference in motion blur.  An IPS panel is usually 5-8ms response rate, which will have slightly more motion blur than a TN panel at 60hz, compared to a panel with 120hz you'll get more than twice as much motion blur and compared to lightboost it's even worse (lightboost is basically no motion blur).

 

Let me give you a real world example of what Input lag does:

 

Every played an FPS game against someone who was laggy?  That guy with a high ping that everytime you try to shoot him you miss?  You know, the guy that to shoot you have to aim slightly ahead (or behind) where he actually appears on the screen to hit him?  That's what input lag is going to do.  30ms of input lag is pretty significant, you can tell a difference between 30-60 ping with regards to registration, input lag is worse than ping...it's always there.  It doesn't get better or worse, you can't upgrade your ISP for more bandwidth...you always have it.

 

If you only play single player games it isn't much of a problem.  But the entire benefit of an IPS panel is being able to jump to a higher resolution and a bigger screen.  If you aren't going with a 27" 1440p monitor all you're getting is slightly more accurate out of the box colors.  Buying a BENQ XL24240TE and spending $100 bucks on a calibration tool will get you a similar result (since most people don't bother to calibrate in the first place) and you'll get no motion blur and much smoother gameplay (plus better registration since you have extra frames).

 

60hz = 16ms between frames

120hz = 8ms between frames

144hz = < 8ms between frames

 

For heavy gaming, refresh > color accuracy

[Glenwing]

The picture quality on an IPS panel is much better than on a TN.  If the difference between TN and IPS was simply a matter of calibrating colors then we'd see plenty of nice looking TN monitors out there.  But it isn't, leaving accuracy aside TN simply isn't capable of reproducing the range of colors that IPS can, not to mention to color shift as you change your vantage point.  IPS monitors don't look better because they are calibrated, that's just something that's done by graphics professionals if they need to match the colors on your monitor to the colors produced by a printer.  High refresh rate gets you a bit smoother gameplay in games.  IPS gets you better looking colors in games, and on the desktop, and in movies, and browsing, and everything else you use your computer for.

 

The input lag is not significant at all, and neither is the ghosting.  I do play FPS games on an IPS monitor and lag in the hit detection has never been a problem except when my network was bogged down.  If you get a professional graphics monitor with color processing it will be higher, but in normal IPS monitors (and in many professional monitors which have the option of turning color processing off) the input lag is ~5-10ms.  The Dell P2314H has near 0ms input lag, beating out "gaming" monitors like the XL2420T handily.  Input lag isn't tied to the panel type, it's in the circuitry.  There is nothing stopping IPS panels from having just as fast image processing as TN.

[aithos]

The picture quality on an IPS panel is much better than on a TN.  If the difference between TN and IPS was simply a matter of calibrating colors then we'd see plenty of nice looking TN monitors out there.  But it isn't, leaving accuracy aside TN simply isn't capable of reproducing the range of colors that IPS can, not to mention to color shift as you change your vantage point.  IPS monitors don't look better because they are calibrated, that's just something that's done by graphics professionals if they need to match the colors on your monitor to the colors produced by a printer.  High refresh rate gets you a bit smoother gameplay in games.  IPS gets you better looking colors in games, and on the desktop, and in movies, and browsing, and everything else you use your computer for.

 

The input lag is not significant at all, and neither is the ghosting.  I do play FPS games on an IPS monitor and lag in the hit detection has never been a problem except when my network was bogged down.  If you get a professional graphics monitor with color processing it will be higher, but in normal IPS monitors (and in many professional monitors which have the option of turning color processing off) the input lag is ~5-10ms.  The Dell P2314H has near 0ms input lag, beating out "gaming" monitors like the XL2420T handily.  Input lag isn't tied to the panel type, it's in the circuitry.  There is nothing stopping IPS panels from having just as fast image processing as TN.

 

You are right, input/processing lag isn't tied to the panel type, it *is* the circuitry.  However, nearly every IPS panel on the market (excluding the 1080p ones) have significant input/processing lag.  If you take away the jump in resolution what is the benefit of going with an IPS panel instead of a TN?  Color depth?  Really?  Over a significantly faster display, the elimination of motion blur and less total frame lag?  No thanks.

