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

[kirBi]

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?

 

For the price, I think it is a very good deal.

If you are going for 120 hz +lightboost instead, you need you need a good Nvidia (Nvidia only!) graphics card that can output high fps to see the full benefit of 120 hz monitors with lightboost. Just to make sure

 

@aithos: Technically Lightboost is supported by Nvidia, but not the "hack" to use it to reduce motion blur. I'm not sure they will do any time soon though. There are fairly small number of monitors that can be used for this hack, I believe, and I'm not sure whether Nvidia will give a damn when they are trying to sell G-sync monitors.

[aithos]

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*

 

1) If that's what you meant then I don't have a problem with your statement.  The point I was trying to make is that most people make it sound like *any* IPS monitor is fine for gaming, and that isn't true.  Not any more than *all* TN panels are good for gaming.

 

2) I'm not talking about just fast paced shooters.  My priority in gaming is one thing, and one thing only:  having fun.  What is fun?  Winning.  So when I look at things that directly impact the "gameplay experience", monitor, keyboard, mouse, gaming surface...anything that makes gameplay feel smoother, more accurate, more enjoyable...is the focus.  No, people playing Hearthstone aren't going to care about 120hz, it's not what I would call a "competitive" game.  Is there competition?  Of course, but it's mental competition and deck building, not a dexterity and control based game.  That's what I would call the more specific phrasing, I didn't think I had to spell it out.  Games which require hand eye coordination, dexterity, reactions and other physically measurable inputs are the ones that will benefit from a better monitor.  I'll use your example against you:  WoW.  There is ABSOLUTELY a requirement for split second inputs.  You've never raided or done PVP?  In raids you routinely come up against bosses were you are required to move, group, dodge or respond to environmental things.  It could be mobs spawning, fire patches, cone attacks, a clickable item mechanic or other various things.  In PVP your ability to immediately respond to your enemies, what they are doing, what they might do and use your appopriate abilties immediately is the difference in being a sub 1500 player and a 2k rated player.

 

I've raided at a high level (top 50 USA 25m heroic guilds) and every tier there were fights where each person had to perform perfectly in order for the boss to be downed.  I can't tell you how long it took us to down H Ragnaros in Firelands (when I was still raiding most recently) because a couple people in our guild always seemed to get hit by the walls of fire in phases 2/3.  You know how often we heard "we moved as soon as we saw it" after a wipe?  Want to take bets on what kind of monitor they were using?  Input lag may not matter to a weekend raider in 10m because they don't care, but don't tell me it doesn't make a difference.

 

I've said that before by the way:  If *you* don't care...FINE.  That's ok, you don't have to justify it to me.  I really don't care.  What I *do* care is when you come in and say that in a general sense it shouldn't matter to anyone else.  That's why I'm in this thread posting as much as I am in the first damn place.  People on these forums come in and make ignorant statements like "the response time on an IPS is fine, it's ok for gaming" and then they procede to mention what monitor they have that has awful input lag and say:  "it looks awesome!".  The OP's in those threads are being done a major disservice by not getting the full picture.

 

I'm not angry with people like you, who understand the finer points of the technology, I'm angry with the idiots who blindly recommend something with no reasoning behind it.  I could sit here and go through other games besides fast paced shooters that are affected, but it doesn't matter.  People have their minds made up and refuse to acknowledge they might be wrong.  I'd like to point out I've never said not to buy an IPS, I've even said that in some cases it doesn't matter, go ahead and buy whatever you want.  I've stated that I own a PLS monitor.

 

3) If Starcraft II is dropping to 40-50 FPS either your hardware is ancient or you're running with VSYNC on or you have some really wonky settings.  My old computer was easily able to run over 100fps with settings maxxed out, same with Diablo III.  Blizzard games are NOT demanding graphically.  If you can't run 100+ FPS there is a serious issue.  The point I've been trying to get at that you're avoiding is that games where multiplayer competition is the main focus....the GRAPHICS DON'T MATTER.  People don't care about 16x AA, if you're more concerned with how good BF4 maps look than with how responsive and accurate the game "feels" then maybe multiplayer online gaming isn't right for you.  I can come to terms with people who want their games to look good, but looking good and MAXING settings are two completely different things. 

 

Prior to building my current monster PC, I had a moderate build that wasn't anything special.  I kept it for 4 years and played a variety of games, never less than *high* settings with some AA enabled and I consistently ran over 100fps in every game I played.  I've named them before but I'll name them again:  CS:GO, Battlefield 3, WoW, LoL, FFXIV, a couple CoD games, DOTA2, Starcraft II, Diablo III and plenty of others.  I also played some single player games of course, but for those I've said all along framerate isn't as important.  So why do you seem to think that in order to play at a high framerate you have to be running LOW settings for everything?  You don't.  That's ridiculous, you can turn off the crazy bloom lighting effects and leave everything else maxxed in most games and run 100+ fps and not even notice the lighting effects are missing. 

