30" 2560x1600 Korean IPS or 27" 1080 120hz TN?

[poohbear]

Hey all, i'm looking @ upgrading my old Samsung P2770 27" TN LCD. It was a great monitor at its time, but i'm currently working in S Korea and seeing so many incredibly cheap IPS panels here in the $300-$400. My Korean friends recommended i avoid crossover, Yamasaki, and all the others that i find on Ebay and go with "Microboard" brand name which is higher quality and more expensive. Check out their monitors:

http://www.microboard.co.kr/

Anyways, its either the i3006WQ (LG IPS Q5 panel), or a 27" TN panels @ 120hz. I'm a gamer, but mostly a RTS & RPG gamer, so don't really play that many FPS games (only BF3 and even then just occasionally). Will i notice a hugh issue with ghosting on the 30" IPS? Also, i own a GTX 670, i understand i'll hafta turn off AA in most new titles to game @ 2560x1600, but i always figured AA was for the lower resolutions anyways, no?

Thanks in advance for any feedback and advice! Cheers.

 

[blackened23]

It's all personal preference. My personal opinion is that all TN panels are trash, 120hz or not. I do not like them at all for many reasons, but others do like them.

I will say this. Do not get a korean 30" 2560x1600 monitor, there is no significant price advantage in doing so. You can get a real 30 inch from Dell for a comparable price, and with the benefits they offer in terms of long term support, real warranty in the USA, no question exchange, etc - the prospect of getting a 30 inch korean IPS is downright laughable. The 27 inch korean models may offer a price benefit even if I don't like them. The 30 inch models? Not so much.

 

[blackened23]

Just read your post again, sounds like you have access to cheaper prices than those in the states. A 30 inch may be worth it in that case. To answer the other question: there will be no ghosting, and you shouldn't have issues with RTS and RPG games. The latest 3D shooters will likely require you to lower a few settings of course, but you should be okay. Just don't expect to max something such as crysis 3 out.

 

[Fx1]

The only decent IPS monitor i have seen is the dell 3014 which offers no input lag and decent pixel response. It costs $1500-$1600 though.

Also remember you can kiss goodbye maximum settings unless you have dual flagship GPU's and you will need new ones every 2 years.

This is a huge outlay in upgrade costs.

Even then IPS pixel response is pretty poor and you will likely see an element of motion blur. Also you have to turn off all of the features of the monitor to get input lag into the single digits which makes spending $1500 on a monitor seem excessive.

TN or IPS both have good and bad points.

 

[aaksheytalwar]

The only decent IPS monitor i have seen is the dell 3014 which offers no input lag and decent pixel response. It costs $1500-$1600 though.

Also remember you can kiss goodbye maximum settings unless you have dual flagship GPU's and you will need new ones every 2 years.

This is a huge outlay in upgrade costs.

Even then IPS pixel response is pretty poor and you will likely see an element of motion blur. Also you have to turn off all of the features of the monitor to get input lag into the single digits which makes spending $1500 on a monitor seem excessive.

TN or IPS both have good and bad points.

All this is BS. Just ignore this guy.

 

[Fx1]

All this is BS. Just ignore this guy.

Why is it BS?

 

[imported_kebo]

Get a 120hz monitor that supports the lightboost hack.

http://www.blurbusters.com/zero-motion-blur/lightboost/

 

[blackened23]

Why is it BS?

Because the number of times you've posted an actual meaningful, objective opinion on any matter without inserting bias or misinformation - has been rare. I'm not trying to be facetious or mean, but you've posted some pretty "out there" opinions on monitors and video cards several times.

 

[Fx1]

Because the number of times you've posted an actual meaningful, objective opinion on any matter without inserting bias or misinformation - has been rare. I'm not trying to be facetious or mean, but you've posted some pretty "out there" opinions on monitors and video cards several times.

Except what i posted above isnt biased or BS or anything of the sort.

In fact i have never just flat out called anyones post BS without explaining why i disagree. Unlike the person who just did.

 

[poohbear]

$600 for the 30" and $330 for the 27" IPS LED, so me thinks the 27" is obviously the better deal. but the question is how good would these IPS panels be with 5ms (GtG and only ONE DVI port (to bring latency down to a minimum) be for gaming?

Fx1, so IPS are hopeless for gaming? 2560x 1440 of 27" IPS displays still needs SLI high end vid cards to play BF3 in ultra yea? It's pretty much similar to 2560x1600 situation at that rez?