 

Let's get something straight here:  Yes, there are a handful of 1080p IPS variations that have low input lag (as measured by sites like TFTcentral, the Dell you mention being one).  However, they still run at 60hz, which means a minimum delay of 16ms between frames and a significant amount of motion blur since there is no lightboost option.  A 120hz panel has an 8ms delay between frames and a 144 is slightly less than that (I think 6.3 but I don't have the info in front of me atm).  That not only means more than twice as many frames per second, but eliminating the motion blur means the smoothest and most accurate picture.

 

Also, the results you're talking about with the Dell "beating" the BENQ aren't direct comparisons, they were measured using different techniques and therefore aren't reliable or comparable.  I can tell you right now the XL2420TE at 144hz with lightboost is a faster, smoother gaming experience and that beats out the minor difference in colors IMO. 

 

I sold TVs for years and you know what I learned in that time?  People have no idea what a good picture looks like, they don't know the difference between good black levels and crushing, they see bright and shiny and think it means better.  The people who I helped calibrate their TVs were almost always shocked at how dim and "washed out" the colors looks when you set them to what a movie should look like.  Then a funny thing happened, those people went home and watched their TVs for a few months and nearly universally came back to me saying something similar to the following:  "Wow, I can't belive how good this TV looks, once I got used to the new settings I started seeing how bad my friends TVs look, how can they watch such a bright picture that pixelates badly and crushes whites like that?  Thank you so much for helping me out, it's amazing". 

 

The moral of the story is this:  a lot of people can't tell the difference, whether you're talking about color or lag.  Then once they use the better option for a while they adapt and start to see how much they didn't understand before.  Given a choice between lag (of any kind) and color, for gaming, I'll choose less lag every time.  For movies, pictures, porn, whatever else...I'll grant you that color is probably superior.  But when you're running around a CoD map or BF4 or Skyrim are you more likely to notice how nice the shades of blue look or how much easier it is to shoot your enemy now that your monitor keeps up with the action twice as fast?

[TymmVonD]

Low lag is the way to go for gaming. I've been screaming this point since PS3 on the plasma with game mode on then off. My plasma had .001ms lag with game mode on and 4ms off. You can't just explain it though. It's like 3D or 144Hz. You can't just see it on youtube and decide if it's for you or not. You have to see it for yourself. Trust these guys here on the forums. We all as a community have experienced every different option. IPS is amazing, but from a gaming standpoint, it's got a while to go. Just like 4K. You get 4K resolution, but only at 30fps. Quality is not sacrificed on my monitor. Games look amazing. If you've played ACIV Black Flag, the syncronize viewpoints look choppy at 60fps. At 144, it's smooth. And just for reference, 780 isn't much overkill on 1080p. I need SLI for that.

[ItzikCPU]

I would strongly recommend against an IPS for gaming, the picture quality isn't that much better (especially if you don't go with 1440p) and you'll get significant amounts of input lag with *most* IPS panels.  Input/Processing lag will make most multiplayer online games significantly worse than a fast TN panel and that isn't even considering the difference in motion blur.  An IPS panel is usually 5-8ms response rate, which will have slightly more motion blur than a TN panel at 60hz, compared to a panel with 120hz you'll get more than twice as much motion blur and compared to lightboost it's even worse (lightboost is basically no motion blur).

 

Let me give you a real world example of what Input lag does:

 

Every played an FPS game against someone who was laggy?  That guy with a high ping that everytime you try to shoot him you miss?  You know, the guy that to shoot you have to aim slightly ahead (or behind) where he actually appears on the screen to hit him?  That's what input lag is going to do.  30ms of input lag is pretty significant, you can tell a difference between 30-60 ping with regards to registration, input lag is worse than ping...it's always there.  It doesn't get better or worse, you can't upgrade your ISP for more bandwidth...you always have it.

 

If you only play single player games it isn't much of a problem.  But the entire benefit of an IPS panel is being able to jump to a higher resolution and a bigger screen.  If you aren't going with a 27" 1440p monitor all you're getting is slightly more accurate out of the box colors.  Buying a BENQ XL24240TE and spending $100 bucks on a calibration tool will get you a similar result (since most people don't bother to calibrate in the first place) and you'll get no motion blur and much smoother gameplay (plus better registration since you have extra frames).