 

I honestly don't understand why you don't understand what I'm trying to say here....

 

Edit:  Again, I'm not saying IPS gaming isn't viable.  I'm saying I don't understand why people get so fixated on it.  If you're not getting a higher resolution then you're saying that the range of colors and viewing angle is more important than eliminating motion blur and refresh rate.  I'm sorry, there is just no rational explanation I can come up with for why you would do that.  Even modest hardware can easily run 1080p at over 100fps, and most systems that can't only need a graphics card upgrade because anything within the past two generations for either GPU company can do it EASILY.  People who haven't gamed at 120hz just don't understand.  They are arguing against something they literally don't realize the impact.  It would be like someone with a 150 ping telling everyone that it's "fine for gaming" because he doesn't care that 25 ping is better.  While everyone with 25 ping are saying:  get the better internet, trust us.  That's what this conversation comes down to, and if you're on the 144hz side...why the hell are you arguing with me???

[aithos]

For the price, I think it is a very good deal.

If you are going for 120 hz +lightboost instead, you need you need a good Nvidia (Nvidia only!) graphics card that can output high fps to see the full benefit of 120 hz monitors with lightboost. Just to make sure

 

@aithos: Technically Lightboost is supported by Nvidia, but not the "hack" to use it to reduce motion blur. I'm not sure they will do any time soon though. There are fairly small number of monitors that can be used for this hack, I believe, and I'm not sure whether Nvidia will give a damn when they are trying to sell G-sync monitors.

 

That's what I meant when I was saying it's not supported.  When I talk about lightboost I mean using it to reduce motion blur, I don't care about 3D.  You can also use it with AMD if I recall correctly because it's a "hack" and not the NVIDIA only 3D stuff.  NVIDIA has come out and said they would support it for motion blur in later versions...I'd expect AMD to follow...

[aithos]

For the record, all I'm saying here...and what I've said in countless other threads of a similar nature:  MAKE AN INFORMED DECISION.  I really don't care what you do with your money, I don't.  You want to buy a 17" LCD and game on 1024x768 with super high response time, all manner of input lag and crazy motion blur?  Go ahead, be my guest.  Just don't come in here and complain later how bad your monitor sucks and don't sit in game and blame "lag" for performing poorly.

 

I only get worked up in threads like this because less informed people come to these forums *specifically* for advice on what their next purchase should be.  Most people who post in these threads, don't give a second thought to their advice and how it might affect what someone else spends their money on.  I've been given bad advice on the internet in the past, I've spent money and been PISSED when I didn't get what I expected and it turned out my money was essentially wasted.  I was too poor to just "replace" what I had bought, you know what that's like?  To trust someone and have it turn out they had no idea what they were talking about?  I do.

 

It's one of the reasons as I got older and got into sales that I drove myself so hard to learn everything I could.  It's one of the reasons I spend MONTHS before every build (mine or for someone else) rigorously researching the current state of technology.  It's one of the reasons I know so much about hardware.  The fact I care about what I recommend is what made me a good salesperson.  I just want people to have all the sides of the story, tech forums are notoriously one sided.  I don't care if the OP listens to me or not, I just care that he has the OPTION to.  You don't have to agree with me, I'm not trying to win an argument here, I'm trying to be understood.  If you say:  Ok, I get where you're coming from, I don't agree but it's fine... then we are done here.  That's it. 

 

I understand what *you're* saying, I just don't agree.  I think IPS gaming at 1080p is viable, I just think it's pointless.  If you want an IPS get a 1440p or higher resolution one.  If you care so much about max graphical settings, then why are you getting a 1080p monitor?  It doesn't make sense.  If you don't care about 144hz or motion blur, then don't care...but if you're telling me you *do* care about input lag then you also care about your experience.  Then you should also care about 144hz and lightboost, because it's a part of the experience just the same...

[SirRoderick]

1) If that's what you meant then I don't have a problem with your statement.  The point I was trying to make is that most people make it sound like *any* IPS monitor is fine for gaming, and that isn't true.  Not any more than *all* TN panels are good for gaming.

