IPS Monitor Gaming - Very Good

[OVerLoRDI]

Yeah, this. There are very few, if any IPS monitors over 90Hz.

Posting this from my 110hz Catleap 2B IPS display. There are few, but there are some

 

[cmdrdredd]

Posting this from my 110hz Catleap 2B IPS display. There are few, but there are some

That's not a native refresh for the panel as it was designed and built in Korea. They are all 60Hz panels, every one of them. The fact that you can run them above these specs with varying results doesn't change that.

How strange, I can run mine at 75hz just fine.

See above

 

[Aithos]

Usually when people talk about TN's giving smoother performance, they are referring to 120/144hz monitors, not 60hz. If using a 60hz TN monitor, the only benefit is less ghosting or motion blur.

Actually the benefit is that the screen refreshes twice as quickly therefore giving you more accurate positioning AND smoother motion (less motion blur). The fact is this: on a 60hz screen there is a minimum of 16ms of lag between every frame, on a 120hz screen that's halved to 8ms. Framerates are never even, even if you got exactly 60 frames per second that does not mean that the frames are generated by your video card exactly every 16ms. Half of those might be twice as fast and half twice as slow, thus averaging to 60fps but arriving in different bursts. The 120hz monitor will display frames up to twice as fast as the 60hz, resulting in a significant gaming advantange in positioning even at 60hz or less.

It's also much easier on your eyes for long stretches because a higher refresh rate is smoother visually and the reduced motion blur also impacts eye strain. There is also the fact that nearly every IPS monitor on the planet has additional processing involved that most people refer to as input lag (which is actually a separate issue) and even if you can't tell it affects you. I have personally played on systems with an IPS monitor and I can't stand it, likewise I couldn't stand a wireless mouse because I noticed a delay. I played semi-professional counterstrike and had the opportunity to go pro (I turned it down due to it being too much of a time committment with very little financial return).

No offense to previous posters, but no serious competitive gamer would ever play on an IPS panel that wasn't using a bypass board (which eliminates processing and input lag) and was overclocked to 120hz. There is a reason every professional match these days is sponsored by BENQ or Asus or another 120 or 144hz monitor company. It's the biggest change in gaming on a PC in ages, finally being able to regain framerates like CRTs.

edit:

That's not a native refresh for the panel as it was designed and built in Korea. They are all 60Hz panels, every one of them. The fact that you can run them above these specs with varying results doesn't change that.



See above

The thing you're ignoring is that even though they are designed to run at 60hz they are running at a true 120hz (in the cases where they can reach that high). It's been proven countless times through framerate tools, it isn't just saying it's running 120hz, it IS running 120hz. Most monitors with the bypass board (the ones that are overclockable) can easily hit 96hz, which for gaming is still a HUGE benefit. A significant portion of them can hit 120hz, the only downside being a slight lowing of your brightness if you have the PLS panel from Samsung and a higher chance of image retention if you aren't careful.

Edit2: Just for clarity sake, overclocking is a real performance gain. The entire point of overclocking (monitor, cpu, gpu, ram) is to get gains in performance at the expense of something else (power, heat, brightness, longevity, etc). You can claim it isn't a "native" 120hz, but so what? If my cpu is a 3.5ghz but I overclock it to 4.5ghz does it matter that it didn't come as a "native" 4.5ghz? No. All that means is the manufacturer didn't want to have to warranty the product at those specs, it has literally no meaning otherwise. Given that running the Korean panels at 120hz introduces slight picture quality drops and a decent risk for image retention it is no surprise that cheap offbrand Korean companies don't want to advertise and warranty those specs. So yeah...

 

[cmdrdredd]

Yet you didn't address the fact that the panel is built only to accept and display 60hz. This is the specs of the panel from LG or Samsung or wherever else for such displays. Boards that adjust the pixel clock limit can introduce various issues at certain values. Frame skipping being a notorious one.

