u need to put it to 120hz also in the windows display properties.

It's set to 120hz there as well.

eh... you can check if you have 120hz with the osd! menu -> system -> information check both for windows desktop and ingame.

are you sure you use dvi-d (dual dvi)?

i had to turn off gpu scaling in the nvidia drivers, afterwards 120hz worked with no problems, do you use the native resolution in quake (or atleast tried it)?

I have tried using native resolution without any success of getting clear image when moving my mouse fast. I am sure that i use dvi-d cable. The white cable that followed with the monitor.

use the osd to check if you have 120hz, only way to know for sure. this makes little sense if in fact you have 120hz and are complaining about something else :>

The cable has to be dual link DVI-D, are you sure it's the correct one and have you tried another cable?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:DVI_Connector_Types.svg

I just double checked. Its DVI-D.

copy&paste from my cfg (mind you, i'm using linux):

// benq osd: (picture) brightness 45 contrast 50 sharpness 4 gamma 2.2 color: r 93 g 89 b 97
// (picture advanced) picture mode: standard dynamic contrast 0 instant mode on pbp off
// gfx drivers: gpu scaling off
// xorg.conf Section "Monitor":
// Modeline "1920x1080_120.00" 368.76 1920 2072 2288 2656 1080 1081 1084 1157 -HSync +Vsync
// Modeline "800x600_120.00" 83.95 800 856 944 1088 600 601 604 643 -HSync +Vsync

+ r_mode 23 (native resolution) or r_mode 9 (800x600) and r_displayrefresh 120

Where do I copypaste these?

please read what i wrote, these are commented lines from my cfg to save my osd and other settings for me and others who are interested.

obviously you can't copy&paste those.

I'm sorry but it doesn't work. Are you getting clear image when moving your mouse fast? And yes it says that I have 120hz in the OSD panel.

Edit: I can't turn off my gpu-scaling. If you check my last image. When I click on "Do not scale" and then save, it automaticly changes back to "Use my display's built-in..".

if it says it's 120 Hz than it obviouslty is 120 Hz oO

Yes. But I'd still like an answer why the image becomes "ghosty" sort of, when moving my mouse ingame fast. The image isn't clear.

the osd "information" tab says 120hz when you are in fullscreen full hd ql?

you're free to try using my exact settings like i posted above (mainly osd settings). at first ALWAYS use the native resolution as to eliminate the possibility of any sort of scaling fucking with your picture.

i had problems with blurry crosshairs when i couldn't get 120hz to work in the beginning but now there really is no visible difference between the benq and my old crt.

my guess is the scaling being the issue btw... do you have black borders with 800x600 or do you get a stretched (therefore somehow scaled) image?

I have black borders. When having set to native (1080p, 1920 x 1080 (native)) I can only choose 60hz as max (16 bit color is max as well rather than 32) and in OSD options > information it says also that its set to 60hz.

now you don't have 120hz, a few posts above you were saying it worked fine?

you should always state wether you're in windows or in quake, we have no way of knowing what you're talking about.

another guess... Edit: I can't turn off my gpu-scaling. this is the culprit most likely as it was what didn't work for me first either. most probably a driver issue, nyshak is using windows and has a nvidia card aswell, ask him :d

I never used HD, SD resolutions. I use PC resolution in nvidia options to get pick 120hz there and 32bit color

i don't understand what you are trying to say, i'm sorry.

btw, another thing that stands out: in the first pic posted in the op you set "preferred refresh rate" to "application controlled". the correct setting should be 120hz, no idea if that'll help though.

I'm on AMD/ATI.

If you cannot chose 120hz with 1920x1080 something is wrong with your setup. Did you install the driver for the monitor?

I installed the drivers for my monitor that u gave me before. With (1080p, 1920 x 1080 (native)) I can't chose 120hz but with only 1920 x 1080 (PC) I can choose 120hz together with 32bit color. I guess it makes no sense. The only thing that irritates me is that my screen becomes "ghosty" when turning mouse ingames fast. I dunno if its supposed to be like this.

What don't you use 1920x1080 PC @ 120hz then?

The 1080p thing is meant for TVs not monitors afaik.

I do and I can see the difference between 60hz and 120hz pretty high tbh but as I have asked before I want to know why image becomes "blurry"/"ghosty" when moving my mouse fast ingames. Meaning when I turn around quickly it feels kinda blurry.


Many others say that they get clear picture when doing it.

Well afaik a 120hz LCD can't be 100% sharp like a CRT, but I can hardly believe the difference would be THAT noticeable.

because its not a crt you dummy.

if you have like black shadows behind items in quake when you move fast its simply cause the monitor is shit, had that at dreamhack when i played on the benq one, don't have that on my 2233rz

that's cause you played with AMA on. the BenQ is fine once you turn it off.

turn on AMA then?