 

[blackened23]

$600 for the 30" and $330 for the 27" LED, so me thinks the 27" is obviously the better deal. but the question is how good would these IPS panels be with 5ms (GtG0 and only ONE DVI port (to bring latency down to a minimum) be for gaming?

Fx1, so IPS are hopeless for gaming? 2560x 1440 of 27" IPS displays still needs SLI high end vid cards to play BF3 in ultra yea? It's pretty much similar to 2560x1600 situation at that rez?

This isn't true. Unless you get an incredibly old model (ie, 2004-2007 model) - IPS is fine for gaming. I've gamed on many IPS panels in addition to several 120hz TN panels. 120hz is slightly more fluid but you will have to deal with TN viewing angles, poor color, terrible color accuracy etc in addition to the low resolution (eg 1080p). Personally I find 1080p to be terrible and will never go back.

Essentially, you should make a choice between what you find more immersive: high resolution with higher pixel density versus slightly more fluid with worse colors and the other drawbacks of TN. I find the former to be more immersive, I will never, ever use a 1080p panel again whether it is 120hz or not. That's not to say that 120hz is without merit, but I can't handle the other negatives of TN panels. That is my preference. Keep in mind you will not find two people on this forum who has the same preference - so asking this question here for a consensus isn't a wise idea. There is no consensus. You need to decide for yourself.

If you play RTS and RPG, trust me, IPS is fine for gaming. There's a lot of hyperbole out there regarding this mostly from people who have never used IPS (FX1 being one..). It is fine. You just need to make your judgement call on 1080p TN which I find terrible versus higher resolution and higher pixel density. I would suggest giving the IPS 2560x1600 a try - nearly everyone I know that has tried it, loves it. Certainly you will not struggle since you play mostly RTS and RPG games.

Again, you'll get a million opinions on this. Since you play RTS and RPG's, I highly suspect that you will love the higher resolution. Trust me on this - give it a shot. But if you're trying to get a forum consensus, it just won't happen. You'll get tons of opinions that are non-objective and probably many from people who have never used an IPS and will spout hyperbole nonstop.

 

[Tweak155]

Get a 120hz monitor that supports the lightboost hack.

http://www.blurbusters.com/zero-motion-blur/lightboost/

MINE!!

First post after 7 years. I'm only 4 years away from the highest!

 

[MrK6]

Just get the 30 inch. I constantly say this, but if you didn't have a conniption going from a CRT to an LCD, 120Hz won't matter to you. However, all TN panels pale in comparison to an IPS, and the IPS will make your games more enjoyable and immersive simply because the image quality is that much better.

Also performance isn't a problem. My 7970 maxes almost every game without issue. Also, those that it can't, going multi-GPU wouldn't get you there either. I think you have to be more intelligent about how you use AA, like I run most games with SMAA, which ironically looks better and runs faster than most in-game options.

 

[bystander36]

The biggest advantage to a 120hz TN display is 3D Vision 2. 3D Vision and a total lack of motion blur are pretty awesome. And while a lot of games don't support 3D Vision by default, there is a great community that fixes a lot: http://helixmod.wikispot.org/gamelist

There is also this for fixing any motion blur with lightboost monitors and a few Samsungs 3D monitors: http://www.blurbusters.com/zero-motion-blur/lightboost/

 

[Fx1]

$600 for the 30" and $330 for the 27" LED, so me thinks the 27" is obviously the better deal. but the question is how good would these IPS panels be with 5ms (GtG0 and only ONE DVI port (to bring latency down to a minimum) be for gaming?

Fx1, so IPS are hopeless for gaming? 2560x 1440 of 27" IPS displays still needs SLI high end vid cards to play BF3 in ultra yea? It's pretty much similar to 2560x1600 situation at that rez?

Nothing is hopeless.

Just monitors are the least developed part of a gaming rig. The technology is so far behind what we expect its not even funny.

Basically anything you buy is going to suck in one way or another.

Personally im waiting for OLED because i have heard they are super fast responsive and colours are amazing with resolutions that will also be great. Not to mention the first ever curved screens for gaming!

Also yes SLI is needed for anything above 1900x1200 and there are some games that SLI is needed on that resolution too. But a 1440p monitor is way cheaper and also its easier to run than 1600p

 

[blastingcap]

My vote is for the 30" IPS. Spending that much on a 27" TN isn't really justified IMHO; just get the real thing or continue to save up. Or get a 27" IPS.