It may work and it may not but calling it a "120hz panel" is false which is my point. When you can go to retail (amazon, newegg etc) and buy a name branded (Asus, Samsung, BenQ, Acer, Dell, Apple) display with full warranty that is listed as 2560x1440 @ 120hz then we will have something. As it is, you have to hand pick which specific monitors from Korea will actually function properly above 60hz.

 

[Aithos]

Yet you didn't address the fact that the panel is built only to accept and display 60hz. This is the specs of the panel from LG or Samsung or wherever else for such displays. Boards that adjust the pixel clock limit can introduce various issues at certain values. Frame skipping being a notorious one.

It may work and it may not but calling it a "120hz panel" is false which is my point. When you can go to retail (amazon, newegg etc) and buy a name branded (Asus, Samsung, BenQ, Acer, Dell, Apple) display with full warranty that is listed as 2560x1440 @ 120hz then we will have something. As it is, you have to hand pick which specific monitors from Korea will actually function properly above 60hz.

The panel is not built to only accept and display 60hz, it is rated and warranted to run at 60hz. Just like CPUs are rated and warranted to run at the clock speeds Intel and AMD advertise but can easily and safely be overclocked. Calling it a 120hz panel is only false in the sense that it is not a panel rated for 120hz.

And yes, you are correct that it *can* introduce frame skips and visual artifacts. That's part of the gamble in that not every one of the panels can reach 120hz. However, I'd say over 90% of them can reach 96hz without any frame skipping or visual artifacts and a significant portion of them can reach 120hz. As I said before, it's been proven in countless posts over multiple forums that these panels are not frame skipping, they are not faking 120hz, they are running it exactly as any of the TN panels from Asus, BenQ or Samsung would.

You are also incorrect in saying that you have to handpick a monitor to overclock. You only need to know which models specifically use what the community is calling the bypass board. If you want specifics here you go: QNIX QX2710 led evolution II, XSTAR DP2710, Yamasaki Catleap 2b. Specifically you want the models that ONLY use dual link DVI, the boards that include displayport or other inputs are NOT using the bypass board and will not overclock. They also introduce input lag like other IPS panels which is why US companies haven't jumped on board this yet, because input lag is a bigger problem than 120hz on the panel and US consumers expect a name brand monitor to include more than a single input these days.

It works, and it works perfectly. They also cost under 400 dollars (with the exception of the Catleap 2B which was the first one found to work and is so more rare these days). You're arguing about something you can't possibly win because it's irrational to think that because these are rated as 120hz that makes it "false".

Edit: Let me give you a further example, HDMI cables are rated for certain speeds. Have you bought the Monster 1000 series HDMI cables for your HDTV? If you run a 3d device by your logic it will only run with a cable RATED for the correct HDMI standard with at least 10gbps speed. You wouldn't have bought a monoprice cable that isn't rated for that speed would you? I mean, it might work but it isn't rated for it so therefore it wasn't intended to work that way and you can't use it. See how stupid that sounds? I buy Monster cables because the rating on the cable is what they guarantee their cable will run as a MINIMUM level of performance. That is what a technology rating is, a minimum performance rating. It doesn't mean that the device, cable, monitor or cpu won't perform to a much higher level, only that that company won't guarantee it. That's it. Any company who uses a "max" performance rating is BS and you shouldn't buy their product because it's idiotic. If you don't understand now there isn't any helping you. What those panels are rated for means exactly jack shit. The fact is they will run 120hz flawlessly with very little effort and a mild risk of image retention that if you run a screensaver and don't leave your screen on a static image all day isn't a problem.

 

[cmdrdredd]

You again miss the point...

If they were 120hz panels they wouldn't need special boards and Dell would be selling them. Until then the market for TN 120hz and now 144hz monitors will continue to be the big thing for gamers.

Unless g-sync takes off and then it shouldn't matter as much.

 

[bystander36]

Actually the benefit is that the screen refreshes twice as quickly therefore giving you more accurate positioning AND smoother motion (less motion blur). The fact is this: on a 60hz screen there is a minimum of 16ms of lag between every frame, on a 120hz screen that's halved to 8ms. Framerates are never even, even if you got exactly 60 frames per second that does not mean that the frames are generated by your video card exactly every 16ms. Half of those might be twice as fast and half twice as slow, thus averaging to 60fps but arriving in different bursts. The 120hz monitor will display frames up to twice as fast as the 60hz, resulting in a significant gaming advantange in positioning even at 60hz or less.