I tried different settings as well. Doesn't work.

Clean your glasses?
Ok that didn't help, but...I'm not sure how I could. I use the BenQ and my image is sharp. AMA Off.

Are you using windows xp?
There were lot of problems for me to get 120hz in game unless I use native resolution in game.
2nd is your mouse in 500/1000hz?

I am using w7 64-bit. My mouse is 1000hz. If i remember correctly. I clocked it or whatever you call it.

Didnt people @ DH say the BenQ 120hz monitor wasnt good? I got a Samsung 120hz monitor and it feels great, just as good if not better than my v old CRT

O also someone said they used their old monitors dvi cable on the samsung and it didnt look good but switched to the one that came with it and it was fine

I think I heard this as well.

I heard other reports that it's not as good as the other 120hz actually (apparently it's still fairly blurry despite the 120hz)

it's not blurry at all?

you should always trust randoms on the internet who had the chance to test a product for 1-2 days... :p the benq is fine.

I've had this monitor since 2010-11-16

Randoms??? it was top players at dreamhack that said that

I recall most pros @ DH saying it performed pretty well.

you are another one of those forum people who claim to know about stuff they have no experience with. i, on the other hand, experienced exactly what you were talking about and can tell you that you are wrong.

in comparison i felt the same - the samsung feels way smoother than the benq :x

do you even know what settings the benq was running @ dreamhack?

well i played on them with 120hz that's really all I can say. I know there were some issues setting up the msi laptops with the benq's - as far as i remember, later when they played on the dell in the dreamhack 1v1 tournament, things got better...

hmm, I guess the monitor wasn't set up perfectly then

Btw why set all your nvidia settings to the lowest when you got a decent GPU ?
Trilinear and anisotropic optimization, texture filtering quality on high performance mode etc look crap for no performance gain at all on a GPU like this one.

Not that it will help with your problem though.

Ok guys, come on.
I know exactly what the OP is talking about. Seems like most people don't believe him, though.

I have a samsung 2233rz, and I'm using my CRT. Why?
Because of the blurriness.

Even though 120hz is miles better than 60hz on the 2233rz, if you move the mouse faster than very slow, there is STILL a noticable 'non smooth" slight blur that is NOT there on a CRT. And I notice it very easily, as I have very good eyes and a good brain (being a chess master, I guess, helps). Some people here say 120hz is as good as a CRT, and for heaven's sake, no it isn't. It only appears good if you had to suffer on a 60 hz LCD for years, and forgot what playing on a CRT is like.

So no, the tech simply isn't there yet.
Another thing is that any upcoming "240 hz" monitors won't mean anything. Sure, you might finally have CRT smoothness on them, but ONLY at 240hz. And that means you're going to need to push 240 FPS in order to see it. CS:S and Quake Live on a high end comp can do that, but forget about it on any recent games (or even many older games).

What we need--what we TRULY need, are LCD's that can perform non blurry almost perfect glass smooth FPS at 60hz/60 FPS, and perfect smoothness at 100hz/100 FPS, and a whole different tech than what's available now is going to be needed for that. Having to get 120 FPS at 120hz (to get "close" to CRT smoothness) is simply too demanding for many recent games.

You are not pushing 240 FPS on your CRT. Hence, you don't have to have 240 FPS to get the same amount of perceived "smoothness". It's just a question of if the technology is up to it (response time for LCDs etc.).

you are right ! when i play first time on 12O hz samsung lcd i feel thouse 12O hz but was very blury or ghosty.

r_picmip 5 and simple icons in fast speed looks very blury :D

so i go back to home and play on my old asus 2 ms 75 hz and i say . waste of money , am gona wait for better lcds .

but i dont wana back to crt

O =/= 0

Thank you for this awesome reply. I think you are right in what you are saying. Even though being a random - © zealot.

I guess I'll just have to wait for new monitor.

maybe i overreacted there, but you are praising a guy talking about 240hz monitors that need 240fps and "glass smooth fps" at 60/60 or 100/100... should make you think twice if you have any experience with hz and fps settings in shooters.

I have a samsung 2233rz, and I'm using my CRT. Why?

'cause you're not a noob

lol,
I actually bought the 2233rz two years ago because my CRT is dying badly, but it works IF I can get it on after being powered off for a long time--and works great. The problem is,if I power it off, it's anyone's guess whether I can get it warmed up enough to stop the arcing and screen popping before something permanently dies.

Now, about the comment about the 240 fps thing:
Since I know a few people flamed me-I happen to know EXACTLY What I'm talking about.

Even though I'm not a reviewer, I've done a LOT of work with FPS testing over the years. Including testing on Voodoo2 and old Geforce cards. I even found out that, during those days, playing at 60hz refresh rate could give you a 20% fps boost, which was important during the early Q3 days. (and before you flame me for THAT, flame the people that had to play Q3 with no textures...)

