ESR - Best monitor 2014 ? (bye crt?)

<< Comment #1 @ 17:46 CDT, 18 July 2014 >>

By

Well you're definitely not getting an advantage ingame worthy of your money. It's worth it if you use LCD for other stuff, which most of people do.

<< Comment #3 @ 18:12 CDT, 18 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

108 - Reply to #1

at least i would get a wider view than 4:3 and bigger targets :D
maybe not worth 250-330 euro though :/

<< Comment #35 @ 06:04 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

amOKchen - Reply to #3

No reason to stick with CRT in 2014.
You will be very happy to upgrade to BenQ.

<< Comment #37 @ 07:29 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

mi - Reply to #35

Upgrade from "gaming" CRT to LCD:
- poor TN viewing angles
- worse, 6bit colors
- only 1080 pixels vertical (I use 1600x1200)
- one, native resolution without scaling
- only 144 Hz (CRT can go up to 160-170)
- more lag - with all the extra hardware, software and optimization, it's still a few miliseconds behind a CRT

It's better to leave CRT for fast games. Anything else - go for quality LCD, like 24" 1920x1200 IPS. This at least has some advantages over CRT.

20%

<< Comment #43 @ 08:49 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

amOKchen - Reply to #37

It really helps you go from 2500 elo to 2520 elo doesnt it?

10%

<< Comment #47 @ 10:37 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

mi - Reply to #43

CRT vs best LCD gaming monitor difference is indeed very small.
But if someone has very good CRT, there's no reason to "upgrade" to gaming LCD in 2014. I wish better screens were available though, so CRTs could finally retire.

<< Comment #48 @ 10:46 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

*b0se - Reply to #37

I'd proffer that the (large amount of) additional screen estate you get going from 5:4 to 16:9/10 is more beneficial than that listed here.

<< Comment #98 @ 17:19 CDT, 22 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

doped - Reply to #48

4:3, crt monitors are 4:3. early lcd's where 5:4(1280x1024)

<< Comment #102 @ 04:10 CDT, 23 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

*b0se - Reply to #98

Ah yes, I meant 4:3 :)

<< Comment #51 @ 12:25 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Retribution - Reply to #37

but IPS panels are slow. the input latency (worst form of lag IMHO) is too high for competitive play. especially compared to CRTs.

<< Comment #56 @ 13:08 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

mi - Reply to #51

Sure, but assuming someone already has that 21" or better CRT for gaming, IPS will be good for other activities, as a secondary monitor.

<< Comment #57 @ 13:14 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Retribution - Reply to #56

I agree. IPS panels are beautiful.

<< Comment #64 @ 16:18 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

takesix - Reply to #37

Those CRT spec you're posting are absolutely insane.

1600x1200 @ 160hz?

What's the name of the model? is if still sold? For how much?

<< Comment #70 @ 16:57 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Schreq - Reply to #64

I think you are misunderstanding him. He just meant there are CRTs which can do 160Hz maximum. CRTs work differently than lcds and you can't use maximum refresh rate at any resolution. You are limited by factors like maximum pixel clock, max horizontal and vertical refresh rates etc.

For example the iiyama vision master pro 514 and 454, which are known for their very high refresh rates, can do 200Hz vertical and 142kHz horizontal. Within those limits you could do 120Hz @ 1472x1104. If you want higher refresh rates, you have to lower the (vertical) resolution.

<< Comment #72 @ 16:59 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

mi - Reply to #64

Nah.. it's either high resolution or refresh rate: 1600x1200 @100Hz desktop, and 1024x768 @ 155Hz QL. Best CRTs have about 15Hz more.

<< Comment #74 @ 17:01 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

odellus - Reply to #72

what crt does 100 hz at 1600x1200?

<< Comment #78 @ 17:32 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Schreq - Reply to #74

Any crt which can do at least ~127.1 kHz horizontal refresh rate :)

<< Comment #79 @ 18:00 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

odellus - Reply to #78

and which ones are those? can't be that many if fw900 can't.

<< Comment #80 @ 18:55 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Schreq - Reply to #79

Iiyama vision master pro 454, 512 and 514
Sony GDM-F520
Mitsubishi Diamond Pro 2070SB

Can probably find more but enough Google-fu for today.

Edited by Schreq at 19:10 CDT, 21 July 2014

<< Comment #82 @ 19:40 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Yakumo - Reply to #80

I used to have the Vision Master Pro 454.
Got sick of EDID problems with nvidia drivers, having to modify inf files and for some reason it had no driver from MS built into the OS unlike most other Iiyama's ( http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=88011 )

When the focus started failing on the left side for about an inchafter maybe 6 years I finally went to one of the first 120hz benq displays.

