How can you not be satisfied with the input lag on the BenQ, it has none.

As you can see the pictures are perfectly synced, and because our reference W2363D is already proven to have 0 ms input lag, BenQ XL2410T has 0 ms input lag, too.

You have bad informations, it has almost 0ms response time, but it has nothing to do with input lag...

Tell me how the lag in benq is bad. How can you be not satisfied with something that is not noticeable? If it is noticeable, what consequences does it bring to your gaming experience? I have a benq monitor and its flawless in every practical aspect.

"non noticeable" delay, ghosting and input lag are BS. Every single decent quake player notices the slightest one, unless it's QW perfect (playing with fps, monitor and mouse settings, among others) with a CRT screen.
That goes for everything really, including watching tv (yep), playing console games with wireless controllers on any current flat screen, having 5 more ping, etc.

Thing is it is a compromise. I've tried the 2233rz and considering everything it does the job superbly, though I'm sticking with my old viewsonic for gaming.

.

i have a benq and no idea what you are talking about.

I understandt that there are tons of new players who cant notice anything, but i am very oldschool player and maybe too sensitive with settings.I am playing more than 12y right now, i used to play many fps games at highest level, i cant say pro, but very high leagues.All of them on classic CRT monitor.I started using LCD for 2y right now and it turn my playing to total crap, my hand movements clearly doesnt respond to what is happening on my monitor.I am trying to get used to with LCD monitors, but my results from gaming are far from my real skills so i am trying to find monitor which is nearest to any shitty old crt.

I see a lot of posts like yours and every time I do, I don't understand why you just get a CRT? I've been curious about the CRT "magic" but I see more flaws than advantages.

I just like 4:3/5:4 and the increased chances of getting cancer.

I got this argument many times but truth is that i want LCD.I want modern BIG and small weight monitor, crt monitors are not healthy for eyes and i am not playing that often like some years ago, but if i do, i want same feeling of control.

I've heard that is impossible with the LCD technology that we have today. Not surprising considering how CRTs work :-)

My opinion of the 2233rz compared to a CRT is this:

- Yes I *could* notice the input lag, however, I doubt it could make any meaningful difference to your gameplay. (The difference could only be noticed directly after switching to the LCD, after a couple of days it didn't matter anymore.)

- I think the smooth positive feeling you get from playing on a high refresh rate is retained

- When responding to anything on screen, your mouse input will remain the same, so the only way a CRT will give an advantage over the samsung is if the enemy surprises you on screen and you need to react to it. If you are a good player, you shouldn't need to rely on this.

If you are noticing lag between hand movements, I would say that there is something wrong with your setup, as the lag is nowhere near as bad as that. The only time I can notice input lag on screen is if vsync is enabled. Possibly switch off multi monitors as I have heard this could cause lag.

well, it "probably" matters just for small group of people, i am playing with mid-high sensitivity and practicaly moving just with very fast flicking over mousepad, but when i need pixel accuracy or smoothly tracking my oponnent, i definitely need fast response coresponding with my mouse movement to make a clear hit with rg for example..

I play with a high sensitivity too, my aim has remained the same between monitors and I hit a lot.

To add on to that, I think something is wrong with your monitor, you will find that everyone that has the samsung will tell you that there is hardly any difference. I doubt that you are special in some way, unless:

- There is something wrong with the monitor/your pc

- It is psychological.

i wouldnt post this without reason and research or comparing, i can play QL and other games at friends pc where i notice huge difference, my pc is ok, my GC settings is ok, my OS settings is ok, mouse is ok

benq is better if you compare input lag, however it got issues with ghosting
stop flaming hardware when getting owned btw

What is ghosting? My monitor knowledge don't go further than "low response is good, get 120Hz!".

trails after moving targets

Ah, benq has that too. The only flaw, however its only noticeable when I play TF2 with black equalizer on and if the enemy moves infront of a grey wall. In quake there are nothing what I can see. Maybe its just me as I sometimes play on a shit setup in order to not be hardware depending.

Ghosting depends on what's being displayed, some colours will have more trailing than others. So depending on the map and on your Quake config, it might or might not be noticeable.

"The only flaw, however its only noticeable when I play TF2 with black equalizer on and if the enemy moves infront of a grey wall. "

Yep, TN panels (such as the BenQ) are pretty slow with dark objects moving in front of a light background, hence why you notice the ghosting under those specific circumstances.

I like it though. I dont see why you would complain about it :)

(I feel "new school" saying/thinking these things. Me not experiencing CRT is probably the reason)

Nothing wrong with liking an overall good monitor :)

Dude, i have very good reason to blame monitor because i can compare, when i play from friends computer with crt, i am ten times better, smooth movement, no lag at all.And we have exactly same pc,os, settings.

like it was said already, turn OFF v-sync.
If you have it enabled, i can understand what u have described, otherwise there is nothing which holds ur skill back compared to a CRT.