Anyway, when I bought my 2233rz, I noticed something (first tested in CS:Source, a game that can push 120fps and then some).

When I capped the FPS at let's say, 85 fps, at 120hz, the blurriness wasn't much better than playing on my old Samsung T220 at 75hz. The input lag was much better, but not the game smoothness. I *had* to get the full 120 FPS for it to be smooth enough to not feel disorientating to me.

And likewise, lowering the refresh rate to 100 hz, for 100 FPS, (Trying to have refreh rate match fps) also didn't give me the same smoothness as 120hz and 120 fps.

So you see what I'm getting at.
What I'm clearly saying is, if a 240hz gaming LCD comes out, you simply won't get the CRT smoothness on it if you're only getting 100 FPS or lower. THAT'S what I'm trying to point out here. You would need to push 240 FPS to get the crt smoothness.

And this is a guesstimation as to how 120fps/120hz performs on 120hz gaming lcd's, so a true 240hz monitor should give you the smoothness that we want.

But once we're able to get silky smooth FPS at 100 fps on 240hz screen, THEN we know we're there. Oh, and fix the viewing angles while they're at it. too =.=

On my CRT, I get the same silky smoth FPS at 100hz/100 fps as 120hz/120 fps. Even 85hz/85 FPS is great. the only difference that I can see going from 100 hz to 120hz are at high mouse movement speeds, and it isn't enough to detract from gameplay.

we play quake at 120hz/125fps and there's a reason for that. i'd get 240+ fps in ql right now btw and most people can surely do over 100 these days.

Yes I know that, but I'm not talking about games like Quake, which can pump out 300 FPS if you need it to :) I'm aware these boards are more tuned towards Quake/QL and CS players, but I'm talking about other games, like those which if you can break 60 FPS at high settings, you're doing very well.

I mean yeah, maybe I'm just preaching to the choir here, and I'd be better off posting about the FPS stuff on Steam or futuremark or something. But I do have a large amount of games I play, and smoothness is important to me.

esr started and still remains as mainly quake(3/ql) site and we do care about our fps :)

what kaleena said was my other point, hz should not be equal (or a clean multiple) of fps, because that will lead to heavy tearing. from experience fps (slightly) > hz gives the cleanest picture.

edit: oh, and i played with 100hz/125fps for a year (no money for a new monitor at that point) and the difference was huge in quake.

huge in what way?

i wrote this somewhere else already, i could actually see a railtrail with railtrailtime 0 when playing with 100hz as opposed to (of course) not seeing anything with 120hz. unless there's some other explanation i missed, this is "huge" to me :)

In my experience, it's a bit better to have the hzrate a bit higher than your framerate (only achievable on crt then): if for some reason (punkbuster when it was still being used for example) you have a fps drop, you might get some tearing on one or 2 frames, while if your refreshrate is over your framerate, they can't match each other = no tearing.

(ok that's very very slight difference :D)

On LCDs you really need your framerate to be a clean multiple (or close to it) of your refresh rate.
60fps on 60hz is smooth (awful tearing though), 120/125 and 240/250 are smooth too (with negligible tearing) but 100 or 85 don't feel great for example.

From what you're saying it looks like it's the same with the 120hz LCDs (which makes sense I guess).

You're not making sense. As long as you are not runnig 240 FPS on you're CRT (and I doubt that) 240 FPS on ANY LCD will not make it as smooth as your super duper CRT. Hence, once LCD technology is up to it 120FPS will feel the same as on a CRT. Its not about the FPS, it's about the technology.

Ofc 240 FPS CRT > 120FPS LCD but that's not the point.

I think his point is that he feels current LCD technology isn't smooth enough at 120 Hz unless you put ~120 FPS into it. So should the next generation of LCD monitors handle 240 Hz, it'll be pointless if they're only smooth at ~240 FPS because it'll be hard to run newer games at such high FPS (and that's if they even let you; my experience is that newer games are more and more often removing the option to change your FPS). Which means he'd rather they find at way to make 60 FPS look smooth at 120 Hz first.

This is in contrast to CRTs, because in his experience even lower refresh rates with lower FPS provide a smooth image on them.

Yeah but that just means its all about the technology (LCD vs. CRT, response time etc.) and not about the actual FPS your game is running on. 120 FPS are 120 FPS. If a CRT feels smoother showing them it's because it's a CRT.

I just ordered a samsum 2233rz...
i decided to move my iiyama visionmaster pro 454 to the basement... wonder if i'll regret it...

note: i played on r_displayrefresh 75 cause i can't hit shit on 120. wondering how a 120 hz lcd will work =)

iiyama visionmaster pro 454 - gief me! xD

payup payup :-p

how good is it? any blurryness/issues with changing brightness etc?

its in good shape :-)
you can have it for 12 budwisers :p

where you located in germany? =P

at the very top of Germany, next to the Danish border. There is no way I can pick it up. I am still trying to convince noctis to give me his old crt. :x I gonna come back to you - my offer atm for noctis is 40E but his lazy as fuck and would probably do it for 100 euro.

well im lazy as well, cause i cba to drop it off at the postal office =}

the monitor is fine and you're over reacting.

