Monitor for gaming(doesn't have to be "gaming monitor" :D)

[chos5555]

OK got the monitor :D wait like 15-30 mins to get first impressions from me...

[chos5555]

Just the first impression here: The monitor is simply AWESOME!!!!!!!!! That thing is huge... I have a 18 inch monitor LOL this is just really goood! Thank you everybody again

[aithos]

IF he was looking to play Couinter Strike on a tournament level I would agree with you.

 

For 99% of everyone else, IPS panels are plenty fast.

 

No, they aren't.  The fact that you're even making the statement means you don't even realize how big of a deal it is.  A client side delay of any kind is significantly worse than anything server or IPS related.  Think of it this way:  A static increase of 30 ping, while bad, isn't horrible because the server (and thus game software) is coded with ping taken into consideration.  It means that the servers do the best job they can of making an even playing field, they take lag and positioning into account whenever they deal with registration.  It doesn't matter what kind of game you're talking about (FPS, MMORPG, MOBA, etc) they all have things impacted by lag.  In an FPS game it's obvious, how shots register and where enemies appear, in an MMORPG it could be spell effects or environmental issues like fire on the ground or a cone effect from an enemy, for a MOBA it's skillshots or spell effects.

 

Now, let's talk about input/processing lag.  Let's say you have 30ms of combined lag from your monitor (which is the average on 1440p IPS panels).  The game server doesn't know about your lag because it's invisible to it, it's not measurable like your ping is, so there is no compensation for your lag.  Now, everything that happens on everyone elses screen (who don't have input lag) appears on your screen 30ms after the fact.  It means the enemies you see are slightly off their actual position, it means those spells on the ground were actually there sooner than you think, it means those skillshots are a little harder to dodge.  The worst part is there is nothing, aside from getting a new monitor that you can do.  It doesn't matter what resolution you play in, or what settings you use, it's because of the multi-input PCB and the scaler being used on modern name brand IPS monitors.  Even if you have amazing reaction times, you're reacting to everything slower than you would be.  The average reaction time for most people is something like 200ms, that means 30ms of input/processing lag is a 15% difference.  If you're on the lower side of the curve it's even more of an impact, and if you're on the upper side you're making your already slow reaction time even worse.

 

Think for a second about the guy in every FPS pub you know who complains about lag and registration every time he dies.  Think of that guild member who dies in the fire every raid encounter and always swears it missed him on his screen.  Think of that guy who gets hit by every charm or spear in LoL and blames lag.  That's you with an IPS monitor.  It isn't minor, it isn't little and it isn't un-noticable.  If you've never done a real comparison with a good fast monitor with no input lag and an IPS both for significant periods of time, then I'd expect you are severely underestimating it.  A lot of people don't know how bad it is because their "old" monitors weren't much better.  It also doesn't help that no one has a standard for how to measure input lag and that different tools give wildly different results. 

 

The consensus is still (among informed people) that for multiplayer online gaming a no-input lag monitor is the single most important feature.  If you play single player games then by all means, grab the prettiest monitor you can get your hands on, it really doesn't matter much against the computer.  But anyone who plays against other people and *intentionally* gives themselves a siginificant disadvantage...is just ignorant (and I don't mean that to be an insult, it's the definition of the word).

 

For the record:  I own an IPS monitor, I went with a Korean one that has virtually no input lag and I'm overclocking.  I would have gotten a TN panel 144hz lightboost monitor in a heartbeat if they weren't all awful matte finish screens.  I use matte finish e-ips at work and it gives me headaches and eye strain.  The sparkle is awful and the matte finish obviously hurts clarity.  Unfortunately, there isn't a single 120+ hz glossy monitor on the market...

 

edit:  The big problem on forums like this is people always think they know everything and they make really uninformed statements like "for average people it doesn't make any difference".  That's BS and I'll call you on it.  It absolutely makes a difference.  *You* might not care, but other people might and if you're coming on a forum and giving someone else advice on how to spend *their* money, you better damn well give accurate and impartial advice.  People who parrot about IPS panels are even worse than AMD fanboys who defend their CPUs for gaming against Intel when the DATA clearly shows what's better.  Myself, I don't care *WHO* makes what, I don't care what *I* use when I make a recommendation unless I'm asked or I qualify my statement by saying "this is just my preference, but I use....<insert part> for <insert reason>".  I *always* consider what the OP is asking about and make a recommendation based on that.

 

In this case if the OP is ok with matte screens and wants a "gaming" monitor...then a fast TN 144hz lightboost is *the* best way to go.  It isn't what I own, but I don't recommend most people buy Korean panels.  The sellers are pretty much all jerks, they try to swindle you, refuse to honor their pixel policies, you take a risk getting a bad panel and you need a stupidly powerful computer to run 120fps @ 1440p.  That's how you can tell an honest person making good recommendations, when they tell you what *YOU* should buy, not what they own.

 

 

You're not wrong, but don't take offense when I refute your argument with a single line that,

 

he's not looking for a "gaming" monitor, the benefits of an IPS panel will more than likely outweigh the cons.

 

I know he isn't looking for a "gaming" monitor, but it's for gaming.  Read the above for the reasoning why.  You don't have to spend extra money on a gaming oriented monitor brand, but the type of panel and refresh rate are far more important.  And the benefits of IPS are limited to two things:

 

1) resolution - you're not even getting native higher resolution content.  You're upscaling.  Game engines are largely not making content above 1080p, so if you max settings at 1080p on a 24" monitor vs 1440p on a 27" monitor you won't see much difference in nearly every game on the market today.  Game companies won't render in a higher resolution (including 4k) until those monitors make up a significant portion of the gaming systems active.  It isn't money efficient, which is why games have always lagged FAAARRRR behind hardware power.

 

2) color/viewing angle - if you aren't doing print work it makes very little difference.  Most of what makes an IPS panel desirable for graphic work is their uniformity and accuracy, not the range of colors it can display.  This is another case of people talking up a feature that 99% of them wouldn't even be able to distinguish in a blind test.  It's like high end audio or wine, even the most informed people usually fail when it comes time for blind tests.  As for viewing angle, anyone gaming on a single monitor setup will be straight on and it's stupid to even mention.  If you have a 3 monitor setup good luck running 3 IPS monitors without a $10k rig.

 

While the cons are significant:

 

1) input/processing lag - see above.  It's a big deal.  Anyone who says 15% or worse performance is minor is kidding themselves.

 

2) refresh rate - 60hz means a gap of 16ms between frames.  Your positioning is worse, your accuracy and registration is worse, everything you do based on movement is worse.  120hz is 8ms between frames, 144hz is less.  Response time is meaningless largely because any monitor on the market today is below 16ms, so a transition will always be done before the next frame arrives.  However, that doesn't eliminate motion blur...the higher the refresh the less you have, but it's still there.

 

3) lightboost - solves the permanance issue of LCD screens.  Go read about it if you don't know, it eliminates motion blur, resulting in CRT quality clarity.  If you've never gamed on a high quality CRT and don't "notice" motion blur, you're really not qualified to even have this discussion.  Other than input lag, it's by far the single biggest thing for "experience" you can talk about.  I'd actually consider a 60hz lightboost monitor over a 120hz non-lightboost if that was an option.  Of course, since lightboost started as a hack of the 3d strobing effect that doesn't exist...but companies are planning to incorporate lightboost into future releases as a feature..not a driver hack.