 

60hz = 16ms between frames

120hz = 8ms between frames

144hz = < 8ms between frames

 

For heavy gaming, refresh > color accuracy

But monitors of dell is 5MS!

[bottenfield125]

But in futre in new games like in 2016 i can't run in 2560X1440 monitor with games! because the GTX780 will be not good with the time!

 

no?

I believe you would be just fine. And if it does become an issue, another 780 would be the trick, thats 2 years from now. They will be cheaper then they are now by then and would be a quick and easy upgrade. I used a TN for years and never knew the difference until i got my ips panels, they look incredible compared to my buddy's 144hz asus monitor

[ItzikCPU]

I believe you would be just fine. And if it does become an issue, another 780 would be the trick, thats 2 years from now. They will be cheaper then they are now by then and would be a quick and easy upgrade. I used a TN for years and never knew the difference until i got my ips panels, they look incredible compared to my buddy's 144hz asus monitor

So what go with?

[bottenfield125]

So what go with?

It all depends, if you have never used an IPS monitor or a 144hz, it can be verrry hard. What are the games you will be playing the most and what is your favorite genre of games?

[bottenfield125]

also please dont worry about 5ms or 8 ms or any response time spec. You wont notice anything unless its some pro monitor that has like a 32ms response, but yes a 144hz will feel the most responsive, but you loose the amazing colors of an IPS

[ItzikCPU]

It all depends, if you have never used an IPS monitor or a 144hz, it can be verrry hard. What are the games you will be playing the most and what is your favorite genre of games?

 

 

also please dont worry about 5ms or 8 ms or any response time spec. You wont notice anything unless its some pro monitor that has like a 32ms response, but yes a 144hz will feel the most responsive, but you loose the amazing colors of an IPS

I play just FPS and sports!

 

Heavy games like Battlfied 4 / 3 ... FIFA 14 ... Call of duty ... farcry 3 ... crysis 3 ... NFS rivals and all heavy games in FPS/SPORTS.

 

and the IPS LED DELL 23" is 5MS..

[martinrox1568]

Ok but the 1440P big price...120 OR 144HZ it's good? and i say that i don't care about TN and FAST..i want IPS because is qulity.

 

Ok..ty

go on ebay. they have 27 inch 1440p monitors for $350. Search the yamakasi cat leap. It has the same panel as Apple's cinema display

[bottenfield125]

I play just FPS and sports!

 

Heavy games like Battlfied 4 / 3 ... FIFA 14 ... Call of duty ... farcry 3 ... crysis 3 ... NFS rivals and all heavy games in FPS/SPORTS.

 

and the IPS LED DELL 23" is 5MS..

Then i say 144hz monitor, they are greaaat for FPS games

[bottenfield125]

I play just FPS and sports!

 

Heavy games like Battlfied 4 / 3 ... FIFA 14 ... Call of duty ... farcry 3 ... crysis 3 ... NFS rivals and all heavy games in FPS/SPORTS.

 

and the IPS LED DELL 23" is 5MS..

Actually wait until Q1 of next year for the G-sync monitor!!!!!! 

[aithos]

also please dont worry about 5ms or 8 ms or any response time spec. You wont notice anything unless its some pro monitor that has like a 32ms response, but yes a 144hz will feel the most responsive, but you loose the amazing colors of an IPS

 

Sigh.  I tried to explain this...there are three things to look at:

 

1) Reponse time (2ms, 5ms, 8ms, etc)  - this is what people claim the gray to gray time is, it's completely meaningless because there isn't a standard way to measure it.  It's like contrast ratio, or black levels, there is no standard.  Between a 2ms and an 8ms monitor most people can't tell a difference.  Only horrendously bad or old monitors are issues and it just means your motion blur will be worse.

 

2) Refresh rate (60hz, 120hz, 144hz, etc) - this is what determines how quickly your panel can refresh the picture, or how long it takes between frames.  A 60hz is 16ms between frames, a 120hz is 8ms and 144hz is slightly faster.  The higher this number the smoother your picture will be, the lower your motion blur will be, and the more responsive the experience will be.  When I say responsive think of it like this:  In an FPS game if you have a really low ping it seems like your shots register better, because you get the information before your opponent you can shoot them sooner than they can shoot you.  Refresh rate is the same thing, if your screen updates twice as fast you'll have more accurate (and quick) information on where your enemy is and your shots will seem more responsive.