It's also much easier on your eyes for long stretches because a higher refresh rate is smoother visually and the reduced motion blur also impacts eye strain. There is also the fact that nearly every IPS monitor on the planet has additional processing involved that most people refer to as input lag (which is actually a separate issue) and even if you can't tell it affects you. I have personally played on systems with an IPS monitor and I can't stand it, likewise I couldn't stand a wireless mouse because I noticed a delay. I played semi-professional counterstrike and had the opportunity to go pro (I turned it down due to it being too much of a time committment with very little financial return).

No offense to previous posters, but no serious competitive gamer would ever play on an IPS panel that wasn't using a bypass board (which eliminates processing and input lag) and was overclocked to 120hz. There is a reason every professional match these days is sponsored by BENQ or Asus or another 120 or 144hz monitor company. It's the biggest change in gaming on a PC in ages, finally being able to regain framerates like CRTs.

Did you even read the quote you quoted? Here it is again:

Usually when people talk about TN's giving smoother performance, they are referring to 120/144hz monitors, not 60hz. If using a 60hz TN monitor, the only benefit is less ghosting or motion blur.

I was pointing out to the OP, that when people do talk about how smooth TN panels are, they are NOT talking about 60hz monitors.

They are talking about 120hz monitors, which results in a smoother experiences.

I further mentioned that the only benefit from a 60hz TN screen is better response times resulting in less motion blur.

It was everything you went on about, just in a much more condensed form.

 

[Aithos]

You again miss the point...

If they were 120hz panels they wouldn't need special boards and Dell would be selling them. Until then the market for TN 120hz and now 144hz monitors will continue to be the big thing for gamers.

Unless g-sync takes off and then it shouldn't matter as much.

They aren't special boards, they are actually really basic ones. The reason they work to overclock is because they don't have a scaler so you have to run in native resolutions and they don't have the extra processing that comes along with multiple forms of inputs. You just don't have the first clue about the monitors and are clearly grasping at straws at this point because you didn't bother to educate yourself about the subject you are arguing. I've addressed every single possible flaw in your argument, just shut up and stop wasting my time.

But again, for the sake of being thorough, since you ignored it the first time: Dell doesn't sell them because eliminating input lag while retaining a scaler and multiple inputs, which an AMERICAN MARKET MANUFACTURER IS EXPECTED TO HAVE is currently not possible with the technology behind an IPS panel. It works because the Korean off-brands don't give a damn about those features, they just want the cheapest 8-bit IPS panel on the market and resourceful overclockers have taken advantage of that fact to do something that no one else is currently capable of.

Edit: You say that I don't get the point. I do get the point, your point is that because it isn't RATED for 120hz it's meaningless, that until a manufacturer RATES a monitor for 120hz you don't care and it doesn't count. You think there is something special or aftermarket about these monitors that magically enables them to overclock. There isn't. It's the cheapest panel these Korean companies could get a hold of and the cheapest bare-bones no feature PCB in the world and that means that it doesn't have the same input lag or bandwidth issues because it has no scaler or visual processing. There is a reason the companies who sell these check for compatibility with your video card because even some modern cards can't run those monitors. It's a niche market of a NICHE market. But I've literally shredded any argument you've put forth, you have MISSED MY POINT. The point is that I don't give a damn what something is rated for, I care what it does. Now I'm done.

Did you even read the quote you quoted? Here it is again:

I was pointing out to the OP, that when people do talk about how smooth TN panels are, they are NOT talking about 60hz monitors.

They are talking about 120hz monitors, which results in a smoother experiences.

I further mentioned that the only benefit from a 60hz TN screen is better response times resulting in less motion blur.

It was everything you went on about, just in a much more condensed form.