 

You can think what you want, but IPS is inferior for gaming.

[aithos]

I have always leaned toward performance, not so much on color accuracy but I do use calibration tools to get close. I am competitive when I game. Whether in BF4 or next to my brother on NBA2K.

 

Look at it this way. Everyone recommends IPS, but I bet...if any of them have an HDTV, it's a LED, even though plasmas have better color, motion, blacks, response and extremely low latency(.001ms).

 

There is a balance between panel types, but because of everything else on the market, we are forced to pick a side and be fanboys. We are told that one product is way better that another, can't even come close...from both sides. Whether it's cars, politics, electronics, religion, OSes; we are constantly being divided. There are too many "one vs another" and very few free market choices.

 

And now panel types...

 

I used to sell TVs, it was always frustrating to me when everyone thinks LED TVs are superior.  They aren't, and anyone who knows what they are talking about will tell you that when people talk about the "best" TV the experts without fail *all* choose Plasma.  There is a reason the Pioneer Elite Kuro was considered the best TV in the world for something like 4 or more years...  Yet when I sold TVs everyone came in with no knowledge wanting the LEDs because they were "told" those are the best.  Way to be marketing sheep without any actual knowledge to back it up...  -shakes fist at customers-

 

Thank god I don't work in sales anymore, 3.5 years removed...

 

edit:  sorry for the giant wall of text above.  I get really annoyed when people make blind recommendations and then form baseless, highly subjective opinions without any facts to back them up.  I try to avoid doing the same, but sometimes like with my opinion on the colors of an IPS panel...it's grounded in something else (like the fact they are prized for accuracy and uniformity and not the range of color).  It's still an opinion, but it's not something on the same level as "for 99% of people it's fine".

[SirRoderick]

I have always leaned toward performance, not so much on color accuracy but I do use calibration tools to get close. I am competitive when I game. Whether in BF4 or next to my brother on NBA2K.

 

Look at it this way. Everyone recommends IPS, but I bet...if any of them have an HDTV, it's a LED, even though plasmas have better color, motion, blacks, response and extremely low latency(.001ms).

 

There is a balance between panel types, but because of everything else on the market, we are forced to pick a side and be fanboys. We are told that one product is way better that another, can't even come close...from both sides. Whether it's cars, politics, electronics, religion, OSes; we are constantly being divided. There are too many "one vs another" and very few free market choices.

 

And now panel types...

Don't have a TV, your point is invalid o3o

 

As far as IPS, there are plenty of panels with 5-8ms response times. That is objectively fine for the vast majority of people.

 

As for Aithos' reply to my post, seriously man I am not reading all of that, just give me a couple of concise points please. Meanwhile have a look at the Eizo Foris FS2333. An IPS panel with less than 4 ms of response time

[aithos]

Don't have a TV, your point is invalid o3o

 

As far as IPS, there are plenty of panels with 5-8ms response times. That is objectively fine for the vast majority of people.

 

As for Aithos' reply to my post, seriously man I am not reading all of that, just give me a couple of concise points please. Meanwhile have a look at the Eizo Foris FS2333. An IPS panel with less than 4 ms of response time

 

Response time is worthless, it means nothing.  It isn't measured by any standard and gray-to-gray which is what they advertise is also meaningless.  Full pixel transitions from black to white are all that matter and they don't measure that speed.

 

60hz = 16ms between each frame, minimum.  It can't get faster.

120hz = 8ms between each frame, minimum, again, can't get any faster.

144hz = < 8ms (I think like 6ish, not 100%), again, can't get any faster.

 

As long as response time for a full pixel transition is less than those numbers it's literally worthless.  If it's more it'll introduce a little blurring.  It is never more on a monitor today unless you're overclocking and *not* dropping frames.

 

IPS = 20-30ms of input/processing lag as a minimum...aka everything you see is at least that much slower.  There is no lag compensation by games because it doesn't know you have processing lag.  That means that if you have an average reaction time you get 15% less performance automatically because you're reacting that much slower than an *average* person.  In other words, input lag is several times worse than ping.  So I'd say it's like adding 30ms to your ping...except that it's more like adding 100 (or more) to your ping.  It's really, really bad and people ignore it.

 

As for the Eizo monitors:  1080p IPS monitors are stupid.  The *ONLY* benefit to an IPS panel is you can run in a higher resolution.  But even then most games aren't rendered natively above 1080p, you're upscaling.  The color depth isn't that big of a deal, IPS panels are good for photo work because of the uniformity and their accuracy, not their color depth.  The processing on images is only really important to graphics work, not gaming.  144hz and lightboost are far more important for gaming.

[aithos]

This is the problem I have with people on this forum.  They all say "IPS is so much better" "response time, blah blah blah" and then have literally no idea what they are even talking about.  They don't understand what causes motion blur, what input lag is, how it affects them.  I see things like "games are starting to be significantly more heavily threaded so the 8350 will be better for future games" and I want to ram my head into the wall.  Games aren't getting significantly more heavily threaded because the average computer still doesn't even have that capability.  The most heavily threaded game in recent years (BF4) still runs higher FPS on the i5-4670k than the AMD 8350.  The 8350 keeps up because it's better with multi-threading, but it still loses AND gets crushed in games that aren't as threaded.

 

It's just a complete lack on knowledge from most people and it's really frustrating.  Then when someone who does have a lot of knowledge posts, people ignore it, refuse to read it or respond with "nuh uh".  AAARRRRGGGGHHH.  -shakes fist-

 

I was reading a thread about the 120hz overclocked IPS Korean panels (one of which I own) and a "trusted advisor and news reporter" posts something along the lines of: "you're going to get more motion blur because you're overclocking"  Never mind that motion blur is from how often a panel refreshes and LCD permanance and running at 120hz will *lessen* motion blur...this is someone with thousands of posts, posting blatent LIES.

[kirBi]

Response time is worthless, it means nothing.  It isn't measured by any standard and gray-to-gray which is what they advertise is also meaningless.  Full pixel transitions from black to white are all that matter and they don't measure that speed.

 

60hz = 16ms between each frame, minimum.  It can't get faster.

120hz = 8ms between each frame, minimum, again, can't get any faster.

144hz = < 8ms (I think like 6ish, not 100%), again, can't get any faster.

 

As long as response time for a full pixel transition is less than those numbers it's literally worthless.  If it's more it'll introduce a little blurring.  It is never more on a monitor today unless you're overclocking and *not* dropping frames.

 

IPS = 20-30ms of input/processing lag as a minimum...aka everything you see is at least that much slower.  There is no lag compensation by games because it doesn't know you have processing lag.  That means that if you have an average reaction time you get 15% less performance automatically because you're reacting that much slower than an *average* person.  In other words, input lag is several times worse than ping.  So I'd say it's like adding 30ms to your ping...except that it's more like adding 100 (or more) to your ping.  It's really, really bad and people ignore it.