 

2) I'm not talking about just fast paced shooters.  My priority in gaming is one thing, and one thing only:  having fun.  What is fun?  Winning.  So when I look at things that directly impact the "gameplay experience", monitor, keyboard, mouse, gaming surface...anything that makes gameplay feel smoother, more accurate, more enjoyable...is the focus.  No, people playing Hearthstone aren't going to care about 120hz, it's not what I would call a "competitive" game.  Is there competition?  Of course, but it's mental competition and deck building, not a dexterity and control based game.  That's what I would call the more specific phrasing, I didn't think I had to spell it out.  Games which require hand eye coordination, dexterity, reactions and other physically measurable inputs are the ones that will benefit from a better monitor.  I'll use your example against you:  WoW.  There is ABSOLUTELY a requirement for split second inputs.  You've never raided or done PVP?  In raids you routinely come up against bosses were you are required to move, group, dodge or respond to environmental things.  It could be mobs spawning, fire patches, cone attacks, a clickable item mechanic or other various things.  In PVP your ability to immediately respond to your enemies, what they are doing, what they might do and use your appopriate abilties immediately is the difference in being a sub 1500 player and a 2k rated player.

 

I've raided at a high level (top 50 USA 25m heroic guilds) and every tier there were fights where each person had to perform perfectly in order for the boss to be downed.  I can't tell you how long it took us to down H Ragnaros in Firelands (when I was still raiding most recently) because a couple people in our guild always seemed to get hit by the walls of fire in phases 2/3.  You know how often we heard "we moved as soon as we saw it" after a wipe?  Want to take bets on what kind of monitor they were using?  Input lag may not matter to a weekend raider in 10m because they don't care, but don't tell me it doesn't make a difference.

 

I've said that before by the way:  If *you* don't care...FINE.  That's ok, you don't have to justify it to me.  I really don't care.  What I *do* care is when you come in and say that in a general sense it shouldn't matter to anyone else.  That's why I'm in this thread posting as much as I am in the first damn place.  People on these forums come in and make ignorant statements like "the response time on an IPS is fine, it's ok for gaming" and then they procede to mention what monitor they have that has awful input lag and say:  "it looks awesome!".  The OP's in those threads are being done a major disservice by not getting the full picture.

 

I'm not angry with people like you, who understand the finer points of the technology, I'm angry with the idiots who blindly recommend something with no reasoning behind it.  I could sit here and go through other games besides fast paced shooters that are affected, but it doesn't matter.  People have their minds made up and refuse to acknowledge they might be wrong.  I'd like to point out I've never said not to buy an IPS, I've even said that in some cases it doesn't matter, go ahead and buy whatever you want.  I've stated that I own a PLS monitor.

 

3) If Starcraft II is dropping to 40-50 FPS either your hardware is ancient or you're running with VSYNC on or you have some really wonky settings.  My old computer was easily able to run over 100fps with settings maxxed out, same with Diablo III.  Blizzard games are NOT demanding graphically.  If you can't run 100+ FPS there is a serious issue.  The point I've been trying to get at that you're avoiding is that games where multiplayer competition is the main focus....the GRAPHICS DON'T MATTER.  People don't care about 16x AA, if you're more concerned with how good BF4 maps look than with how responsive and accurate the game "feels" then maybe multiplayer online gaming isn't right for you.  I can come to terms with people who want their games to look good, but looking good and MAXING settings are two completely different things. 

 

Prior to building my current monster PC, I had a moderate build that wasn't anything special.  I kept it for 4 years and played a variety of games, never less than *high* settings with some AA enabled and I consistently ran over 100fps in every game I played.  I've named them before but I'll name them again:  CS:GO, Battlefield 3, WoW, LoL, FFXIV, a couple CoD games, DOTA2, Starcraft II, Diablo III and plenty of others.  I also played some single player games of course, but for those I've said all along framerate isn't as important.  So why do you seem to think that in order to play at a high framerate you have to be running LOW settings for everything?  You don't.  That's ridiculous, you can turn off the crazy bloom lighting effects and leave everything else maxxed in most games and run 100+ fps and not even notice the lighting effects are missing. 

 

I honestly don't understand why you don't understand what I'm trying to say here....

 

Edit:  Again, I'm not saying IPS gaming isn't viable.  I'm saying I don't understand why people get so fixated on it.  If you're not getting a higher resolution then you're saying that the range of colors and viewing angle is more important than eliminating motion blur and refresh rate.  I'm sorry, there is just no rational explanation I can come up with for why you would do that.  Even modest hardware can easily run 1080p at over 100fps, and most systems that can't only need a graphics card upgrade because anything within the past two generations for either GPU company can do it EASILY.  People who haven't gamed at 120hz just don't understand.  They are arguing against something they literally don't realize the impact.  It would be like someone with a 150 ping telling everyone that it's "fine for gaming" because he doesn't care that 25 ping is better.  While everyone with 25 ping are saying:  get the better internet, trust us.  That's what this conversation comes down to, and if you're on the 144hz side...why the hell are you arguing with me???