It was never turn on, i dont need noob advices, i did research about 10 years about lagging, but thx:D

.

yes it is, i dont want to argue with anybody, i just wanted opinion from people who own Samsung..

i own a 2233rz for almost a year now, and was using a CRT before with 125fps@144hz for years.

After 5mins of using the 2233rz, i knew it won't change the feel of the game(even with 16:10).

Dude, you are playing silver league with 1389 Elo.....thats very low if you play for years?:DDDDNow i understandt you cant recognize difference.If you played shit before, it will be same with any other hardware.

http://www.qlranks.com/duel/player/thunda

just look in my matches then, how often i play duel out of 100 games.

btw. he has a 2233rz too(at least if he hasn't changed lately):
http://www.qlranks.com/duel/player/k1llsen

go cry about not getting used to a 120hz TFT, you're the only one.

No i am not..

You are...

I know plenty of ppl with same adapt problem.Nobody cares what noname like you thinks.

Who the fuck are you good sir? And why should I care about the people you know if I don't even know you, while knowing about many good to top-tier players who changed to LCD monitors (weather it's BenQ or Samsung doesn't matter) and don't have any problems with them.

turn AMA off :S

AMA off means more lag..

imo, no. AMA off elimates the trailing (which sucks), i don't find the lag to be a problem wether it's with AMA on or off. it's not a crt, but it's also not a big deal and i truely enjoy playing with the benq.

btw, i think it's super weird you seem to think your gaming performance suffers because of this monitor, i own the same one and rarely find someone that matches my aim. not to be a dick or anything, but it seems to me more placebo than an actual problem :d

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/content/benq_xl2410t.htm

i hope u enabled "Instant Mode"

Hi, fucking whiner.

Honestly, if you have a problem with the BenQ you're probably going to have a problem with the other 120hz LCDs as well.

I haven't used a CRT in ages but I can accept the fact that some people might still prefer a CRT over a 120hz LCD. However, the differences between the 120hz LCDs are really tiny, I don't even think any of them has been proven (by reliable measurements I mean) to have any major input lag (apart from the BenQ without "Instant Mode" I guess).

Regarding the pixel response time, unless you turn the overdrive off on the BenQ, they are all roughly similar too.

So get used to your BenQ or just get a bloody CRT.

They are all "roughly similar" as far as input lag goes, but other monitors such as the "Viewsonic VX2268WM" and "LG W2363D" do pixel response much better i.e. produce no "errors", or "artifacts", commonly referred too as "overdrive trailing", "or rtc overshoots" (The Viewsonic is actually slightly faster in this area than the LG).

The new Iiyama from what I've tested (a limited amount, where the other 2 were not side by side) doesn't even compete with those two if memory served me best, although it's much better than the BenQ (and very close to the Viewsonic and LG offerings), providing several overdrive settings from -2 to +2... either way, the BenQ is awful in this area and it's QA from both pro gamers is quite frankly hilarious. Those who just tell you to turn AMA off (zealot), don't, that just makes it perform worse. Fantastic marketing and gullible counterstrike players is all i have to say really.

I can't comment on the Iiyama input lag though, but from playing Painkiller at LAN it felt just as responsive as those above. I'd put money on the new Iiyama being the only true 120hz gaming monitor on TN panel that's actually still available to buy new... but like i said... i haven't had enough time with it, and I've yet to see any numbers published.

I say that primarily because there's also the Samsung S27A750D and Samsung S27A950D which are in my opinion kings of pixel response, but their input lag i imagine is slightly higher than one that is catered directly toward gaming such as the BenQ (check the values on legit review websites)... but when all is said and done I'd imagine the difference is probably negligible anyway and if the OP has a problem with the BenQ, he'll have a problem with the rest as you've quite rightly said.

TL:DR (for impje), There is a problem with the BenQ, but unfortunately it's not the one you describe, the problem in this case is just you.

Yes, you're right to say there are some noticeable differences in response time between them but most people don't seem to notice that at all (zealot isn't the only one I know playing without AMA on the BenQ) and it's not as critical as input lag IMO (I can't stand overdrive artefacts but I can live with some clean trailing).
The 120hz alone make these monitors satisfying for most gamers despite some of them having slight trailing/artefacts. The complaints about these monitors are rarely related to pixel response times (and the OP clearly isn't complaining about that).

Also, I think the BenQ received some firmware update that improved things greatly, could be wrong though.

Oh, and I had forgotten about the new Samsungs, I think those have been measured to have some input lag of about 10ms (so that's a one frame lag with 120hz). I haven't seem them in action so I dunno about their pixel response time but the reviewers seem to agree that it's very good.

hm, interesting ;) i'm going to play with AMA on for a while then because of what you two wrote, it's just that i remember hating it before.