 

As for the Eizo monitors:  1080p IPS monitors are stupid.  The *ONLY* benefit to an IPS panel is you can run in a higher resolution.  But even then most games aren't rendered natively above 1080p, you're upscaling.  The color depth isn't that big of a deal, IPS panels are good for photo work because of the uniformity and their accuracy, not their color depth.  The processing on images is only really important to graphics work, not gaming.  144hz and lightboost are far more important for gaming.

 

Ah, we meet again.

I was just looking at a P2414H benchmark which had around 5 ms MEASURED total input lag.

Asus PA series seems to have about 8 ms total lag.

And Eizo is using VA not IPS. And they are using lightboost-like technology for 240 hz refresh rate.

Finally, if 1080p IPS monitors are stupid, 1080p TN monitors are not stupid?

[SirRoderick]

Response time is worthless, it means nothing.  It isn't measured by any standard and gray-to-gray which is what they advertise is also meaningless.  Full pixel transitions from black to white are all that matter and they don't measure that speed.

 

60hz = 16ms between each frame, minimum.  It can't get faster.

120hz = 8ms between each frame, minimum, again, can't get any faster.

144hz = < 8ms (I think like 6ish, not 100%), again, can't get any faster.

 

As long as response time for a full pixel transition is less than those numbers it's literally worthless.  If it's more it'll introduce a little blurring.  It is never more on a monitor today unless you're overclocking and *not* dropping frames.

 

IPS = 20-30ms of input/processing lag as a minimum...aka everything you see is at least that much slower.  There is no lag compensation by games because it doesn't know you have processing lag.  That means that if you have an average reaction time you get 15% less performance automatically because you're reacting that much slower than an *average* person.  In other words, input lag is several times worse than ping.  So I'd say it's like adding 30ms to your ping...except that it's more like adding 100 (or more) to your ping.  It's really, really bad and people ignore it.

 

As for the Eizo monitors:  1080p IPS monitors are stupid.  The *ONLY* benefit to an IPS panel is you can run in a higher resolution.  But even then most games aren't rendered natively above 1080p, you're upscaling.  The color depth isn't that big of a deal, IPS panels are good for photo work because of the uniformity and their accuracy, not their color depth.  The processing on images is only really important to graphics work, not gaming.  144hz and lightboost are far more important for gaming.

Alright that's a lot better. I can actually reply to this.

 

The Eizo screen has an INPUT lag of less than 16. Well under actually, under 10 with ease. So, basically your entire argument falls flat on it's face because you assume that IPS panels are slower than they are. Yes they CAN be slower, but not all of them are, not by a long shot. You're just objectively wrong about that. You cannot make a case without cherry picking terribly slow panels.

 

Secondly, if you are seriously stating that the only advantage of IPS is that you can run at a higher resolution, you don't know what you're talking about and have no business in an discussion like this. The colour depth is a HUGE deal for a lot of people, the viewing angles are a HUGE deal for many more. Add to that the fact that most people don't have the hardware to run games comfortable above 1080p and you have a very compelling case for screen that just flat out look better. What you mean to say is YOU don't think it's a big deal. Basically your entire argument boils down to "i don't like them and I'm going to make up reasons to justify that".

[aithos]

Ah, we meet again.

I was just looking at a P2414H benchmark which had around 5 ms MEASURED total input lag.

Asus PA series seems to have about 8 ms total lag.

And Eizo is using VA not IPS. And they are using lightboost-like technology for 240 hz refresh rate.

Finally, if 1080p IPS monitors are stupid, 1080p TN monitors are not stupid?

 

Most IPS panels (and VA for that matter) don't have only 5ms of input/processing lag.  The reason I think 1080p panels that aren't TN are stupid is because you lose out on the biggest benefit (higher resolution, more screen area) and take the risk of none of the benefits (faster panel, no input lag, no lightboost).  The thing is this:  the TN panels that people look at for gaming (which are pretty reasonably priced) have *no* input lag.  Not 10ms, not 5ms, none.  30ms of input lag is 15% of most people's average reaction time, 15ms is still 7.5% of the average.  That's not world altering, but given a choice of having it or not, I'll take not.

 

Also, let's keep the stupid BS terminology for the TV market, the Eizo monitors are using frame interpolation and are NOT 240hz monitors.  There isn't a single 240hz monitor available.

 

Alright that's a lot better. I can actually reply to this.

 

The Eizo screen has an INPUT lag of less than 16. Well under actually, under 10 with ease. So, basically your entire argument falls flat on it's face because you assume that IPS panels are slower than they are. Yes they CAN be slower, but not all of them are, not by a long shot. You're just objectively wrong about that. You cannot make a case without cherry picking terribly slow panels.

 

Secondly, if you are seriously stating that the only advantage of IPS is that you can run at a higher resolution, you don't know what you're talking about and have no business in an discussion like this. The colour depth is a HUGE deal for a lot of people, the viewing angles are a HUGE deal for many more. Add to that the fact that most people don't have the hardware to run games comfortable above 1080p and you have a very compelling case for screen that just flat out look better. What you mean to say is YOU don't think it's a big deal. Basically your entire argument boils down to "i don't like them and I'm going to make up reasons to justify that".

 

Yes, I am seriously stating that the only real advantage of an IPS is the higher resolution.  I do know what I'm talking about, and I'm right.  Let me give you a bit of background before I let you in on a couple secrets:

 

1) I'm 33 years old, I'm a videophile and audiophile.  I sold TVs and monitors professionally for several years and at the time I was highly active on AVS forums, which is where a lot of the professional calibrators and highly knowledgable videophile community lurk.  I own a Pioneer elite kuro FD-111 that has been professionally calibrated and I know people who do professional graphics work on very high end equipment.  Let's just say, I know what a good picture looks like and I have a very sensitive eye for graphics. 

 

2) I own a variety of computer monitors, I have a PLS Korean panel monitor, a 60hz glossy TN panel, a 60hz matte TN panel, a 19" badass Samsung CRT and I've had a decent amount of time on a recent 144hz TN panel even though I haven't purchased one because I dislike the matte finish.  I have had my screens calibrated in the past and I'm using a profile currently on the new panel until I get my new calibration tool for christmas.

 

So here are the secrets:

 

1) People are stupid.  People largely have *no idea* what a picture is supposed to look at.  When I sold TVs we would set up two TVs, calibrate one...give it the best picture you can get, properly balanced colors, brightness, etc.  Then we'd set up a much cheaper TV next to it, we'd completely mess up the colors, make it way too bright, put it on vivid (burn) mode and make it look completely terrible.  Then we'd bring customers over and ask them which picture they thought looked better.  What happened?  9.5 times out of 10 they picked the awful looking TV because it was brighter and the colors more vivid.  Never mindall the issues,  it was brighter and the eye is drawn to bright color.  That's why looking at TVs in the store is stupid.  You never, ever, will see a TV that's been properly set up outside of a dedicated viewing room with a very expensive TV/stereo.

 

2) People who talk about "color depth" largely wouldn't even notice if you took it away.  Most people don't calibrate their monitors, most people don't calibrate their TVs, most people have their settings too bright, oversaturated and don't like what it looks like when it's properly set up.  If you calibrated most people's monitors the first thing they would say is that the colors look washed out and boring.  Well guess what, that's what colors are supposed to look like.  Grass doesn't glow neon green in the real world, it's just GREEN.  Very few people, especially in games would notice a difference in color depth or gamut, particularly in multiplayer online games...where your attention is on what you're doing..not where you're doing it.

