Are gaming monitors worth it?

[shortylickens]

I'm at the point where everything is good. Dont need a better monitor unless I go way bigger. Like 27 inches at 2560x1440 or something.

 

[TridenT]

If you're doing competitive FPS then they're worth it from what I gather. Get something with good g2g refresh rates and very low input latency. 120-144hz is nice from what I hear too but you need the rig to push 120-144+ fps for that game, which can be difficult for new titles...

 

[Whitestar127]

It's a mixed bag. There are a couple of things to consider.

- Do your eyes care? You may not even notice things like motion blur, stutter or differences in color quality, or you may pay little attention to it. Besides, I suppose one can get used to just about any type of monitor after staring at it long enough.

- FPS! Both in terms of performance and locked framerates. Too many modern games have a locked framerate of 60. A 120hz monitor is of no use then (if less motion blur is what you are looking for). Also, to make full use of Lightboost or ULMB (technologies that offer much less motion blur) the framerate needs to be at least 75 all the time, preferably 100+. Even today most games with cutting edge graphics cannot manage that.

I would consider what games you are going to play and what other things you are going to use the monitor for.

The best thing would be have a look at the different monitors with your own eyes, if possible. Then you would be in a better position to decide whether or not what I mentioned above is at all important to you.

 

[cmdrdredd]

I've never owned a real gaming monitor but from my research they may not be for me because they are usually TN panels which aren't the best at viewing angles and color reproduction. IPS screens aren't as fast but I like the colors on them better.

You don't always need to be able to push 120fps to get the benefit of less motion blur either.

 

[HumblePie]

VA panels usually far as good if not better than IPS panels for color and contrast. Problem is, they are usually much slower on refresh than IPS. There are a few exceptions though.

I still have my two Soyo 24" MVA panels though from when the company went out of business and dump the price on them. There are some cheapie electrical components in them, namely the power supplies in them, but the panels were freaking awesome. They had almost zero input lag with really high refresh rates and a color/clarity that was as good as damn near any IPS out there. They did use LCD lighting though and draw a bit more power while producing more heat.

I also have a Dell u2413 as well. Decent for most gaming at least.

Also, most people don't know that the problem with IPS for fast games in this thread has little to do with refresh rate. It has to do with input lag which is something different than refresh rate.


I have been keeping my eye out for some decent 27" monitors though that do 120Hz with low input lag and at least IPS visual quality. Couple of the Korean ones are very very close, but hard to get sometimes.

 

[slightlyhuman]

I don't game much lately but still play quake 2 a lot. Going from 60hz regular LCD to 144hz asus 24"(using the lightboost 120hz hack) was night and day difference for me. it definitely improved my fragging power.

 

[smackababy]

The only advantage of IPS, for me, isn't gaming related. You can still get 16:10 aspect ratio, which is great for work. With that said, I have a 120hz gaming monitor and I love it. It is great for fast paced games. The color reproduction is really a non issue for most people (unless you're doing some professional, you can't tell) and the viewing angles also mean nothing for me. I don't view my monitor at some strange angle, as I sit in front of it like a normal person.

With that, go to a store and take a look at each type (TN, IPS, VA) and determine how hard it is to find a good CRT on craigslist. >_<

 

[Midwayman]

It's a mixed bag. There are a couple of things to consider.

- Do your eyes care? You may not even notice things like motion blur, stutter or differences in color quality, or you may pay little attention to it. Besides, I suppose one can get used to just about any type of monitor after staring at it long enough.

- FPS! Both in terms of performance and locked framerates. Too many modern games have a locked framerate of 60. A 120hz monitor is of no use then (if less motion blur is what you are looking for). Also, to make full use of Lightboost or ULMB (technologies that offer much less motion blur) the framerate needs to be at least 75 all the time, preferably 100+. Even today most games with cutting edge graphics cannot manage that.

If you have a lower end rig something like G-sync (or the free sync once it starts coming out) are probably better options. However I think every monitor that supports g sync at this point also supports the strobing (ulmb, etc) Once price gets down on variable refresh monitors, its something I would suggest to anyone who has any interest in gaming.

 

[DominionSeraph]

This is still my favorite test, and it doesn't require a big PC
http://www.testufo.com/#test=photo&photo=toronto-map.png&pps=960&pursuit=0&height=0

Wow, what's wrong with my monitor? I'm getting horrible blur/stuttering with anything but 60Hz.

 

[Midwayman]

Wow, what's wrong with my monitor? I'm getting horrible blur/stuttering with anything but 60Hz.

Are you saying you *don't* have blurring at 60hz? If you aren't on a CRT, or a strobbing montior you'll probably see lots of blurring. A 120/144hz will be clearer, but any 60hz monitor will probably be a mess.

 

[DominionSeraph]

^^ CRT
Hmmm, apparently neither Chrome nor Firefox can detect beyond 60Hz on that page for me. It's weird that at a VSYNC'd 120Hz, showing 60FPS it's still awful. There's two images superimposed, offset by about an eighth of an inch.

 

[DarthPader]

I just love the new Asus monitor with IPS and 1ms GtG, a real gaming deal

http://www.asus.com/Monitors_Projectors/VS278Q

 

[Miklebud]

I just picked up a BenQ XL2411Z and I'm very happy with the results! So much smoother and clean versus my old HP 2207 and Samsung 245T. No ghosting or blur in FPS games. To my eyes, I'm pretty sensitive to ghosting, so 144hz is a huge difference. I won't be going back to anything less than 100hz (which is what I play BF4 on, a nice compromise for my 280x). And BlurReduction (Lightboost) is the reason why I didn't go for the overclockable Qnix PLS panels. I'm glad I went this route.

 

[Midwayman]

I just love the new Asus monitor with IPS and 1ms GtG, a real gaming deal

http://www.asus.com/Monitors_Projectors/VS278Q

Response time is mostly meaningless in terms of motion clarity. You'll get far better results with upping the refresh rate, and even better with some sort of strobing tech. The issue is that no matter how fast the image changes, it still is displaying the wrong image the vast majority of the time. With eye tracking this leads to a smeared image on the retina. Going to a higher refresh means the right image is displayed more often. Using strobing means the image is only displayed when it is correct.

I just picked up a BenQ XL2411Z and I'm very happy with the results! So much smoother and clean versus my old HP 2207 and Samsung 245T. No ghosting or blur in FPS games. To my eyes, I'm pretty sensitive to ghosting, so 144hz is a huge difference. I won't be going back to anything less than 100hz (which is what I play BF4 on, a nice compromise for my 280x). And BlurReduction (Lightboost) is the reason why I didn't go for the overclockable Qnix PLS panels. I'm glad I went this route.

I have that one. Go into your user.cfg and set a frame cap. Set your refresh = frame cap for best results.

 

[VashHT]

I bought an Eizo 2333 after the monitor in my sig died. I tried a couple 120hz panels but the TN viewing angles just bothered me too much, I can deal with the washed out colors, but I was noticing the poor viewing angles looking at it straight on pretty much. Anyway the Eizo monitor has less ghosting than my doublesight one did and the colors and viewing angle are great so it makes me happy.