Which is the best 120hz gaming monitor out there?

[Xed]

It had better be good because I just ordered it

Muahaha my evil plan to get random internet people to buy a Planar monitor is working!

 

[snuuggles]

On a side note, does anyone know what CRT monitor had the fastest horizontal refresh rate? I know the widely popular FW900 went up to 121khz. I could have sworn there was a European brand that went up to ~162khz.

Hmmm, I had a iiyama vision master pro 514 that could crank pretty fast. Wotta beast! I kind of think it was mostly limited by the resolution, eg at 16x12 is was >100 but at 1024x768 - forget it, I think I could easily push it over 140. But I just can't remember really, maybe I'm way off...

 

[Ben90]

Iiyama was the brand I was thinking of. Some quick googling shows your Vision Master Pro having a vertical refresh rate of 142Khz. What a beast indeed.

With tweaking the math puts it at about 170Hz for 1024x768 and ~110Hz for 16x12.
I'm sure the vertical refresh rate would constrain it, but since I haven't found and numbers for it: 640x480 would give ~285Hz. LOL

 

[snuuggles]

What's really terrible is that I just left it out on the curb for the trash a couple years ago because I got a fairly horrible (but big! 32"!) hdtv to game on. This was before I had ever heard of input lag etc.

BTW, Ben90, if you have a moment to give your thoughts on my question here I'd really be interested:

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=31737419&postcount=39

Thx!

 

[Vdubchaos]

I would like to see some 27" 120hz monitor that are not 1080p......

 

[Ben90]

Oh crap, I totally missed that post.

In doing some research, it may look like LCD panels already refresh line by line ALA CRT style. I always thought that they refreshed the entire image at once. If this is true, I might be able to apply some resolution tweaking to current LCD panels and lower the input delay even more.

But the main thing I was talking about is running the controller faster than the panel (and interface) can really keep up with. 240hz TVs already do this. Unless they built the panels with magic, there is no way those pixels are ghost free for every transition in under 4ms.

If a 240hz TV could actually accept a 240hz signal, we could build a monitor out of that and enjoy extremely low input delays at ridiculous refresh rates. There would be slight image degradation when a lot of changes happen within a few frames, but I would personally prefer that over a crisp 120hz image.

 

[Ben90]

Also, what a sad story about just leaving it out on the road. My family back in the day had some very high quality CRTs that we just gave away. That was as well before I knew about monitor performance and any of that.

Don't fret too much however. LCDs are getting close to reaching parity from a purely performance perspective. Image quality is leaps and bounds better though if you don't take color into consideration. Non-strait geometry pisses me off. Although aliasing looks a lot better on a CRT.

Despite how much money I dump into having the most competitive equipment possible, it doesn't keep my cheapo friend from giving me the spanks on most games. Damn you $10 intellimouse!!

 

[BababooeyHTJ]

I don't understand why anyone would pay $700+ for a 1080p TN panel.

 

[Petey!]

Cause it's the biggest panel you can get for 3D?

But I agree in principal... 1080 on a 27" is stretching it.

 

[Baasha]

the simple fact that all 120hz monitors are still 1080P means they should be avoided for the moment.

Until there are 30" monitors @ 2560x1600 AND 120hz, they're not worth it IMO.

 

[BababooeyHTJ]

Cause it's the biggest panel you can get for 3D?

But I agree in principal... 1080 on a 27" is stretching it.

I bought a 28" 1920x1200 monitor for $250. I just couldn't see spending three times that for a smaller display.

 

[Petey!]

I bought a 28" 1920x1200 monitor for $250. I just couldn't see spending three times that for a smaller display.

Well when you play FPS 120hz makes a huge difference.

 

[Emultra]

My monitor (sig) is 1680x1050 on 22", bu that way I get the fps needed to really feed it.

 

[BababooeyHTJ]

Well when you play FPS 120hz makes a huge difference.

Enough to be worth three times what I spent for my display for a downgrade in size and a sidegrade in image quality?

 

[SirPauly]

Imho,

If one isn't interested in 3d stereo, then there isn't much value but to play games with 120hz and 3d Stereo flexibility may be appealing considering there isn't anything larger with these abilities and that usually translates into a price premium, considering we're still in the early adoption phase, so-to-speak.

The great aspects about having more choice is other 120hz monitors, though smaller, are slowly dropping in price and becoming more mainstream. Hopefully, in the future there may not be premiums for having 120hz and may be considered more-so default abilities, with many more gamers enjoying the strengths of 120hz and 3d stereo flexibility.

 

[edplayer]

Until there are 30" monitors @ 2560x1600 AND 120hz, they're not worth it IMO.

if your opinion was in charge or a company it would probably drive it out of business. Most potential customers are thinking of gaming or watching 3D movies/gaming.

 

[Ben90]

Enough to be worth three times what I spent for my display for a downgrade in size and a sidegrade in image quality?

For myself and many others, yes.
Its really not even a question of if its worth the price difference for me. I will not use any 60hz panel. Before the 2233RZ came out, CRTs were my only option.

There is no reason to be any type of snob on this forum. If you posted the model number of your monitor, the IPS-snobs would be like "omg what horrible image quality!" We all have different wants and desires. Image quality, pixel count, and screen size are not very important to me. Do not pitch your view as the only possible one.

 

[snuuggles]

But the main thing I was talking about is running the controller faster than the panel (and interface) can really keep up with. 240hz TVs already do this. Unless they built the panels with magic, there is no way those pixels are ghost free for every transition in under 4ms.

If a 240hz TV could actually accept a 240hz signal, we could build a monitor out of that and enjoy extremely low input delays at ridiculous refresh rates. There would be slight image degradation when a lot of changes happen within a few frames, but I would personally prefer that over a crisp 120hz image.

Thanks! I, too, missed your updates until just now. Yeah, I'm still not exactly sure what is stopping the tv manufacturers from putting a DVI-D or DP input on thier TVs and allowing the higher input. Seems almost inevitable that one of them will just do it one of these days...