 

[poohbear]

This isn't true. Unless you get an incredibly old model (ie, 2004-2007 model) - IPS is fine for gaming. I've gamed on many IPS panels in addition to several 120hz TN panels. 120hz is slightly more fluid but you will have to deal with TN viewing angles, poor color, terrible color accuracy etc in addition to the low resolution (eg 1080p). Personally I find 1080p to be terrible and will never go back.

Essentially, you should make a choice between what you find more immersive: high resolution with higher pixel density versus slightly more fluid with worse colors and the other drawbacks of TN. I find the former to be more immersive, I will never, ever use a 1080p panel again whether it is 120hz or not. That's not to say that 120hz is without merit, but I can't handle the other negatives of TN panels. That is my preference. Keep in mind you will not find two people on this forum who has the same preference - so asking this question here for a consensus isn't a wise idea. There is no consensus. You need to decide for yourself.

If you play RTS and RPG, trust me, IPS is fine for gaming. There's a lot of hyperbole out there regarding this mostly from people who have never used IPS (FX1 being one..). It is fine. You just need to make your judgement call on 1080p TN which I find terrible versus higher resolution and higher pixel density. I would suggest giving the IPS 2560x1600 a try - nearly everyone I know that has tried it, loves it. Certainly you will not struggle since you play mostly RTS and RPG games.

Again, you'll get a million opinions on this. Since you play RTS and RPG's, I highly suspect that you will love the higher resolution. Trust me on this - give it a shot. But if you're trying to get a forum consensus, it just won't happen. You'll get tons of opinions that are non-objective and probably many from people who have never used an IPS and will spout hyperbole nonstop.

Thanks Blackend, really informative stuff here.

Yes i've been looking @ IPS after the colors of one display i saw blew me away! My TN's colors look so bland compared to IPS.... i was just worried about the resolution and a video card that can keep up. As it is now, my GTX 670 & 4.4ghz 2500k burn through all RTS games and RPG games i play @ 1080p. Maybe 2560x1600 will be more of a challenge but i think my setup can handle it without going SLI or upgrading every year. As for AA, i recall it was invented for lower resolutions, higher resolutions don't have nearly as much jaggies and hence don't need AA, is that a correct assessment with your IPS? Also, i'd love to just get out of my chair and game from my bed or sofa using a controller for alot of the RPG games i play, but with a TN the viewing angle prevents me from doing that. IPS have no such limitation right?

Again, the only FPS i play regularly is BF3, and even then its just 20 min here and there, certainly not the main game i play. I play Dawn of War 2 mostly along with Skyrim. With that said, is BF3 on an IPS horrid?

Nothing is hopeless.

Just monitors are the least developed part of a gaming rig. The technology is so far behind what we expect its not even funny.

Basically anything you buy is going to suck in one way or another.

Personally im waiting for OLED because i have heard they are super fast responsive and colours are amazing with resolutions that will also be great. Not to mention the first ever curved screens for gaming!

Also yes SLI is needed for anything above 1900x1200 and there are some games that SLI is needed on that resolution too. But a 1440p monitor is way cheaper and also its easier to run than 1600p

i think we're all waiting for OLED, but the question is when will they become available @ reasonable price points? I'm guessing not until 2015-16, right? I wouldn't mind buying a cheaper IPS to hold me over until 2015 if that's the case. Now, you say a 1440p is easier to run, but 2560x1440 vs 2560x1600 is like a 3% difference in pixels, its basically the same resolution performance wise. or am i missing something?




Another question, what's the difference between an IPS panel and an IPS LED panel? is it just marketing or is the IPS LED actually better? thanks

 

[aaksheytalwar]

30" ips.

 

[aigomorla]

I will say this. Do not get a korean 30" 2560x1600 monitor, there is no significant price advantage in doing so. You can get a real 30 inch from Dell for a comparable price, and with the benefits they offer in terms of long term support, real warranty in the USA, no question exchange, etc - the prospect of getting a 30 inch korean IPS is downright laughable. The 27 inch korean models may offer a price benefit even if I don't like them. The 30 inch models? Not so much.

whats laughable about a korean 30inch IPS?

Im fairly sure those korean OEM vendors are supplying samsung and LG with pannels, and selling off extra panels which those vendors arent buying.

Its a repeat of nike all over again.

Whats the difference between a korean nike and american nike? the shoe size printed on it... that was IT.

 

[Fx1]

Thanks Blackend, really informative stuff here.

