7 ms·

I'm not too impressed honestly. 120 fps is the minimum for me when it comes to playing games. Then again I was used to 120hz monitors on CRTs in the early 2000

I'm not too impressed honestly. 120 fps is the minimum for me when it comes to playing games. Then again I was used to 120hz monitors on CRTs in the early 2000s with 0 input lag. I would only ever consider 4k for normal desktop usage but there's no way I would pay anything for 60 fps and we all know 4k monitors will be stupidly expensive for at least 10 years.

sillysaurus2 13y ago
It always seemed strange that monitors aim for 60fps. That seems like a recipe for input lag. They could aim for 90fps, because when they fail to meet that, at least they'll still achieve 60fps. Then again, the audience of hardcore gamers who would notice that sort of thing is probably small, so I guess it makes economic sense.
- TylerE 13y ago
  90hz aiming for 60hz is terrible. You're either getting 45 (not 60) or horrible microstuttering.
- rartichoke 13y ago
  This is also why most LCD manufacturers use low quality TN panels. A majority of people just can't tell the difference, don't care enough or they don't care about things like viewing angles. LCD manufacturers in general are really crooked. They have been accused and found guilty of price fixing on multiple occasions. They also love to release monitors with high quality panels initially so they get good reviews and swap in garbage panels without letting consumers know and then sell it for the same price as the same model.
  - kyrra 13y ago
    Any proof of panel swapping happening in later models? Not that I couldn't see it happening, I would just like to see an article documenting such an event.
    - rartichoke 13y ago
      I don't actively follow it anymore but I remember there being a huge fiasco over Dell's 2007fp series. A few hardware communities labeled buying one as playing "panel roulette" or "panel lotto". It went on for a few years after its initial release so it's still semi-current although now a days I doubt anyone would be buying that model. I remember a 100ish page thread on hardforum documenting which panels lined up with what serial numbers. I actually played the roulette and bought one off a dude. I ended up getting an s-ips panel and I still use it as my second monitor. It's not 120hz but I don't game with it. Here's the link to the thread: http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1111100 http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1111100 I'm sure there were/are more cases but this was the most popular one because the s-ips version of this monitor was amazing for its time. It was my first LCD purchase.
  - coldpie 13y ago
    I'm on the market for a decent monitor. Are there any brands that you /like/, or is it simply a matter of choosing the least terrible?
    - sillysaurus2 13y ago
      I use a Dell U2711. Best monitor I've ever owned. Reviews say noticeable input lag, but I've never noticed any and I'm a fairly hardc0r3 gam3r. More to the point, I'm a graphics programmer / researcher, so monitors with low Delta E are important for my work. The Dell U2711 combined with an i1Display Pro can be calibrated to exceptional color fidelity.
    - hoka 13y ago
      I have an HP LP2475W and a Dell U2412M; generally, among the IPS class, the consensus seems to be that HPs have more outputs and a better UI. Some of them are wide-gamut, however, which turns off a few purchasers. Research as to whether or not wide-gamut is important/detrimental to you. I'd say go for 24s or a 30; if you have the 27 you'll just wish you had the 30 :-p but definitely go IPS, they are fantastic. I haven't read much about the Korean monitors as they were nonexistent when I researched the market 4-5 years ago.
      - sillysaurus2 13y ago
        Actually, the Dell U30xx is worse than the U27xx. The color fidelity isn't as good. (This only matters if you calibrate your monitor.)