 

3) Gaming monitors are used for two tasks - single player gaming and multiplayer gaming.  If all you do is the former, I've said multiple times that an IPS monitor...even one with input lag is FINE.  The higher resolution, the color depth, the cinematic experience will be better.  However, if you play multiplayer games the most important thing becomes the "feel" of the experience, not the graphics or the colors.  That's why so many FPS gamers are willing to turn down settings in the name of better registration, because feeling that your shots are hitting and performing better is more fun that getting killed and thinking how nice the level looks under your dead body.  Faster refresh rates, less motion blur and zero input lag make the biggest difference in that.

 

As to your final comment:  my entire argument doesn't boil down to I don't like them.  I OWN A PLS MONITOR.  It just drives me NUTS when people say "it doesn't matter".  IT DOES MATTER.  You may not care, but it does.  One of my biggest pet peeves in the entire world is people giving opinionated advice *without* considering the USE the OP is considering, weighing the pros/cons and then giving unbiased recommendations. 

 

If you look at my post history, I pick threads like this one specifically because so many people come into them and blindly say "get an IPS, they are fine"  which is beyond stupid.  They refuse to consider that input lag matters and often recommend monitors with 30ms or more of lag, they refuse to acknowledge that refresh rate and lightboost are important and their defense is almost always "the response time is 5-6ms, it's fine".  Which as I'm sure you know is meaningless, I've only explained it half a dozen times now.  It's STUPID, it's IGNORANT and it makes people spend *THEIR* money without knowing the repercussions of it. 

 

Which, by the way is my other big pet peeve.  It's not your money, it's incredibly rude to give out subjective, biased information with no reasoning behind it when someone else is making a purchase decision based on it.  People come to forums like this for expert opinions.  They are TRUSTING you to know what you're talking about and to give them appropriate recommendations for their needs.  90% or more of the people on forums like this have no idea what they are talking about and are more concerned about being *right* or *winning* the argument than helping the OP.  When I'm wrong, I admit I'm wrong.  When I don't know what they need to know, I say so.  Go look up my content, one of the CPU threads (3770k in the title) they start talking about professional level CPUs.  I don't know anything about those lineups so I said so, I specifically bowed out of the conversation.  Yet I can't even tell you how many times I've seen people say incredibly stupid and wrong things and then argue with me for 10 posts over several days over something that if they bothered to Google would understand they were wrong.

[aithos]

Now I'm done with this conversation.  I've given my opinions, I've spent a considerable amount of time explaining them only to be refuted by a couple lines of text with literally no information backing them up.  If you want to continue thinking that monitor selections are black and white and the tasks don't matter:  go ahead.  You're wrong.  The entire market for IPS panels has always been for graphical work, not gaming.  IPS panels are junk for gaming.  It's a fact, and until the companies come out with a fast IPS that natively does 120hz it won't change.  Don't forget now, that's an opinion coming from a guy gaming on a Korean PLS panel.  I made my choice that having a glossy monitor was more important to me than a 144hz lightboost one because matte finish and sparkle give me eye strain and headaches.  The second a 144hz lightboost glossy panel hits the market I'll be changing, regardless of panel type.

[SirRoderick]

@aithos

 

You provide plenty of reasonings and points to argue with, but when it comes down to just accepting the fact that other people do not have the same opinion or situation as you you're hopeless. It's NOT all factual, you're the one who's approaching this as a black/white decision making process. Which makes you come off as arrogant and dismissive. You cannot say that IPS panels have 30ms of input lag when that is objectrively false, you cannot say IPS panels aren't good for gaming (multiplayer or otherwise) because that is simply not true. Plenty of people are playing their games right now on 60Hz 1080p TN panels. An IPS screen would be an upgrade for them that they WOULD notice, the input lag remains the same or slightly elevated and before you say everyone needs to get 120Hz monitors, maybe you should consider that most gamers, the actually mathmatical majority, cannot even run their games at those framerates. Or that maybe, just maybe, some gamers prefer to have a higher resolution or fancier graphical effects rather than a higher refresh rate if they get the choice. Wether that depends on the type of game they are playing or not

 

Not everyone has the same preferences and not everyone has the ability to drive things at 120Hz or more at 1440p, meanwhile a 24inch IPS panel at 1920*1200 is something like 200 euros and readily available. Whic is another point by the way. "Cheap" Korean monitors are actually a terrible Idea for most Europeans due to the import duties and VAT that they make you pay on imports.

[aithos]

@aithos

 

You provide plenty of reasonings and points to argue with, but when it comes down to just accepting the fact that other people do not have the same opinion or situation as you you're hopeless. It's NOT all factual, you're the one who's approaching this as a black/white decision making process. Which makes you come off as arrogant and dismissive. You cannot say that IPS panels have 30ms of input lag when that is objectrively false, you cannot say IPS panels aren't good for gaming (multiplayer or otherwise) because that is simply not true. Plenty of people are playing their games right now on 60Hz 1080p TN panels. An IPS screen would be an upgrade for them that they WOULD notice, the input lag remains the same or slightly elevated and before you say everyone needs to get 120Hz monitors, maybe you should consider that most gamers, the actually mathmatical majority, cannot even run their games at those framerates. Or that maybe, just maybe, some gamers prefer to have a higher resolution or fancier graphical effects rather than a higher refresh rate if they get the choice. Wether that depends on the type of game they are playing or not

 

Not everyone has the same preferences and not everyone has the ability to drive things at 120Hz or more at 1440p, meanwhile a 24inch IPS panel at 1920*1200 is something like 200 euros and readily available. Whic is another point by the way. "Cheap" Korean monitors are actually a terrible Idea for most Europeans due to the import duties and VAT that they make you pay on imports.

 

I've given my reasoning several times, you're ignoring all of that because you don't want to read it.  I've explained with 1080p IPS is pointless, I've explained the situations where I think IPS is fine and where it's not.  I've gone into painstaking detail in describing the pros and cons of both monitor types.  I haven't advocated Korean panels at all or suggested anyone buy one.  That's great that plenty of people are playing on 60hz TN, most 60hz TN don't have severe input lag.  Most IPS panels do.  Just because a few don't, doesn't mean that all IPS panels are a good idea.  What did the OP buy?  What is the input lag on it?  Give me some facts. 

 

Prove to me why an IPS is superior, especially at 1080p.  Why?  Give me one clear, real world benefit and don't even start with "colors" or "viewing angle"  because viewing angle in a single monitor setup is a joke and colors does not trump faster response times and refresh rate.  I would never recommend a 60hz 1080p TN today, just like I would never recommend a 60hz 1080p IPS.  The panel type does not make up for the loss of 120+ hz and lightboost.  Period.

 

The only argument for IPS you can make is resolutions above 1080p and as I've stated, every single monitor above 1080p except the Korean ones has serious input lag.  So tell me again why the following statements are false:

 

1) For single player gaming IPS monitors are FINE.  I've said this several times now.  Input lag or no, it doesn't really matter.