 

Right well at least there's some common ground here then. I'll just add a few things.

 

2) Regardless, even if you feel that way about WoW, there's hundreds of other games I could use as an example and there's little point dwelling on it

 

3) Running it on a 8350 with a GTX 680. Totalbiscuit runs it on SLI Titans and he STILL gets framedrops according to his own reports. If you haven't seen that game drop that low you don't play it very often or on low settings, which comes back to the user preference case. It's totally NOT comparable with Diablo III either. As for the "multiplayer competition where graphics don't matter" That is just such a closed argument it's still nonsensical. Only if you actually play at a top top level is that definitely your focus. I feel entirely confident in saying that MOST gamers will prefer Battlefield 4 to be playing on the highest settings at 60FPS than at low settings at 120FPS. Literally all of the people I play ARMA III with put their graphics up all the way even though they only run it at 40-50 when they do so. Because to them, RESPONSIVENESS DOESNT MATTER as much as the quality of the graphics (to a reasonable point, of course). You have this incredibly arrogant and elitist view that EVERY LIVING GAMER that plays multiplayer NEEDS to be this super competitive person. Reasonings like that is why I called you out of touch, because quite frankly a lot of those people just want to have some bloody fun by shooting at you with a tank with pretty explosions and there is nothing at all wrong with that.

 

That is the number one reason I feel I can't agree with you.

 

Now the SECOND reason I can't agree with you is this bit.

I understand what *you're* saying, I just don't agree.  I think IPS gaming at 1080p is viable, I just think it's pointless.  If you want an IPS get a 1440p or higher resolution one.  If you care so much about max graphical settings, then why are you getting a 1080p monitor?  It doesn't make sense.

 

I don't know how you managed to delude yourself into the notion that nearly all PC gamers have infinite funds for their gaming rigs, but this just strenghtens the feeling of arrogance and elitism. You don't seem to understand how money works, like you never even have to worry about how much something costs. Most people don't HAVE thousands of dollars to pump into a hobby like this just to get a frankly less than critical return. They just want to play some games in their off time man. This is like a banker complaining about how he doesn't understand why not everyone gets a 60 inch plasma screen and a BMW M6 because they are so awesome. Maybe it's the salesman talking, but I sincerely hope you're not that disconnected.

[aithos]

Now the SECOND reason I can't agree with you is this bit.

I don't know how you managed to delude yourself into the notion that nearly all PC gamers have infinite funds for their gaming rigs, but this just strenghtens the feeling of arrogance and elitism. You don't seem to understand how money works, like you never even have to worry about how much something costs. Most people don't HAVE thousands of dollars to pump into a hobby like this just to get a frankly less than critical return. They just want to play some games in their off time man. This is like a banker complaining about how he doesn't understand why not everyone gets a 60 inch plasma screen and a BMW M6 because they are so awesome. Maybe it's the salesman talking, but I sincerely hope you're not that disconnected.

 

I understand exactly how money works, I grew up poor and until just the last couple years I was extremely poor myself.  I worked at a store during the recent recession, a store that slashed commission rates, profit margins and took our spiffs.  My sales increased well over 10% each year and my profit margins went up several percent each year and I made less money 3 years in a row.  I barely made ends meet, there were months I had to borrow money to pay bills or skip utility payments because I needed groceries.  Even with all that, I stil managed to save for nice things and to take advantage of the discount where I worked (which was the only really good thing about the compensation there).

 

If you can't build a computer capable of running high settings on a reasonable resolution (1080p) for $1k then you have a serious lack of common sense when it comes to video settings in gaming.  The reason I said you were out of touch is you seem to think that every gamer should max settings because that somehow makes the gaming experience infinitely better.  The difference between "high" and "very high" (or ultra) is barely noticable, the only major visual difference is when you have something like lighting bloom or specular lighting and that feature is purely frivolous and an ENORMOUS performance hit. 

 

If your priority is completely max settings then you should expect to get crappy framerates and need extremely expensive builds.  It is VERY easy to set things to high and maintain a 100fps rate on even the newest games.  I'd be happy to prove it to you with my old machine if I ever set it back up, just tell me what game you'd like me to set up and if I have it I'll gladly humor you with my video settings on my old machine VS my new machine.  I'm not going to spend days doing it, but I'll show you a couple comparison screenshots if that will make you feel better.  I think the disconnect here is that people are stupid, they don't understand the visual settings and so they just do whatever the game tells them to do.  I ALWAYS go through my settings individually to get the best mix of graphics and performance.

 

I'm a video snob, I would NEVER play with low settings...