    - sliverstorm 13y ago
      I've been pretty happy with my NEC monitors.
- coldtea 13y ago
  >It always seemed strange that monitors aim for 60fps. That seems like a recipe for input lag. They could aim for 90fps, because when they fail to meet that, at least they'll still achieve 60fps. It's not like modern games have that much CPU time to prepare each 1/60 sec frame -- 16ms actually. As for input lag, they can scan inpput at different frequencies and adapt the next frame accordingly, but it's not like the input is gonna show in any less than 1/60 for an graphically involved game.
  - sillysaurus2 13y ago
    In this context, input lag refers to a monitor phenomenon. Some monitors have terrible input lag. The game can't compensate since it's due to the monitor.
    - rartichoke 13y ago
      Yep, input lag in an LCD monitor context is the amount of time it takes for a frame to be displayed on the screen. A lot of panels have a varied amount of input lag. Some of them are in the single digits of milliseconds. On the other side of the spectrum you could see upwards of 100ms. It's really bad when you get something like 30ms to 70ms of random delay. You can't predict this type of randomness and since it happens every frame it makes for a very poor gaming experience. Think about a competitive game like quake 3 where you might be playing at a LAN where you have a 5ms ping but your monitor is giving you 30-50ms of random input lag. You would be at a -massive- disadvantage if your opponent had a monitor with 2-7ms of input lag. There is a world of difference between 30ms and 60ms at a competitive level.
harpastum 13y ago
It came out a little while ago, so it only supports 30fps at 4k, but this 39 inch 4k monitor is decently reviewed, and only $700: http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B00DOPGO2G http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B00DOPGO2G
- rartichoke 13y ago
  30 fps is even a bigger joke than 60. I think even the general public would get nauseous watching a game being played at a solid 30 fps, it's much different than watching a low fps movie. If I were to drop $700 on a new display I would rather buy 2x $350 2650x1440 monitors that can run at 120hz at that resolution. They've been on the market at that price for quite a while now. Back in 2001 or 2002 I bought a 21" 1600x1200 120hz CRT for $80 for comparison. It also had no input delay, perfect colors and the screen itself was flat. The only downside is it weighed like 80 pounds.
  - kayoone 13y ago
    Most current-gen console games target 30FPS. An exception being Rage made by id software. Carmack was very proud that it ran at 60fps, but nobody else seemed to care. Its a different story for PC gaming and competetive gaming though.
  - coldtea 13y ago
    >30 fps is even a bigger joke than 60. I think even the general public would get nauseous watching a game being played at a solid 30 fps, it's much different than watching a low fps movie. People after 4K displays in the current market aren't going for game machines...
  - sillysaurus2 13y ago
    If I were to drop $700 on a new display I would rather buy 2x $350 2650x1440 monitors that can run at 120hz at that resolution. They've been on the market at that price for quite a while now. May I ask, which monitor are you referring to? A $350 monitor that can do 2650x1440 and run at 120hz? I need a monitor like that for my graphics research.
Qantourisc 13y ago
Seriously ? Another 60hz standard ? Even if you consider 60HZ enough, consider at the least 3D screens ... that needs 120HZ !
- stinos 13y ago
  goog point actually. Domains like vision research are again left in the cold. And then people sometimes wonder why oh why researchers like to stick to old standards and still use 20yr old fluor CRTs driven over VGA cables :P Btw 3D using shuttered glasses on a nomral 120Hz LCD might look ok when playing games and whatnot but is in reality not: the amounts of crosstalk are beyond what can be used for scientific research unless you stick to a small area on the screen and tune everything specifically for that area.