 

2) For multiplayer online gaming, higher refresh rate and lightboost to remove motion blur is SIGNIFICANTLY more important to the experience.

 

And anyone who can't play a game with 100+ fps at 1080p is on an ancient machine and won't drive the IPS to a decent level either.  Never mind the fact that even at 60fps a 120hz refresh rate will give you benefit.  You don't really think that a 60fps average means you never run above or below that do you?  Frame rates bounce all over and get averaged, the faster refresh rate is still going to be smoother and more accurate even running under 100fps.  A 60hz IPS is not an upgrade over a 60hz TN.  It's not.  It's a sidegrade at best.  That's why you're making this black and white and I'm not.  You clearly think the PANEL is superior.  It's not.  It has pros and cons.  If it was superior TN panels wouldn't exist, period. 

 

edit:  I'd love to know how many of you IPS people have played on a 144hz lightboost monitor, or any monitor with a refresh rate of 120hz or higher that doesn't have input lag.  I would LOVE to hear how many of you chose the IPS monitor AFTER spending 6 months or more on the faster panel.  Everyone I've ever seen or talked to who gamed at 120hz for any significant period of time has said they will never consider a lower refresh rate.  I can't say the same about IPS people, a lot of gamers go back to TN or go the route I did with the overclocking models.  Any of you who live near Iowa are welcome to come to my place and you can buy me a few beers and I'll let you game on my machine for a weekend.  Then we will see what you have to say.

[kirBi]

Now I'm done with this conversation.  I've given my opinions, I've spent a considerable amount of time explaining them only to be refuted by a couple lines of text with literally no information backing them up.  If you want to continue thinking that monitor selections are black and white and the tasks don't matter:  go ahead.  You're wrong.  The entire market for IPS panels has always been for graphical work, not gaming.  IPS panels are junk for gaming.  It's a fact, and until the companies come out with a fast IPS that natively does 120hz it won't change.  Don't forget now, that's an opinion coming from a guy gaming on a Korean PLS panel.  I made my choice that having a glossy monitor was more important to me than a 144hz lightboost one because matte finish and sparkle give me eye strain and headaches.  The second a 144hz lightboost glossy panel hits the market I'll be changing, regardless of panel type.

 

HAHAHAHAHAHA

I'm seeing so many problems with your reasoning. Let be refute it one by one.

First of all, there ARE several IPS monitors that have around 5 ms total input lag. In fact, it is becoming more and more common.

Input lag usually has nothing to do panel type because most of the time signal processing takes the most time. That has more to do to engineering not panel types.

Please look for some 3rd party benchmarks. I will even link for you: http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/dell_p2414h.htm

Now how does Benq XL2420T perform? How about this dell monitor?

TN panels have no input lag? Seriously?

 

Now, you say the biggest benefit of IPS display is its size. That is pretty subjective huh? Because for me, the biggest advantage of IPS is its color reproduction.

Please do not present your opinion as a fact.

Given that, the the new U3014, an IPS monitor with 2560x1600 resolution, has 3.2 ms input lag, when you use the option the bypass the signal processing. Now, point invalid.

 

Eizo monitor with 240 hz is kind of bs, that I do know, but it DOES support 120 hz natively. The only advantage of TN panels is that the response time of the panels are generally faster, but VA and IPS panels are advanced enough to see small to no difference. Then why would someone should get TN? VA has superior contrast ratio and better color reproduction. The only reason I can think of is the cost.

 

Now, who's presenting facts and who isn't? You are the one whos plaguing the argument with subjected evaluation without any facts to back your point.

The problem I am having with you right now is that you are presenting flat out lies.

You said that the minimum input lag of all IPS monitors is 30 ms. Is it?

You said that TN monitors have zero input lag. Is it?

You said most people would not differentiate the color reproduction of IPS from TN. Is it?  You are keep talking about lightboost and refresh rate and how it is the most important thing in gaming. Is it? That is like saying people will not differentiate between 60 and 120 fps.

You can't state that as a fact. Those are subjective comments.

 

So, you are a videophile and an audiophile who worked in selling TVs and monitors?

I am a physicist/Engineer who studied these stuff. Please don't be one of those subjectivist idiots in audiophile community.

[aithos]

HAHAHAHAHAHA

I'm seeing so many problems with your reasoning. Let be refute it one by one.

First of all, there ARE several IPS monitors that have around 5 ms total input lag. In fact, it is becoming more and more common.

Input lag usually has nothing to do panel type because most of the time signal processing takes the most time. That has more to do to engineering not panel types.

Please look for some 3rd party benchmarks. I will even link for you: http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/dell_p2414h.htm

Now how does Benq XL2420T perform? How about this dell monitor?

TN panels have no input lag? Seriously?

 

Now, you say the biggest benefit of IPS display is its size. That is pretty subjective huh? Because for me, the biggest advantage of IPS is its color reproduction.

Please do not present your opinion as a fact.

Given that, the the new U3014, an IPS monitor with 2560x1600 resolution, has 3.2 ms input lag, when you use the option the bypass the signal processing. Now, point invalid.

 

Eizo monitor with 240 hz is kind of bs, that I do know, but it DOES support 120 hz natively. The only advantage of TN panels is that the response time of the panels are generally faster, but VA and IPS panels are advanced enough to see small to no difference. Then why would someone should get TN? VA has superior contrast ratio and better color reproduction. The only reason I can think of is the cost.

 

Now, who's presenting facts and who isn't? You are the one whos plaguing the argument with subjected evaluation without any facts to back your point.

The problem I am having with you right now is that you are presenting flat out lies.

You said that the minimum input lag of all IPS monitors is 30 ms. Is it?

You said that TN monitors have zero input lag. Is it?

You said most people would not differentiate the color reproduction of IPS from TN. Is it?  You are keep talking about lightboost and refresh rate and how it is the most important thing in gaming. Is it? That is like saying people will not differentiate between 60 and 120 fps.

You can't state that as a fact. Those are subjective comments.

 

So, you are a videophile and an audiophile who worked in selling TVs and monitors?

I am a physicist/Engineer who studied these stuff. Please don't be one of those subjectivist idiots in audiophile community.

 

 

Nevermind.  Not even worth it.  Half the things you've said I said nearly word for word in a previous post.  You have completely misunderstood the other half of things and I'm pretty sure you didn't even read my posts.

 

However, I will say: TFTcentral...has multiple testing methodologies, you can't even compare their ratings because AS THEY STATE they measure them differently.  They also aren't very accurate at all, I take everything they post with a grain of salt.  And as for your being a physicist/engineer...great.  You don't work on TVs and Monitors so I don't care.  I'm a senior systems programmer, I used to work selling TVs and monitors and I had pretty close relationships with our reps and company engineers.  I've had a chance to talk to a lot of engineers because my GFs brother is an electrical engineer and patent lawyer who works for a firm involved with Samsung.  So yeah...

 

Edit:  can't resist....that 60hz Dell monitor is a complete joke.  16ms 0-255 response time, 20ms of input lag unless you use game mode which turns off the processing and ruins your colors, gamma and other picture settings...bravo.  Don't forget 60hz, so still 16ms between frames and no lightboost for motion, oh and overshoot.  Enjoy your upscaled 1600p gaming.

[kirBi]

Sigh. 