2 weeks later it turns out you are right and AMA on delivers a more responsive quake experiences. i still dislike the 'artifacts' or whatever it is it produces. thanks! :p

listen impje, i will give you understanding on how to find gear for your gaming....1st of all, when you change equipment, esp big thing like monitor, it will be different, no matter if it says 0ms on paper or not... its because simply something gets exchanged in your link and it will be different... ok?
now... i can tell you, i have 120hz 2233rz monitor, i changed to it from 60hz, at that time people told me just get used to it... i told them, 60hz lcd is crap for gaming, it was at time there was no 120hz monitor, im quake player for over 10 year, i dont listen to these people, to me, from first second i try out quake on new 60hz lcd its night and day between my old crt who died... i said ok, i will use it and learn to play with, so, i know im handicapped but i just play with it because i have become casual gamer and its not so important... so i start to play more and more, i dont care... at least its nice and thin and small weight and takes little power, and muich better for internet in general... its just bad in quake... ok, so 120hz comes to market, i buy the 2233rz samsung, plug it in and launch quake in 120hz... everything super smooth, really nice... but what happen is that again i have to adapt to this monitor, its much smoother but its different... i play for 3-4 days and i think... its not as good as crt... better than 60hz lcd yes... but its still something not right... it was the same thing with me when i changed from ball mouse to optical.... it felt weird... i still prefer ball mouse over optical, i think this technology is not good any more, unless you have ms wmo, ime sensor... ok enough with that, im sensitive player too since i grew up with quake and very sensitive for everything to be tip top to play high level.... now, i play with this 2233rz for 2 years... one day i think, lets try 60hz lcd again... i play, and u know what... i destroy my oponents like crazy with it....for 3 days i put on my 60hz again and i played like crazy... i was thinking... is this 120hz technology just fake?.... its super smooth, just like 120hz crt, but its not the same, i dont understand either... but when i played on 60hz lcd going from 120hz lcd i just started to kick ass with it... its like the xhair locks on the refresh rate and you only read half the information so you become quicker.... anyways... i still put 120hz back and i mainly play with this....


now i will try to explain you something from my experience, even if a monitor says 3ms reponse time, 0ms input lag, bla bla bla.,.. you have to try it, lcd's are different technology,,, nobody can say its better or worse... could be one monitor which says 30ms response time you will have all kind of shit on your screen with it but maybe you will start to kick ass with it?.... picture quality is not important to me either, just very bright and make keel shine... you have to try it out, i know somebody can tell you, yes this monitor is super good for quake,,, but its for him, everyone is different and it depends on what you used to play with and even if its bad it could that it actually gives you a performance increase even if its not good on paper....u understand? whatever people will tell you....you have to try it out...i was in same situation when i tried to learn how to play with optical mouse, i told people its fake movement, everyone told me, you are full of shit, its much better than ball mouse... but ball mouse is like analog and optical mouse is like digital to me... too much calculations... people dont understand me when i tell them... its all about what you feel and its important you find your monitor, dont go for spec, 120hz is nice but its not sure its good for you and in quake... you have to try it out, dont believe in this tech, try it, if its bad, throw it out, if its good then dont listen to anybody what they tell, find your equipment, ok? this is how you become good.

:p

Yes i understandt your point here, thats what i am doing for long time now.I had big problem to get used to with optical mice as well.I changed over 15 mice for last 12y.Now i can clearly say whats best for me, without experience i would never find best equipment for me.In case of monitor, its not about 60hz,75,85 or 120hz, its about input lag...i started to play on 15inch monitor with 75Hz and was destroying everything, HZ simply not important for me!All i am talking about this strange inconsistent input lag.Maybe if this lag would be all the time same, i mean it will be stucked on 5ms,10ms or whatever i will get used to it.Its like 75Hz it will be same all the time and not changing, maybe thats the main reason.

"i was thinking... is this 120hz technology just fake?.... its super smooth, just like 120hz crt, but its not the same, i dont understand either... "

Yes a 120hz LCD isn't the same as a 120hz CRT and it can never be, it'll remain a bit blurry because of the sample and hold nature of LCDs (and any other recent display technology for that matter).

Scroll down a bit on this post and you'll have some pretty clear explanations: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=960548

In short, LCDs display a new frame on top of the older one (every 8ms in the case of 120hz) while a CRT will display a new frame on top of nothing at all (hence the annoying flickering with low refresh rates, because there are basically black frames between coloured frames).

So even with a 0ms response time (like with OLED displays) a flat panel display looks blurry compared to a CRT. But the higher the refresh rate, the more subtle the blur becomes.