Which is the better 144hz/165hz monitor? (under £350)
18 minutes ago, OllieGE said:I've seen reviews of ghosting and colour banding with the MSI optix, ghosting is my main worry as its more noticeable on VA than TN. Thanks for the quick response
![]()
There shouldn't be a huge issue regarding that. It really depends whether MSI spend extra time and money to improve pixel response. Here's an explanation of ghosting I found on the forums
Quote
The problem with VA panels is their poor pixel response, specifically their dark transitions. Unless its had focused R&D on the panel to improve pixel response, its going to have significant ghosting, making any high refresh rate it may have pointless, or at the very least less useful than a fast TN panel.
NOTE: advertised response times are ALWAYS wrong, by a large degree. Ignore them.
For reference, the slowest u want any pixel transition (not the average) to be for a given frequency is:
60Hz = 16.6ms or better
120hz= 8.33ms or better
144hz = 6.9ms or better
240hz = 4.1ms or better
Consider that the fastest i have seen tested, with an 'average' response time (so not even based on the slowest) for VA is around 10ms, thus a VA panel cant even run fast enough to handle 120hz.
Having a Monitor that can do 144hz, , thus a new frame is shown every 6.9ms, but using a panel that has a pixel response of 10ms, means the pixel cant transition fully to the required color before the next frame needs displaying, resulting ghosting/blurring.
If that worries you, you can find IPS panels that shouldn't have ghosting issues within the same budget. A good example is this AOC Q27G2U 27" QHD IPS 144hz Monitor
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now