 

3) Input lag (they don't rate this) - this is the dirty little secret of the monitor world.  Every monitor has an input lag (and every TV for that matter) and it works very similar to how your ping does on the Internet.  A good gaming monitor will have very little (or no) input lag.  Most fast TN panels (gaming monitors) have virtually no input lag, most IPS panels (1440p and up) have significant input lag, TVs *always* have a lot of input lag.  As an aside, this is why you don't use a TV as a gaming monitor and why even with a "game" mode you need to calibrate Rock Band on your TV, because even the best TVs (pioneer elite kuro) have 30-40ms of input lag.  So how do you know?  You can look at reviews, both Anandtech and TFTcentral have measurements of input lag.  The problem is that they use different methods and none of them are perfect, so people will get different results and often you can't compare the results.  Here are my general rules:

 

A ) If it's 1440p and has multiple inputs - it has 20-30ms of input lag at the least.  The PCBs in these monitors just aren't meant to pass data through quickly, they are meant to be image monitors for photo/video editors.  They were never intended to be gaming monitors in the first place.  Also, for the record, most (if not all) games are rendered at 1080p and not higher resolutions.  That means at 1440p (or 4k) you're upscaling, it will look better but it isn't native content.  There isn't a huge difference between 1080p and 1440p aside from screen real estate unless you're looking at cutting edge games or future releases.

 

B ) If it's 120-144hz - it probably has very little or no input lag.  Most of these monitors are now considered gaming monitors since the whole 3d gaming thing turned out to be as big of a flop as most of us who were in sales when it launched predicted (I haven't been in sales for 3 years).  These monitors are always 1080p, are TN panels and don't have amazing colors.  The benefit is you get lightboost that flashes the backlight to clear the screen between frames, it virtually eliminates motion blur and gives you a CRT quality picture.  BENQ even makes monitors that don't rely on PWM so people who get eye strain from the flashing will enjoy these. 

 

C ) If it's IPS @ 1080p - it may or may not have input lag, you need to do some heavy research on the specific monitor.  Usually you are trading the refresh speed and reduced motion blur for better colors.  Honestly, I think these panels are garbage.  It's my personal opinion and anyone is free to disagree with me, but I don't consider a higher bit panel for more colors to be an good trade for a slower panel with motion blur.  If I'm going to be forced to have a slow panel with motion blur it better at least be in a higher resolution.  Otherwise I'll take the reduced eye strain of the higher refresh rate, the more accurate posititioning and the eliminated motion blur.

 

So what do you do?  If you have a 60hz TN panel now....get a BENQ XL2420TE and call it a day.  Get a calibrated profile from Google to improve the color accuracy (not the color quality) and set up lightboost at 144hz.  Use your graphics card to keep your framerate buttery smooth and wait for a 120hz IPS panel with G-Sync and no input lag.  Eventually they will be available, it's probably just a couple years down the road.

 

If you really want the better colors of an IPS...make sure you find one that has little or no input lag.  I personally bought a Korean panel (single input) bypass PLS monitor with a Samsung panel.  I'm overclocking to 110hz and I've gotten calibrated colors from a well known poster on another forum.  I was ok with the chance of getting dead pixels (I have a couple, barely noticable at 1440p on a 27" screen) and my light bleed is virtually non-existant.  These monitors aren't for everyone, but if you do heavy gaming they are honestly the only 1440p monitor I'd consider.  I've only had mine a day, but I can already see a major difference in motion when I load up CS:GO or Battlefield.  I'll need a few days to really play with the monitor but I'll be posting a review here soon...

[bottenfield125]

Sigh.  I tried to explain this...there are three things to look at:

 

1) Reponse time (2ms, 5ms, 8ms, etc)  - this is what people claim the gray to gray time is, it's completely meaningless because there isn't a standard way to measure it.  It's like contrast ratio, or black levels, there is no standard.  Between a 2ms and an 8ms monitor most people can't tell a difference.  Only horrendously bad or old monitors are issues and it just means your motion blur will be worse.