If nvc says so, then it must be so!

what OS?

cause I had similar problems with my monitor when I switched to windows 7, turns out I had to change the basic drivers to actually add the supported Hz to resolutions, windows 7 "deemed" those refresh rates as not available when in fact they were.

I have the samsung , it is 100% better than a standard 60/72hz lcd , havent used a crt for so long i dont even know what the differences are anymore

whats your in game res? try 640x480 or 800x600.

I've tried those u just posted. I'm playing with 1440 x 900 ingame.

I like this res when im playing but is 800x600 more prefered? Won't the image get pretty streched out?

its 4:3 which is best for quake

no, it's not. why you saying that? :)

cause it is !

ok ! i'm glad you chimed in.

I just bought the LG W2363D 120hz. Installed it yesterday and played alot of Quakelive. Im really impressed so far to be honest.
The 120hz works in all resolutions for me just like my old CRTs. I just made my own custom resolutions in the Nvidia control panel just like I did all thouse years ago and it works really good. The only thing that I haven't decided on is the scaling. You can change the scaling on all resolutions from the OSD menu - Sidebars on or fullscreen 800x600@120hz for example. Altho I found the native resolution 1920x1080 to be OK for gaming after some fov changing. in Quakelive.
The throu mode wasen't enabled out of the box so with just 2 clicks in the OSD menu it was on.
After some calibration with the colors aswell it was game on.

To be honest side by side with my old CRT I do prefer the the LG W2363D. The smoothnes is equally good on both @ 120hz. No input delay can be felt or seen. The sharp picture quality is bettherr then on the CRT where it looks really washed out.
The blurriness you guys talk about is something I so far haven't notice on the LG W2363D and I tend to long sweeps with my mouse when playing.
It could be seen on my 60hz screen tho but not on the LG W2363D.

got it aswell, no blurriness to be seen.

how much fps do you have when playing? if you ve got like 30fps, whatever the refresh rate it will suck.

when i got a doubt i just use vertical synch. you ll get as much fps as hz and TADA!


douille time to go to school

I hope he's not getting less than 300+ in QL with a gtx260

I'm at 125 constantly.

Edit: no matter what res.
Edit2: this is my dxdiag:

http://data.fuskbugg.se/skalman02/________________DxDiag.txt

well i just played on my new samsung syncmaster 2233rz this weekend.

installed the software, started quake, went on a server and aimwise/acc wise, i didnt notice any difference.

needed minor changes to my sensitivity (bit higher) but otherwise it felt great!

the first time I switched from an old LCD (one of the first ones that there available in Germany, daddy bought it) that did 75 Hz at 1024 x 768 to a Trinitron CRT that did 120 Hz at 800 x 600 I noticed an easily noticeable accuracy increase on long range, not so much on close range. I guess that was because the TFT probably had a huge in-put lag, while the CRT had none. Now when playing with a 120 Hz TFT I wouldn't claim it makes a better player out of me (while it probably does.. a bit), but oh how much more enjoyable the game is when it's smooth.

very true, but if you have a 120hz lcd and a 120hz crt, the crt will still outperform the lcd, even the newest ones. Best case of the 120hz TFTs I've seen has a 5ms response time, whereas CRT response time is so fast it's measured instead in nanoseconds, since it's not even one entire millisecond from when the cathode ray fires to when it's displayed on-screen.

I know, still I can live with that.. and I greatly appreciate the free space I get due to using the LCD instead of the CRT ; ) It has its cons (really narrow viewing angles, backlight bleeding, expensive, inferior performance both in games and presentation of colors, gradients) and pros (doesn't consume my whole desk, less power consumption and some more) like nearly everything. In the end it comes down to what are the more important cons to YOU (with what you can live/what is really damn-disturbing) and finally choosing the product with the least cons.

oh yeah, definitely agreed on all points, I just don't have any other use for the desk space :P

http://www.esreality.com/?a=post&id=2013678

If i actually had to choose instead of going dual monitor, I'd have a really, really hard time not getting a 120hz lcd. Fortunately I can just have the best of both worlds at the same time

wow, nice post
thanks for posting that link

your place is nice, here's mine: http://img203.imageshack.us/img203/207/vib4.jpg

using a different mouse now though

I guess a pro would be to not have a raygun pointed at your face.

eh what?

i played on 75 hz on my iiyama visionmaster pro 454, cause i didnt hit shit on 120 hz :-)

So is there a 1920x1200 120hz LCD out there yet?