kunil 13y ago
Well, your eyes can't see above 24fps so it does not matter </joke> Honestly, I don't care after 60fps, even for games. Are 4k monitors (smaller screens) available? I only see huge 4k TVs, never heard of monitors. (It is not like I can afford one though :()
- xuki 13y ago
  http://www.anandtech.com/show/7157/asus-pq321q-ultrahd-4k-monitor-review http://www.anandtech.com/show/7157/asus-pq321q-ultrahd-4k-mo...
coldtea 13y ago
>120 fps is the minimum for me when it comes to playing games. You like wasting CPU power for placebo-level difference? In a few years (assuming 20-something) you won't care much for games anymore, and 99.999% of the kids are perfectly fine with 60 fps anyway.
- rartichoke 13y ago
  People who enjoy games at a competitive level don't just out grow it once they hit late 20s or 30s. I'm 33 by the way. I'm extremely confident that anyone playing a fast paced game at a highly competitive level would notice the difference between 60 and 120 fps+hz -- even in a best case scenario where the frame rate wasn't varied. Frame rate variance is one of the most noticeable things, but even a rock solid 60 fps+hz is choppy. Look at how many grown men/women play or watch televised sports. There is nothing different than some 40 year old person watching an NFL game and a 40 year old person watching a quakelive or heroes of newerth tournament. I don't watch regular sports but I can see the appeal. I mean, look at a sport like basketball. It seems like a single player can almost carry a team by himself as long as the other players are somewhat competent. Watching someone who is so good that he makes "professionals" seem like amateurs is really entertaining.
  - coldtea 13y ago
    >People who enjoy games at a competitive level don't just out grow it once they hit late 20s or 30s. I'm 33 by the way. Well, statistically speaking, most of them do. They get a job, family, etc.
    - rartichoke 13y ago
      There's nothing stopping a competitive gamer from having a job or family. You also don't need to play 10 hours a day to remain competitive. If you sleep 7 hours a day and work 40 hours a week there's still 9 hours a day to do whatever you want and free weekends assuming you work a typical 9-5 job which might be common but certainly isn't what everyone does. How you choose to spend those remaining 9-10 hours a day is up to you. Some people would rather watch TV for 3 hours a night and sleep more so they lose almost half their free time because they enjoy sleeping in and watching some shows. Nothing wrong with that but not everyone spends their time doing that.
jetd 13y ago
I think topics are mixed up in this thread and more strangely nobody is mentioning it! 1. (120)fps you refer is about the graphic card not the monitor. 2. (120)hz is refresh rate of an LCD is completely different than CRT. BTW, I never heard of 120hz high-res monitor. Mitsubishi or NEC maybe. could you give the brand and model? 3. monitor input lag will _always_be there with LCDs. there is no 120hz or higher LCD panels. they do real-time interpolation with 60hz panels. and that's not natural if you look closely. maybe just maybe OLED will improve response time or input lag as you refer.
- rartichoke 13y ago
  There are tons of 120hz LCDs. Some of the korean models that you can pickup for $350 can be manually set to run at 120hz but you have to be lucky. They run at 2560x1440. A popular one is: http://www.overclock.net/t/1374065/korean-qnix-qx2710-evolution-ll-27-2560x1440-matte-samsung-pls-panel http://www.overclock.net/t/1374065/korean-qnix-qx2710-evolut... Most 120hz LCDs run at 1080p though, and you can typically buy them at Newegg or wherever you usually get computer parts. You should be able to find dozens of models by Googling for "120hz LCD monitors".