And you, your post was very convoluted for as short as it was. It seemed you were implying that 120hz was only good for reducing motion blur, you didn't mention response time at all...and as an aside, response time has nothing to do with refresh rate. I pointed out, correctly I might add, that the more important part of 120hz has literally nothing to do with motion blur but the speed at which the panel is capable of displaying frames.

Without a picture the best way I can explain is this:

The person is playing an FPS game, on a 60 hz monitor they see this:

A ------ A ------ A ------ A

on a 120hz monitor they see this:
A -- A -- A -- A -- A -- A -- A -- A

Ignoring all the extra spaces I put in the point is you see each step a person makes twice as fast and so therefore are much more likely to make an accurate shot because your monitor more accurately reflects where the person actually is than on a 60hz monitor. Yes, there are other factors like lag, input lag, etc. But the point is the gameplay experience is MUCH better, the visual benefit of smoothness, eye strain and less motion blur is all secondary to the PERFORMANCE benefit you get.

You completely missed the point of my post if you don't understand that.

 

[bystander36]

And you, your post was very convoluted for as short as it was. It seemed you were implying that 120hz was only good for reducing motion blur, you didn't mention response time at all...and as an aside, response time has nothing to do with refresh rate. I pointed out, correctly I might add, that the more important part of 120hz has literally nothing to do with motion blur but the speed at which the panel is capable of displaying frames.

Without a picture the best way I can explain is this:

The person is playing an FPS game, on a 60 hz monitor they see this:

A ------ A ------ A ------ A

on a 120hz monitor they see this:
A -- A -- A -- A -- A -- A -- A -- A

Ignoring all the extra spaces I put in the point is you see each step a person makes twice as fast and so therefore are much more likely to make an accurate shot because your monitor more accurately reflects where the person actually is than on a 60hz monitor. Yes, there are other factors like lag, input lag, etc. But the point is the gameplay experience is MUCH better, the visual benefit of smoothness, eye strain and less motion blur is all secondary to the PERFORMANCE benefit you get.

You completely missed the point of my post if you don't understand that.

Duh!!! Look at the post again (I assume English is your first language?). I wasn't trying to explain every detail. I pointed out that it is the 120/144hz monitors that people are talking about when they talk about how smooth TN displays are. Is that not clear? 120hz is smooth. 60hz is not as smooth. That is clearly what was written. I do not see why you keep telling me I'm wrong by saying the same thing I did. We agree, 120hz is smoother. I said 120hz is smoother. Can I be more clear?

I also mentioned that the only advantage a 60hz TN display has, over the IPS screen (assumed, as he was comparing the two), is the lower motion blur.

Jesus. I was not writing a technical novel. I get it. I experience it every day. I have a 120hz TN monitor, and I would not trade it.

I was explaining to the OP that his comparison was not what most people are comparing, when they talk about how TN displays are smoother than IPS displays. By the quotes, other than yours, everyone seemed to understand and agree.

 

[PPB]

That's not a native refresh for the panel as it was designed and built in Korea. They are all 60Hz panels, every one of them. The fact that you can run them above these specs with varying results doesn't change that.



See above

There isnt such a thing as a 60hz panel. Panels can do a handfull of different refresh rates based on the resolution they are ran at. My AH-IPS panel can do 75 hz just fine. And nope, its not one of those Korea monitors.

 

[LOUISSSSS]

i'm not sure about all this back and fourth, but i'm a pretty experienced CS Player. It is about the fastest paced game out there. And definitely the fastest game I've ever played. I play just as well with my current IPS Monitor than on my last TN and VA Panels.

With the cheap IPS Panels these days I suggest everyone take advantage of the IQ of IPS

 

[bystander36]

i'm not sure about all this back and fourth, but i'm a pretty experienced CS Player. It is about the fastest paced game out there. And definitely the fastest game I've ever played. I play just as well with my current IPS Monitor than on my last TN and VA Panels.

With the cheap IPS Panels these days I suggest everyone take advantage of the IQ of IPS

Were your previous TN panels 120hz or 144hz? Have you used one of those with Lightboost and 120hz? If not, you haven't experienced what a TN panel can do.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Were your previous TN panels 120hz or 144hz? Have you used one of those with Lightboost and 120hz? If not, you haven't experienced what a TN panel can do.

