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