sillysaurus2 13y ago

It always seemed strange that monitors aim for 60fps. That seems like a recipe for input lag. They could aim for 90fps, because when they fail to meet that, at least they'll still achieve 60fps. Then again, the audience of hardcore gamers who would notice that sort of thing is probably small, so I guess it makes economic sense.

TylerE 13y ago
90hz aiming for 60hz is terrible. You're either getting 45 (not 60) or horrible microstuttering.
rartichoke 13y ago
This is also why most LCD manufacturers use low quality TN panels. A majority of people just can't tell the difference, don't care enough or they don't care about things like viewing angles. LCD manufacturers in general are really crooked. They have been accused and found guilty of price fixing on multiple occasions. They also love to release monitors with high quality panels initially so they get good reviews and swap in garbage panels without letting consumers know and then sell it for the same price as the same model.
- kyrra 13y ago
  Any proof of panel swapping happening in later models? Not that I couldn't see it happening, I would just like to see an article documenting such an event.
  - rartichoke 13y ago
    I don't actively follow it anymore but I remember there being a huge fiasco over Dell's 2007fp series. A few hardware communities labeled buying one as playing "panel roulette" or "panel lotto". It went on for a few years after its initial release so it's still semi-current although now a days I doubt anyone would be buying that model. I remember a 100ish page thread on hardforum documenting which panels lined up with what serial numbers. I actually played the roulette and bought one off a dude. I ended up getting an s-ips panel and I still use it as my second monitor. It's not 120hz but I don't game with it. Here's the link to the thread: http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1111100 http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1111100 I'm sure there were/are more cases but this was the most popular one because the s-ips version of this monitor was amazing for its time. It was my first LCD purchase.
- coldpie 13y ago
  I'm on the market for a decent monitor. Are there any brands that you /like/, or is it simply a matter of choosing the least terrible?
  - sillysaurus2 13y ago
    I use a Dell U2711. Best monitor I've ever owned. Reviews say noticeable input lag, but I've never noticed any and I'm a fairly hardc0r3 gam3r. More to the point, I'm a graphics programmer / researcher, so monitors with low Delta E are important for my work. The Dell U2711 combined with an i1Display Pro can be calibrated to exceptional color fidelity.
  - hoka 13y ago
    I have an HP LP2475W and a Dell U2412M; generally, among the IPS class, the consensus seems to be that HPs have more outputs and a better UI. Some of them are wide-gamut, however, which turns off a few purchasers. Research as to whether or not wide-gamut is important/detrimental to you. I'd say go for 24s or a 30; if you have the 27 you'll just wish you had the 30 :-p but definitely go IPS, they are fantastic. I haven't read much about the Korean monitors as they were nonexistent when I researched the market 4-5 years ago.
    - sillysaurus2 13y ago
      Actually, the Dell U30xx is worse than the U27xx. The color fidelity isn't as good. (This only matters if you calibrate your monitor.)
  - sliverstorm 13y ago
    I've been pretty happy with my NEC monitors.
coldtea 13y ago
>It always seemed strange that monitors aim for 60fps. That seems like a recipe for input lag. They could aim for 90fps, because when they fail to meet that, at least they'll still achieve 60fps. It's not like modern games have that much CPU time to prepare each 1/60 sec frame -- 16ms actually. As for input lag, they can scan inpput at different frequencies and adapt the next frame accordingly, but it's not like the input is gonna show in any less than 1/60 for an graphically involved game.
- sillysaurus2 13y ago
  In this context, input lag refers to a monitor phenomenon. Some monitors have terrible input lag. The game can't compensate since it's due to the monitor.
  - rartichoke 13y ago
    Yep, input lag in an LCD monitor context is the amount of time it takes for a frame to be displayed on the screen. A lot of panels have a varied amount of input lag. Some of them are in the single digits of milliseconds. On the other side of the spectrum you could see upwards of 100ms. It's really bad when you get something like 30ms to 70ms of random delay. You can't predict this type of randomness and since it happens every frame it makes for a very poor gaming experience. Think about a competitive game like quake 3 where you might be playing at a LAN where you have a 5ms ping but your monitor is giving you 30-50ms of random input lag. You would be at a -massive- disadvantage if your opponent had a monitor with 2-7ms of input lag. There is a world of difference between 30ms and 60ms at a competitive level.

harpastum 13y ago

It came out a little while ago, so it only supports 30fps at 4k, but this 39 inch 4k monitor is decently reviewed, and only $700: http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B00DOPGO2G http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B00DOPGO2G

rartichoke 13y ago
30 fps is even a bigger joke than 60. I think even the general public would get nauseous watching a game being played at a solid 30 fps, it's much different than watching a low fps movie. If I were to drop $700 on a new display I would rather buy 2x $350 2650x1440 monitors that can run at 120hz at that resolution. They've been on the market at that price for quite a while now. Back in 2001 or 2002 I bought a 21" 1600x1200 120hz CRT for $80 for comparison. It also had no input delay, perfect colors and the screen itself was flat. The only downside is it weighed like 80 pounds.
- kayoone 13y ago
  Most current-gen console games target 30FPS. An exception being Rage made by id software. Carmack was very proud that it ran at 60fps, but nobody else seemed to care. Its a different story for PC gaming and competetive gaming though.
- coldtea 13y ago
  >30 fps is even a bigger joke than 60. I think even the general public would get nauseous watching a game being played at a solid 30 fps, it's much different than watching a low fps movie. People after 4K displays in the current market aren't going for game machines...
- sillysaurus2 13y ago
  If I were to drop $700 on a new display I would rather buy 2x $350 2650x1440 monitors that can run at 120hz at that resolution. They've been on the market at that price for quite a while now. May I ask, which monitor are you referring to? A $350 monitor that can do 2650x1440 and run at 120hz? I need a monitor like that for my graphics research.