I haven't owned but I have seen what a TN can't do. Which includes matching an IPS' color and viewing angles.

 

[bystander36]

I'm not even saying whether he would prefer one or the other, just that by his descriptions, I doubt he has compared to one of those 120/144hz monitors with or without Lightboost.

 

[Wall Street]

I think that as a community we are going to have to agree to disagree.

There are some people who play games like Streetfighter IV or do flick rails in Quake who just want the fastest panel possible for competitive purposes. These people often play on low settings anyways so it isn't like the worse color quality of the panels matters. It is worth noting that these being faster doesn't mean that other panels are extremely slow to the point one would notice unless viewing both side by side.

There are some people who prefer aesthetics over purely competitive concerns. These people may even use their monitors for movies. They would prefer the IPS. It is worth noting that even a TN panel can look acceptable when calibrated even if it can't touch an IPS.

Nothing wrong with either view, but the high refresh rate TN panels are well known to be the fastest and the IPS panels are known to have better viewing angles, colors and are available at higher res.

 

[LOUISSSSS]

For my uses, i guess i'm just very happy with spending the $20-30 more for my $150 AR 24" IPS Panel. I could've gotten a decent TN for the same price but i figure for my case the IPS was the right selection.

I use this monitor for CS (fairly competitively), 3rd person gaming, and other new FPS games. I also browse the internet and enjoy watching youtube and movies @ 1080p resolution. I don't do much else.

 

[Aithos]

i'm not sure about all this back and fourth, but i'm a pretty experienced CS Player. It is about the fastest paced game out there. And definitely the fastest game I've ever played. I play just as well with my current IPS Monitor than on my last TN and VA Panels.

With the cheap IPS Panels these days I suggest everyone take advantage of the IQ of IPS

Your opinion of "I play just as well" is ridiculous. First of all, if you do actually play exactly the same...then you aren't at a skill level high enough to matter for the discussion. Even without considering 120hz and comparing 60hz TN to IPS, the IPS is going to have significant input and processing lag. The only way you wouldn't notice a difference is if you had a crappy TN panel on old technology that ALSO had bad input lag. If you were playing on a good gaming 60hz panel and then went to an IPS you'd *hopefully* notice a difference. If not, then again, you're below the skill level where it makes any difference.

I haven't owned but I have seen what a TN can't do. Which includes matching an IPS' color and viewing angles.

Your opinion in this discussion is not needed. If you haven't owned or used a 120hz panel then we don't care what you think. The discussion is about gaming on an IPS panel vs a TN panel, more specifically a 120hz panel. Also, viewing angles are meaningless unless you're running more than two monitors because from directly in front at a proper height it makes almost no difference until you get bigger than 27". As for picture quality, many of the TN panels with PROPER calibration look nearly as good as an IPS panel.

The people in here who think an IPS is as good as a TN for gaming wouldn't be able to tell the picture quality difference of properly calibrated panels anyway, since apparently their eyes suck and they can't even see how badly their monitor lags.

For my uses, i guess i'm just very happy with spending the $20-30 more for my $150 AR 24" IPS Panel. I could've gotten a decent TN for the same price but i figure for my case the IPS was the right selection.

I use this monitor for CS (fairly competitively), 3rd person gaming, and other new FPS games. I also browse the internet and enjoy watching youtube and movies @ 1080p resolution. I don't do much else.

Let's get something straight here: You don't play competitively so don't pretend you do. I'd wager that you "take it seriously" in pubs or maybe even ESEA or maybe you played in an open league once with some friends. If you actually played comeptitively then you wouldn't game on an IPS panel because you'd be capable of noticing the horrible lag on your monitor. Between input lag and processing lag most IPS panels are 30+ ms of lag, that's as bad as doubling your ping where registration is concerned and if you can't notice a difference between 30-60 ping then you aren't competitive.