 

2) Refresh rate (60hz, 120hz, 144hz, etc) - this is what determines how quickly your panel can refresh the picture, or how long it takes between frames.  A 60hz is 16ms between frames, a 120hz is 8ms and 144hz is slightly faster.  The higher this number the smoother your picture will be, the lower your motion blur will be, and the more responsive the experience will be.  When I say responsive think of it like this:  In an FPS game if you have a really low ping it seems like your shots register better, because you get the information before your opponent you can shoot them sooner than they can shoot you.  Refresh rate is the same thing, if your screen updates twice as fast you'll have more accurate (and quick) information on where your enemy is and your shots will seem more responsive.

 

3) Input lag (they don't rate this) - this is the dirty little secret of the monitor world.  Every monitor has an input lag (and every TV for that matter) and it works very similar to how your ping does on the Internet.  A good gaming monitor will have very little (or no) input lag.  Most fast TN panels (gaming monitors) have virtually no input lag, most IPS panels (1440p and up) have significant input lag, TVs *always* have a lot of input lag.  As an aside, this is why you don't use a TV as a gaming monitor and why even with a "game" mode you need to calibrate Rock Band on your TV, because even the best TVs (pioneer elite kuro) have 30-40ms of input lag.  So how do you know?  You can look at reviews, both Anandtech and TFTcentral have measurements of input lag.  The problem is that they use different methods and none of them are perfect, so people will get different results and often you can't compare the results.  Here are my general rules:

 

A ) If it's 1440p and has multiple inputs - it has 20-30ms of input lag at the least.  The PCBs in these monitors just aren't meant to pass data through quickly, they are meant to be image monitors for photo/video editors.  They were never intended to be gaming monitors in the first place.  Also, for the record, most (if not all) games are rendered at 1080p and not higher resolutions.  That means at 1440p (or 4k) you're upscaling, it will look better but it isn't native content.  There isn't a huge difference between 1080p and 1440p aside from screen real estate unless you're looking at cutting edge games or future releases.

 

B ) If it's 120-144hz - it probably has very little or no input lag.  Most of these monitors are now considered gaming monitors since the whole 3d gaming thing turned out to be as big of a flop as most of us who were in sales when it launched predicted (I haven't been in sales for 3 years).  These monitors are always 1080p, are TN panels and don't have amazing colors.  The benefit is you get lightboost that flashes the backlight to clear the screen between frames, it virtually eliminates motion blur and gives you a CRT quality picture.  BENQ even makes monitors that don't rely on PWM so people who get eye strain from the flashing will enjoy these. 

 

C ) If it's IPS @ 1080p - it may or may not have input lag, you need to do some heavy research on the specific monitor.  Usually you are trading the refresh speed and reduced motion blur for better colors.  Honestly, I think these panels are garbage.  It's my personal opinion and anyone is free to disagree with me, but I don't consider a higher bit panel for more colors to be an good trade for a slower panel with motion blur.  If I'm going to be forced to have a slow panel with motion blur it better at least be in a higher resolution.  Otherwise I'll take the reduced eye strain of the higher refresh rate, the more accurate posititioning and the eliminated motion blur.

 

So what do you do?  If you have a 60hz TN panel now....get a BENQ XL2420TE and call it a day.  Get a calibrated profile from Google to improve the color accuracy (not the color quality) and set up lightboost at 144hz.  Use your graphics card to keep your framerate buttery smooth and wait for a 120hz IPS panel with G-Sync and no input lag.  Eventually they will be available, it's probably just a couple years down the road.

 

If you really want the better colors of an IPS...make sure you find one that has little or no input lag.  I personally bought a Korean panel (single input) bypass PLS monitor with a Samsung panel.  I'm overclocking to 110hz and I've gotten calibrated colors from a well known poster on another forum.  I was ok with the chance of getting dead pixels (I have a couple, barely noticable at 1440p on a 27" screen) and my light bleed is virtually non-existant.  These monitors aren't for everyone, but if you do heavy gaming they are honestly the only 1440p monitor I'd consider.  I've only had mine a day, but I can already see a major difference in motion when I load up CS:GO or Battlefield.  I'll need a few days to really play with the monitor but I'll be posting a review here soon...

Yes pretty much, so thats why i said i would recommend him just going for the 144hz since he is coming from a TN anyway