Qantourisc 13y ago

Seriously ? Another 60hz standard ? Even if you consider 60HZ enough, consider at the least 3D screens ... that needs 120HZ !

stinos 13y ago
goog point actually. Domains like vision research are again left in the cold. And then people sometimes wonder why oh why researchers like to stick to old standards and still use 20yr old fluor CRTs driven over VGA cables :P Btw 3D using shuttered glasses on a nomral 120Hz LCD might look ok when playing games and whatnot but is in reality not: the amounts of crosstalk are beyond what can be used for scientific research unless you stick to a small area on the screen and tune everything specifically for that area.

kunil 13y ago

Well, your eyes can't see above 24fps so it does not matter </joke> Honestly, I don't care after 60fps, even for games. Are 4k monitors (smaller screens) available? I only see huge 4k TVs, never heard of monitors. (It is not like I can afford one though :()

xuki 13y ago
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7157/asus-pq321q-ultrahd-4k-monitor-review http://www.anandtech.com/show/7157/asus-pq321q-ultrahd-4k-mo...

coldtea 13y ago

>120 fps is the minimum for me when it comes to playing games. You like wasting CPU power for placebo-level difference? In a few years (assuming 20-something) you won't care much for games anymore, and 99.999% of the kids are perfectly fine with 60 fps anyway.

rartichoke 13y ago
People who enjoy games at a competitive level don't just out grow it once they hit late 20s or 30s. I'm 33 by the way. I'm extremely confident that anyone playing a fast paced game at a highly competitive level would notice the difference between 60 and 120 fps+hz -- even in a best case scenario where the frame rate wasn't varied. Frame rate variance is one of the most noticeable things, but even a rock solid 60 fps+hz is choppy. Look at how many grown men/women play or watch televised sports. There is nothing different than some 40 year old person watching an NFL game and a 40 year old person watching a quakelive or heroes of newerth tournament. I don't watch regular sports but I can see the appeal. I mean, look at a sport like basketball. It seems like a single player can almost carry a team by himself as long as the other players are somewhat competent. Watching someone who is so good that he makes "professionals" seem like amateurs is really entertaining.
- coldtea 13y ago
  >People who enjoy games at a competitive level don't just out grow it once they hit late 20s or 30s. I'm 33 by the way. Well, statistically speaking, most of them do. They get a job, family, etc.
  - rartichoke 13y ago
    There's nothing stopping a competitive gamer from having a job or family. You also don't need to play 10 hours a day to remain competitive. If you sleep 7 hours a day and work 40 hours a week there's still 9 hours a day to do whatever you want and free weekends assuming you work a typical 9-5 job which might be common but certainly isn't what everyone does. How you choose to spend those remaining 9-10 hours a day is up to you. Some people would rather watch TV for 3 hours a night and sleep more so they lose almost half their free time because they enjoy sleeping in and watching some shows. Nothing wrong with that but not everyone spends their time doing that.

jetd 13y ago

I think topics are mixed up in this thread and more strangely nobody is mentioning it! 1. (120)fps you refer is about the graphic card not the monitor. 2. (120)hz is refresh rate of an LCD is completely different than CRT. BTW, I never heard of 120hz high-res monitor. Mitsubishi or NEC maybe. could you give the brand and model? 3. monitor input lag will _always_be there with LCDs. there is no 120hz or higher LCD panels. they do real-time interpolation with 60hz panels. and that's not natural if you look closely. maybe just maybe OLED will improve response time or input lag as you refer.

rartichoke 13y ago
There are tons of 120hz LCDs. Some of the korean models that you can pickup for $350 can be manually set to run at 120hz but you have to be lucky. They run at 2560x1440. A popular one is: http://www.overclock.net/t/1374065/korean-qnix-qx2710-evolution-ll-27-2560x1440-matte-samsung-pls-panel http://www.overclock.net/t/1374065/korean-qnix-qx2710-evolut... Most 120hz LCDs run at 1080p though, and you can typically buy them at Newegg or wherever you usually get computer parts. You should be able to find dozens of models by Googling for "120hz LCD monitors".