As I stated earlier, I played semi-professionally. I had the chance to go pro, we were sponsored, we played in leagues like CEVO-P where you had to pay to enter, we traveled to LAN tournaments. We were at the highest level of CAL when it wasn't a joke (think pre-2006). I don't use wireless mice because I noticed the minor delay and its effect on registration. I would NEVER even consider an IPS (besides one of the handful of Korean panels which lack all the extra PCB hardware that causes the input and processing lag) because it's a magnitude worse.

People just need to stop posting in this thread, no one is going to agree but it's a fact that IPS gaming is inferior to TN. There isn't a single gaming tournament or league in the world that uses IPS panels. Period. It isn't a discussion, it isn't up for debate, it's significantly worse.

Whether you care or not isn't the point. If you don't care or you can't tell, FINE. That's great. I'm glad you're happy with your monitor. But don't sit in this forum where other people look for opinions and say that because you either can't tell or don't care that it doesn't matter. It does, and someone else who does care is going to end up wasting money because of what you people say.

Also, if you spent 150 dollars on an IPS panel then you got an e-ips panel which isn't even an 8-bit panel and is actually not really any better than a TN as far as picture quality. I'm using one right now at work and without having calibrated it (I don't have tools available to use here since we can't install software) my home TN panel looks significantly better. A "decent" TN panel costs around 300 bucks. You can't get a "decent" monitor under 200 dollars. Period.


Edit: Just so I'm perfectly clear, I'm glad you like your monitor and you're happy with it. I just get frustrated and annoyed when people post opinion on a forum where people look for purchase advice about a product. You all post subjective "it feels like" or "I play as well" or "it's good enough" statements as though they are fact. Numbers are facts. The numbers say that IPS panels are worse many times over when compared to TN panels for gaming without even considering the difference a 120hz panel makes.

I strongly suggest every one of you FPS gamers save up and buy an Asus VG248QE as a second monitor to try with your gaming. Keep your IPS panels or whatever you have for daily browsing, but invest 150 bucks in a calibration tool (like a colormunki) and then after you've gamed on both calibrated monitors for a month you tell me you can't see any difference in performance between the two. It would be even better if you waited for G-Sync on that monitor next year since Asus is including the supported software for lightboost on it by default, I'm not sure if it's nVidia exclusive or not yet but lightboost hacks are what give you CRT like clarity.

 

[AdamK47]

I've used TN panels for years prior to IPS. Put up with the poor colors and color shifting. I'm simply not going to game on anything less than a 30" IPS @ 2560x1600. It would be silly taking a step back to something inferior.

 

[Aithos]

I've used TN panels for years prior to IPS. Put up with the poor colors and color shifting. I'm simply not going to game on anything less than a 30" IPS @ 2560x1600. It would be silly taking a step back to something inferior.

And as long as you understand that you're sacrificing performance for picture quality...GOOD FOR YOU. Calling it "inferior" is pretty silly though, inferior how? IPS is inferior for gaming performance, for lag, for response time and for refresh rate. TN is inferior for viewing angle, resolution and in the case of true 8-bit panels color range.

However, half the people in this thread have 6-bit e-ips panels that DON'T have better color, a minor improvement in viewing angle and DON'T have a higher resolution. An e-ips gets all the negatives of IPS without any of the benefits, it's honestly the black sheep of the monitor world.

 

[JeffMD]

I cant recall the last time I played a game at 1080p that lingered above 45fps much anyways. My last dell monitor was ips and currently I am using a 1080p 32 inch panasonic tv just fine, I much enjoy the better color depth. Only complaint on the tv is it does dislike the small windows fonts, I set my scale factor to %125 to fix it.

 

[Wall Street]

From Anandtech's review today by Chris Heinonen:

From the MX229Q review last month:

I hope that Chris can convince ASUS to send a VG248QE or get a BenQ XL2420TE to add to the charts.

 

[BTRY B 529th FA BN]

I hope that Chris can convince ASUS to send a VG248QE or get a BenQ XL2420TE to add to the charts.

Yeah, really

 

[Aithos]

From Anandtech's review today by Chris Heinonen:

From the MX229Q review last month:

I hope that Chris can convince ASUS to send a VG248QE or get a BenQ XL2420TE to add to the charts.