Yes i've been looking @ IPS after the colors of one display i saw blew me away! My TN's colors look so bland compared to IPS.... i was just worried about the resolution and a video card that can keep up. As it is now, my GTX 670 & 4.4ghz 2500k burn through all RTS games and RPG games i play @ 1080p. Maybe 2560x1600 will be more of a challenge but i think my setup can handle it without going SLI or upgrading every year. As for AA, i recall it was invented for lower resolutions, higher resolutions don't have nearly as much jaggies and hence don't need AA, is that a correct assessment with your IPS? Also, i'd love to just get out of my chair and game from my bed or sofa using a controller for alot of the RPG games i play, but with a TN the viewing angle prevents me from doing that. IPS have no such limitation right?

Again, the only FPS i play regularly is BF3, and even then its just 20 min here and there, certainly not the main game i play. I play Dawn of War 2 mostly along with Skyrim. With that said, is BF3 on an IPS horrid?



i think we're all waiting for OLED, but the question is when will they become available @ reasonable price points? I'm guessing not until 2015-16, right? I wouldn't mind buying a cheaper IPS to hold me over until 2015 if that's the case. Now, you say a 1440p is easier to run, but 2560x1440 vs 2560x1600 is like a 3% difference in pixels, its basically the same resolution performance wise. or am i missing something?




Another question, what's the difference between an IPS panel and an IPS LED panel? is it just marketing or is the IPS LED actually better? thanks

Its much harder on the GPU at 1600p than 1440p but also the price difference in those monitors is huge.

I personally have been toying with the idea of 1440p vs 120hz 1080p for a while and i cant seem to find a decent monitor with low lag and decent pixel response in 27" 1440p. Personally i dont think IPS colours are that good. In fact i think they are awful. Then again i have an OLED Note 2 and a Plasma Panasonic TV so generally IPS cant compete.

Since the colours wont impress me that much then i have been leaning towards the benefits of 120hz monitors since they offer real performance benefits with fast response and motion blur free gaming.

 

[Fx1]

whats laughable about a korean 30inch IPS?

Im fairly sure those korean OEM vendors are supplying samsung and LG with pannels, and selling off extra panels which those vendors arent buying.

Its a repeat of nike all over again.

Whats the difference between a korean nike and american nike? the shoe size printed on it... that was IT.

There is more to a monitor than just the panel.

 

[Eureka]

I would get an IPS over a 120Hz.

120 Hz is only truly useful in FPS gaming. You'll notice the difference all around but it only really shines when it comes to high motion.

IPS means better, more vibrant colors all around, as well as better viewing angles. Also high resolution for non-gaming applications. You get more use out of an IPS than you would with a 120 Hz screen.

Since your primary game is a RTS, you won't notice the difference. Hell, I haven't even noticed the "ghosting" on an IPS while playing FPSes. You probably won't see notice it on BF3 until you've used it side-by-side with an extra low latency monitor. I would get a cheap IPS and not lose any sleep on it.

 

[Fx1]

Can anyone sugest a 1440p IPS that has low pixel response and also single digit input lag?

 

[aaksheytalwar]

Live in a world of make belief.

1. 1600p will give you 10% lower fps than 1440p across the board.

2. No plasma TV can compete with a dell u2711. You need to experience the difference to believe it. Try buying both first.

3. And comparing to a phone. Why don't you just admit that grapes are sour.

 

[Fx1]

Live in a world of make belief.

1. 1600p will give you 10% lower fps than 1440p across the board.

2. No plasma TV can compete with a dell u2711. You need to experience the difference to believe it. Try buying both first.

3. And comparing to a phone. Why don't you just admit that grapes are sour.

Firstly a Plasma TV can own a dell easily in certain areas. Blacks can suck pretty back and the dynamic contrast doesnt even work right even though its just a trick. Input lag is game breaking 30-40ms. The dell is an OK screen but lets not get confused here its not a brilliant screen.

Also im not talking about gaming on a plasma with a PC i was talking about dropping £1000 on a screen thats 60% the size of my TV and actually performs ALOT worse in many areas. Not cool!

1600p is harder than 10% FPS on the GPU. There is 10% or so more pixels but this doesnt scale with FPS.

And yes comparing to a phone is perfectly fine since the blacks and colours of the Galaxy Note 2 are a dream compared to any IPS screen on the market today. Why do you think OLED is the future? Sony and others are moving towards OLED because its superior technology.