 

You're misrepresenting what i said.  I said 1440p IPS panels all have input lag, I've explained why I think 1080p IPS panels aren't worthwhile, primarily it's because they don't have the faster refresh rate or lightboost.

 

I also said *most* 1080p IPS monitors still have input lag, not all.  I specifically asked you to look at what the OP bought and the other people were recommending and get me data on those.

 

Also, the TFTcentral link...I've seen it.  They don't use the same testing methodology on all those monitors and the method they are using isn't very precise. 

 

I agree, it's not the panel.  I've said that in several place in this very forum, it's the PCB.  It has very little to do with the scaler though, which is why most IPS monitors have the same amount of lag even in native resolution.  The biggest reason has to do with multi-input...

 

Oh, and yes, I worked selling TVs and monitors...I worked with reps and engineers.  I'm also a senior systems programmer and I've taken engineering courses as well.  My GFs brother is a technology patent lawyer and electrical engineer working with Samsung and other major companies.  You're a physicist and engineer...great.  Do you work on TVs and monitors?  Yeah...didn't think so.  If you did you'd have said.  Now stop misquoting me and go re-read ALL my posts please.  You're making yourself look stupid because half the things you've said I SAID ALREADY IN A PREVIOUS POST.

 

Well, I think you are misrepresenting yourself.

IPS monitors have input lag. So does TN monitors. I think the problem here is that you are generalizing too much. Not all IPS monitors have over 30 ms input lag. In fact, they are becoming minority. TN monitors have small input lag but it is still not zero.

Your opinion is valuable, but it would be nice to put something like 'IMO' or 'I think...' in the beginning before starting to defend why TN panels are good.

That is your opinion, it's great, but you really shouldn't say something is true because you think it is.

I guess you have been annoyed by some other people who blindly reject TN but lets not become the same type of person.

 

Anyway, if my previous comment was bit too rude, I apologize.

[aithos]

Well, I think you are misrepresenting yourself.

IPS monitors have input lag. So does TN monitors. I think the problem here is that you are generalizing too much. Not all IPS monitors have over 30 ms input lag. In fact, they are becoming minority. TN monitors have small input lag but it is still not zero.

Your opinion is valuable, but it would be nice to put something like 'IMO' or 'I think...' in the beginning before starting to defend why TN panels are good.

That is your opinion, it's great, but you really shouldn't say something is true because you think it is.

I guess you have been annoyed by some other people who blindly reject TN but lets not become the same type of person.

 

Anyway, if my previous comment was bit too rude, I apologize.

 

It's ok, I edited my post.  Yes, I get frustrated because most people don't have the first clue what they are talking about and don't read what I post before they respond.  You read some, but you missed some of my posts because there were several things you said that I said earlier and we weren't disagreeing about.

 

I know I make some generalizations, but when I say TN panels in regards to gaming...I mean the ones that people usually recommend as gaming monitors (not gaming companies).  Like the BenQ XL2420TE and the Asus VG248QE.  When people talk about IPS monitors they often just start naming random models, I've seen people recommend monitors with over 30ms of input lag because the "picture looks nice" and the "response time is ok".

 

For what it's worth, I apologize too, I get a little out of control sometimes because it seems like 20 threads a day pop up on the same topics and people are always parrotings the same bad information.  Very rarely does anyone have any technical information to back it up and then they won't even listen when you make valid points.  I deal with some of the same stuff at work (and did daily in sales) and there is only so much I can take before I want to slap people

[kirBi]

It's ok, I edited my post.  Yes, I get frustrated because most people don't have the first clue what they are talking about and don't read what I post before they respond.  You read some, but you missed some of my posts because there were several things you said that I said earlier and we weren't disagreeing about.

 

I know I make some generalizations, but when I say TN panels in regards to gaming...I mean the ones that people usually recommend as gaming monitors (not gaming companies).  Like the BenQ XL2420TE and the Asus VG248QE.  When people talk about IPS monitors they often just start naming random models, I've seen people recommend monitors with over 30ms of input lag because the "picture looks nice" and the "response time is ok".

 

For what it's worth, I apologize too, I get a little out of control sometimes because it seems like 20 threads a day pop up on the same topics and people are always parrotings the same bad information.  Very rarely does anyone have any technical information to back it up and then they won't even listen when you make valid points.  I deal with some of the same stuff at work (and did daily in sales) and there is only so much I can take before I want to slap people

 

I do understand your frustration.

Both TN and IPS have their strong points and weak points and sometimes people seem to follow the trend without much understanding.

I do own an IPS and a TN monitor and I think both of them are great.

I have seen a 120 hz TN in person once and it does have less blurring, although I don't think I will become competitive enough to need one

[aithos]

I do understand your frustration.

Both TN and IPS have their strong points and weak points and sometimes people seem to follow the trend without much understanding.

I do own an IPS and a TN monitor and I think both of them are great.

I have seen a 120 hz TN in person once and it does have less blurring, although I don't think I will become competitive enough to need one

 

Honestly, what I want most is lightboost.  If I had been able to get a glossy lightboost monitor when I bought mine (PLS Korean panel) I would have.  So I'm excited to see what companies bring out with Lightboost2 or whatever they call the official supported version for dealing with motion blur.  I play FPS and other fast paced games (like MOBAs) so the better positioning and accuracy of 120hz...the better "feel" was more important to me than picture quality.  I love my 1440p screen, it's great.  But would I have bought it without being able to overclock?  Nah.  That's my opinion though...

[kirBi]

Honestly, what I want most is lightboost.  If I had been able to get a glossy lightboost monitor when I bought mine (PLS Korean panel) I would have.  So I'm excited to see what companies bring out with Lightboost2 or whatever they call the official supported version for dealing with motion blur.  I play FPS and other fast paced games (like MOBAs) so the better positioning and accuracy of 120hz...the better "feel" was more important to me than picture quality.  I love my 1440p screen, it's great.  But would I have bought it without being able to overclock?  Nah.  That's my opinion though...

 

I thought current lightboost was good enough but I guess there will be something always better...

It's sad that I can't try it because I have an amd card... and that R9 290 seems pretty attractive at this point...

 

Anyway, it seems like we are turning this topic into our private conversation thread so I will jump out

[SirRoderick]

 

The only argument for IPS you can make is resolutions above 1080p and as I've stated, every single monitor above 1080p except the Korean ones has serious input lag.  So tell me again why the following statements are false:

 

1) For single player gaming IPS monitors are FINE.  I've said this several times now.  Input lag or no, it doesn't really matter.

 

2) For multiplayer online gaming, higher refresh rate and lightboost to remove motion blur is SIGNIFICANTLY more important to the experience.

 

The first one isn't a controversial statement to anyone, it's that you keep stating that for multiplayer it is not. So i'm going to repeat the fact that you keep dodging like some well practiced preacher and tell you that low input lag IPS panels not only exist, but are common now. The Eizo Foris FS2333, an IPS panel, has fantastic input lag comparable without compromise with that of TN panels. That is a repeatedly confirmed fact you can look up on any number of hardware websites that do their own testing. I'll even pick one out for you to prove that http://www.prad.de/en/monitore/review/2012/review-eizo-foris-fs2333-bk-part9.html

 

Now it's all well and good that they USED to be slow panels in general, but that is simply no longer the case.