You won't generally see those panels on charts like that because TN panels with fast response times (1-2ms) are basically lag free. At that point what you're dealing with is the refresh rate of the panel (60hz is 16ms between frames) and not a significant additional amount of lag. Short of a CRT which is considered basically lag free at high refresh rates you can't get better than the TN panel.

The IPS graphics you have posted here are in addition to the refresh rate limitations with 60hz. So when you talk about an Asus VG248QE you have a base lag between frames of 8ms + your pixel response 1ms, when you look at even the best IPS the Asus there you get 16ms + 9ms with no input lag to speak of...which is unheard of everywhere else. The processing lag is usually the bigger issue which is what they are showing by the "pixel response", it isn't the GTG response time, that's a case of bad naming convention. What they mean is response of the pixels due to processing.

So when you have an IPS that claims 6ms GTG, that does not account for the processing that goes on behind the scenes. So either way you're dealing with a significant amount of lag on top of your ping. Add in anywhere from 15-75ms of lag from your isp and you're giving yourself a significant handicap.

Again, it doesn't mean you can't play that way or that you can't be decent at it. It means that you're not playing to the level you could be. It's all hypothetical, but I've personally seen a difference in monitors, in a gaming mouse, in a good mousepad. I won't ever play competitive games while intentionally choosing worse performance. I'd rather the "feel" and experience be better than the graphical quality, I enjoy the competition more than the graphics. If I want graphics I'll play single player.

 

[MrK6]

You won't generally see those panels on charts like that because TN panels with fast response times (1-2ms) are basically lag free. At that point what you're dealing with is the refresh rate of the panel (60hz is 16ms between frames) and not a significant additional amount of lag. Short of a CRT which is considered basically lag free at high refresh rates you can't get better than the TN panel.

The IPS graphics you have posted here are in addition to the refresh rate limitations with 60hz. So when you talk about an Asus VG248QE you have a base lag between frames of 8ms + your pixel response 1ms, when you look at even the best IPS the Asus there you get 16ms + 9ms with no input lag to speak of...which is unheard of everywhere else. The processing lag is usually the bigger issue which is what they are showing by the "pixel response", it isn't the GTG response time, that's a case of bad naming convention. What they mean is response of the pixels due to processing.

So when you have an IPS that claims 6ms GTG, that does not account for the processing that goes on behind the scenes. So either way you're dealing with a significant amount of lag on top of your ping. Add in anywhere from 15-75ms of lag from your isp and you're giving yourself a significant handicap.

Again, it doesn't mean you can't play that way or that you can't be decent at it. It means that you're not playing to the level you could be. It's all hypothetical, but I've personally seen a difference in monitors, in a gaming mouse, in a good mousepad. I won't ever play competitive games while intentionally choosing worse performance. I'd rather the "feel" and experience be better than the graphical quality, I enjoy the competition more than the graphics. If I want graphics I'll play single player.

Anywho, as you can see in this thread, some people have been sold hook, line, and sinker on faster refresh while these companies are laughing all the way to the bank.

I lost it at a "good mouse pad." :awe:

 

[sm625]

A "decent" TN panel costs around 300 bucks. You can't get a "decent" monitor under 200 dollars. Period.

Your whole post reeks of snide pompousness, but this remark here is just so far outside the mainstream that it is nonsensical. The vast majority of people would disagree that you "can't" get a "decent" monitor for under $200.

And it is a fact that 10ms makes not a damn difference in the world and nobody is going to notice it. Human reaction time is 150-250 mS. All you get from spending an extra $200 on a monitor is 10mS at most. It is factually insignificant.

http://www.humanbenchmark.com/tests/reactiontime/

Go there and do that test then try telling me that the best monitor in the world is going to give you a significantly better score than a $200 panel. I'd be surprised if it improved your score by 5%. What is 5%? Nothing... The fact is that your own reaction time in mS naturally varies by an order of magnitude more than the difference in mS between a $200 monitor and a $400 monitor.