 

As for your second point, I will reiterate the very obvious facts that make that position completely redundant.

1) The majority of gamers do not have hardware capable of driving modern games over 60 FPS (and don't give me that ancient machine bollocks, a GTX 680 will NOT drive modern games over 60FPS at high settings, that is a 500 dollar card)

2) Wether or not you prefer better image quality or more fluid motion is entirely subjective with the exception of professional gamers, or on the other side of the spectrum, professional video and photo editors.

 

So to sum up, your reasoning is subjective, based on misleading or outdated information and out of touch with the real world.

 

If you prefer TN panels for gaming, I couldn't care less, but don't tell me that IPS screens are inherently bad choices.

[aithos]

The first one isn't a controversial statement to anyone, it's that you keep stating that for multiplayer it is not. So i'm going to repeat the fact that you keep dodging like some well practiced preacher and tell you that low input lag IPS panels not only exist, but are common now. The Eizo Foris FS2333, an IPS panel, has fantastic input lag comparable without compromise with that of TN panels. That is a repeatedly confirmed fact you can look up on any number of hardware websites that do their own testing. I'll even pick one out for you to prove that http://www.prad.de/en/monitore/review/2012/review-eizo-foris-fs2333-bk-part9.html

 

Now it's all well and good that they USED to be slow panels in general, but that is simply no longer the case.

 

As for your second point, I will reiterate the very obvious facts that make that position completely redundant.

1) The majority of gamers do not have hardware capable of driving modern games over 60 FPS (and don't give me that ancient machine bollocks, a GTX 680 will NOT drive modern games over 60FPS at high settings, that is a 500 dollar card)

2) Wether or not you prefer better image quality or more fluid motion is entirely subjective with the exception of professional gamers, or on the other side of the spectrum, professional video and photo editors.

 

So to sum up, your reasoning is subjective, based on misleading or outdated information and out of touch with the real world.

 

If you prefer TN panels for gaming, I couldn't care less, but don't tell me that IPS screens are inherently bad choices.

 

1) IPS panels with low input lag are not common.  They are a minority.  Those websites you're talking about prad.de and TFTcentral...have highly subjective testing methods, they have multiple methods and they post charts using multiple different methods ON THE SAME chart.  They are unreliable, untrustworthy and not much better than "response" times.  There is no standard for measuring input lag, if there was you'd find that *most* IPS panels are considerably worse than fast TN panels.  I don't care that a handful of 1080p IPS panels are fast, as I've said...1080p IPS is silly in my opinion.

 

2) The benefit of a faster refresh rate and lightboost has nothing to do with smoothness.  Does the picture look more fluid?  Yes.  The real benefit?  REGISTRATION.  In online multiplayer games the most important thing is accurate information.  Where people, spells, items, whatever....are physically located at any given moment.  In an FPS whether your shots hit are determined based on having the most accurate knowledge of where an enemy is at any given second relative to where you're shooting.  If your monitor updates twice as fast (or more) you will get a more accurate representation, your reactions will be better and your shots will "feel" like they register better.  It's like playing a game with a 150 ping vs 20 ping.  The lower your ping, the more accurate the information you're getting is.  That's why input lag is ALSO so important.  Same thing.  Everything adds up to your total "experience" and *ALL* online multiplayer games that have any kind of competitive aspect are affected by it.  Which is why I break gaming into single vs multiplayer.

 

3) Don't make me laugh with the hardware thing.  Most people who play multiplayer online games don't max out settings, and at 1080p you can play with high settings in basically ANY multiplayer game and EASILY run 100fps.  There aren't games like Crysis when you're talking about online multiplayer.  I played a variety of online games, CS:GO, BF3, various CoD games, LoL, DOTA2, WoW, FFXIV on my old system (i7-860 @ 2.8ghz, GTX 570) and EASILY ran over 100fps on ALL those games.  The only people who can't run 100 frames easily are people maxing settings on 1440p in single player games.

 

You say I'm out of touch, you're the one out of touch.  You don't even understand that benefits of a fast TN panel and it's clear you've never used one.  I have a PLS panel monitor, I've gamed on IPS monitors, I've gamed on TN gaming panels, I've gamed on regular 60hz monitors.  I don't prefer TN panels, I prefer my PLS panel.  But unlike you, and most of the people whose arguments amount to "derp derp derp" I don't just argue for what I have, I argue based on logic.  Yours....fails hard.  You can say my reasoning is subjective...the only thing subjective about my reasoning is that I don't think the colors of a 1080p monitor are worth the tradeoffs you lose vs 144hz and lightboost.

 

Which, by the way...eliminating motion blur with lightboost will make for a much better picture in any game with any movement than an IPS panel could ever hope to have.  An increase in resolution, better color, all PALE in comparison to no blur.  It's just that people today are largely too young to have gamed on a high refresh rate CRT monitor and so they all think that the shitty blurred image of an LCD screen is normal.  Just look at how many idiots buy LCD or LED TVs instead of plasma and can't tell the motion difference, it makes me want to cry it's so pathetic.

 

IPS screen are inherently bad choices.  If you want to pay for a stupidly expensive Eizo monitor and run 60hz with motion blur at 1080p...be my guest.  I'd take a glossy BENQ XL2420TE even over my 1440p Korean panel at 110hz  *JUST* for lightboost.

 

@Amber_Nova - lightboost2 will be exactly the same, except it won't be a driver patch...it will be included with the main video drivers from what I understand.  Lightboost isn't an officially supported feature right now, the next version will be..that's all I meant

[Acquaaaa]

1) IPS panels with low input lag are not common. They are a minority. Those websites you're talking about prad.de and TFTcentral...have highly subjective testing methods, they have multiple methods and they post charts using multiple different methods ON THE SAME chart. They are unreliable, untrustworthy and not much better than "response" times. There is no standard for measuring input lag, if there was you'd find that *most* IPS panels are considerably worse than fast TN panels. I don't care that a handful of 1080p IPS panels are fast, as I've said...1080p IPS is silly in my opinion.

2) The benefit of a faster refresh rate and lightboost has nothing to do with smoothness. Does the picture look more fluid? Yes. The real benefit? REGISTRATION. In online multiplayer games the most important thing is accurate information. Where people, spells, items, whatever....are physically located at any given moment. In an FPS whether your shots hit are determined based on having the most accurate knowledge of where an enemy is at any given second relative to where you're shooting. If your monitor updates twice as fast (or more) you will get a more accurate representation, your reactions will be better and your shots will "feel" like they register better. It's like playing a game with a 150 ping vs 20 ping. The lower your ping, the more accurate the information you're getting is. That's why input lag is ALSO so important. Same thing. Everything adds up to your total "experience" and *ALL* online multiplayer games that have any kind of competitive aspect are affected by it. Which is why I break gaming into single vs multiplayer.

3) Don't make me laugh with the hardware thing. Most people who play multiplayer online games don't max out settings, and at 1080p you can play with high settings in basically ANY multiplayer game and EASILY run 100fps. There aren't games like Crysis when you're talking about online multiplayer. I played a variety of online games, CS:GO, BF3, various CoD games, LoL, DOTA2, WoW, FFXIV on my old system (i7-860 @ 2.8ghz, GTX 570) and EASILY ran over 100fps on ALL those games. The only people who can't run 100 frames easily are people maxing settings on 1440p in single player games.

You say I'm out of touch, you're the one out of touch. You don't even understand that benefits of a fast TN panel and it's clear you've never used one. I have a PLS panel monitor, I've gamed on IPS monitors, I've gamed on TN gaming panels, I've gamed on regular 60hz monitors. I don't prefer TN panels, I prefer my PLS panel. But unlike you, and most of the people whose arguments amount to "derp derp derp" I don't just argue for what I have, I argue based on logic. Yours....fails hard. You can say my reasoning is subjective...the only thing subjective about my reasoning is that I don't think the colors of a 1080p monitor are worth the tradeoffs you lose vs 144hz and lightboost.

Which, by the way...eliminating motion blur with lightboost will make for a much better picture in any game with any movement than an IPS panel could ever hope to have. An increase in resolution, better color, all PALE in comparison to no blur. It's just that people today are largely too young to have gamed on a high refresh rate CRT monitor and so they all think that the shitty blurred image of an LCD screen is normal. Just look at how many idiots buy LCD or LED TVs instead of plasma and can't tell the motion difference, it makes me want to cry it's so pathetic.

IPS screen are inherently bad choices. If you want to pay for a stupidly expensive Eizo monitor and run 60hz with motion blur at 1080p...be my guest. I'd take a glossy BENQ XL2420TE even over my 1440p Korean panel at 110hz *JUST* for lightboost.

@Amber_Nova - lightboost2 will be exactly the same, except it won't be a driver patch...it will be included with the main video drivers from what I understand. Lightboost isn't an officially supported feature right now, the next version will be..that's all I meant

I know that the eizo fs2333 (ips)has 0.8ms input lag and 3.2 ms gtg, with technology similar to ligthboost.. Actually I'm able to buy that monitor New for 200€ instead of 300€, do you think it's a good choice for gaming, even considered the price I can get it?

[aithos]

I know that the eizo fs2333 (ips)has 0.8ms input lag and 3.2 ms gtg, with technology similar to ligthboost.. Actually I'm able to buy that monitor New for 200€ instead of 300€, do you think it's a good choice for gaming, even considered the price I can get it?

 

I'm not quite sure how to respond to this.  I've edited this post a couple times now.  I'll just say this:

 

As far as IPS monitors go, it's not bad for gaming.  It doesn't have input lag, which is good, but it is still a 60hz panel without lightboost.  PWM is not the same as lightboost.  I would make sure you check out some reviews and make sure it doesn't suffer from overshoot on motion because most IPS panels using overdrive for quicker response time have problems with it.  Overshoot can actually be worst than a slower response for motion blur and ghosting.

 

I personally would say that if you want a 1080p monitor, to get a 144hz lightboost monitor and call it a day.  I have said it several times, but I don't see better color and viewing angle as a good trade for 144hz and lightboost.  It's a subjective opinion, but the experience is MUCH better when you eliminate motion blur and have faster, more accurate positioning.  Everyone I've ever known or talked to who gamed on a fast panel (120+ hz) has said they would never even consider a slower panel again.

 

Edit:  The gaming decision will be a lot harder when a 120hz or faster IPS panel with 1440p hits the market.  If they can work out how to eliminate motion blur, incorporate lightboost and keep the higher bit panel and better color/viewing angles...I could see it being the death of the TN panel.  Until that happens though...

[SirRoderick]

1) IPS panels with low input lag are not common.  They are a minority.  Those websites you're talking about prad.de and TFTcentral...have highly subjective testing methods, they have multiple methods and they post charts using multiple different methods ON THE SAME chart.  They are unreliable, untrustworthy and not much better than "response" times.  There is no standard for measuring input lag, if there was you'd find that *most* IPS panels are considerably worse than fast TN panels.  I don't care that a handful of 1080p IPS panels are fast, as I've said...1080p IPS is silly in my opinion.

 

2) The benefit of a faster refresh rate and lightboost has nothing to do with smoothness.  Does the picture look more fluid?  Yes.  The real benefit?  REGISTRATION.  In online multiplayer games the most important thing is accurate information.  Where people, spells, items, whatever....are physically located at any given moment.  In an FPS whether your shots hit are determined based on having the most accurate knowledge of where an enemy is at any given second relative to where you're shooting.  If your monitor updates twice as fast (or more) you will get a more accurate representation, your reactions will be better and your shots will "feel" like they register better.  It's like playing a game with a 150 ping vs 20 ping.  The lower your ping, the more accurate the information you're getting is.  That's why input lag is ALSO so important.  Same thing.  Everything adds up to your total "experience" and *ALL* online multiplayer games that have any kind of competitive aspect are affected by it.  Which is why I break gaming into single vs multiplayer.

 

3) Don't make me laugh with the hardware thing.  Most people who play multiplayer online games don't max out settings, and at 1080p you can play with high settings in basically ANY multiplayer game and EASILY run 100fps.  There aren't games like Crysis when you're talking about online multiplayer.  I played a variety of online games, CS:GO, BF3, various CoD games, LoL, DOTA2, WoW, FFXIV on my old system (i7-860 @ 2.8ghz, GTX 570) and EASILY ran over 100fps on ALL those games.  The only people who can't run 100 frames easily are people maxing settings on 1440p in single player games.

 

 

1) I meant common as in readily available, if you want to get a low input lag IPS panel you CAN, that's all I'm saying there.

 

2) Again I have to come back to the point that for most people that just doesn't matter, they don't care. Why can you not accept that not everyone has the same priorities in gaming that you might? Also I'd really appreciate it if you stop telling me ALL online games are fast paced shooters, because I'm pretty damn sure that someone who play Hearthstone or WoW has exactly zero need for split second inputs. You're not making any sense when you do that.

 

3)Starcraft II regularly drops to 50-40 FPS on a single GPU just to name an example. As does Battlefield 4. Two popular multiplayer games, one even being a less demanding RTS. The only people who CAN run 100 easily on these games are the ones who either have killer expensive hardware or those who DON'T CARE about image quality and turn it down in the settings to get that smooth as possible framerate. Which has been the entire point of my argument that you keep bloody avoiding. Different people have different priorities, there are a LOT of people who like to play Battlefield 4 or Starcraft II with all the graphical options turned up because they fell that is more important. There are many others that turn them down to get blistering framerates as often as possible. Neither one of these groups are wrong, they just have different needs. The fact that you cannot come to terms with with that baffles me beyond belief. Not everyone likes the same things *shocking*

 

Now, as for your wild unbased accusations that you're flinging out there because you're angry at me for daring to have an opinion different from yours, I've been playing games  on a brand new Ben Q XL2420TE for a while now. I like to play on it and it is smoother, absolutely. I quite like it for my faster paced games. It also has absolutely NO bearing whatsoever on the fact that gaming on an IPS panel is a completely viable option, is dependant not only on the games being played but also the personal priorities of the gamer in question and that you still refuse to reply to that, my only real point.

 

Now I totally understand arguing on the internet can get a little frustrating, but could we please calm down and be a bit sensible?