Edited by Yakumo at 19:42 CDT, 21 July 2014

<< Comment #121 @ 14:55 CDT, 25 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

pierow - Reply to #82

If you have an nvidia card you just needed to create a custom resolution profile in the driver with GTF timing. It's actually really simple.

<< Comment #122 @ 15:47 CDT, 25 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Yakumo - Reply to #121

Figured that out myself in 2010, though it was CVT that I used, I can't remember if it was because GVT didn't work, or just that I used CVT as it was a newer standard : http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showpost.php?...ostcount=4

That didn't solve wanting to have a driver for it in x64 windows, but i'd solved that in 2009 as per the link in #83

Edited by Yakumo at 15:48 CDT, 25 July 2014

<< Comment #84 @ 20:02 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Something - Reply to #74

Mine, dell p1130 (sony trinitron tube); which is also at near enough the maximum bandwidth the vga standard can provide.

got it for �3 plus �25 postage :P

<< Comment #73 @ 17:00 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

odellus - Reply to #64

highest res you're going to get with 100+ hz refresh rate is 1024x768. if you want higher than that you have to drop res to 800x600 or 640x480. i think most crts will do 85-90 hz at 1600x1200 tho.

<< Comment #93 @ 09:16 CDT, 22 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Tsubaki - Reply to #64

I play with 800x600@170hz and for desktop use I use 1600x1200 @ 100hz

Trinitron G520

My problem with it is that with a refresh rate like 1600x1200 @ 100hz it makes the desktop look a bit blurry compared to 1600x1200 @ 75/85hz, and a refresh rate that low starts to give me a headache.

and in other games like CS:GO its hard to play the game on a low resolution, the lowest resolution that looks nice is 1024x768 @ 120hz (can go to 1024x768 @ 155hz but its more blurry)

Edited by Tsubaki at 09:19 CDT, 22 July 2014

<< Comment #96 @ 17:13 CDT, 22 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

noacc - Reply to #93

just got one from friend, try out 1152x864 144Hz for QL. I loved it. Still did not decide is it better than 800x600 170Hz though. It even looks nicer and sharper than 1080p on my benq 2411t.

Edited by noacc at 17:14 CDT, 22 July 2014

<< Comment #49 @ 11:49 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Schreq - Reply to #35

Sony GDM FW900 and iiyama Vision Master Pro 514 are 2 reasons to stick with CRT, even in 2014 and probably a couple more years as well :p

<< Comment #54 @ 12:42 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

108 - Reply to #49

yea i wish i had a fw900 24inch :)) none of the above is available in sweden if you do not import yourself from other countries.

<< Comment #81 @ 18:55 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

cumrag - Reply to #49

what's the usual lifetime for these monitors? i've only had the cheaper ones that eventually start blurring.

<< Comment #88 @ 05:55 CDT, 22 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Schreq - Reply to #81

As with every piece of electronics, it's luck of the draw really. I've bought my fw900 second hand around january 2011. The guy I bought it from said he purchased it in 2003, So it's around 11 years old by now and I put it under quite heavy use. Despite some problems when turning it on for the first time (cold start), it's still going strong.

I think one can increase his chances by not running a CRT at its limits 24/7. 75Hz is enough for desktop use imo. Another thing is resolution changes: If you run different resolutions, in-game and on the desktop, you change resolution whenever you alt-tab. The trick is to switch to the in-game resolution manually before you start a game.

<< Comment #90 @ 06:10 CDT, 22 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

kevz - Reply to #88

75hz gives headaches :(

100hz minimal for desktop imo :D

<< Comment #95 @ 17:06 CDT, 22 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Schreq - Reply to #90

Yeh, I guess that sucks then. It's np for me tho.

<< Comment #89 @ 05:55 CDT, 22 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

odellus - Reply to #81

15-20 years probably

<< Comment #2 @ 18:05 CDT, 18 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

jamalz

CRT FOR LYFE

13%

<< Comment #4 @ 18:13 CDT, 18 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

108 - Reply to #2

CRTCRTCRT
R
T
C
R
T
C
R
T

<< Comment #7 @ 21:19 CDT, 18 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

ZeriouS - Reply to #4

C R T
R
T

<< Comment #5 @ 20:32 CDT, 18 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

ObiousAlias

vg248qe

<< Comment #6 @ 20:42 CDT, 18 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

fau

Have you even tried it? Best monitor for quakelive in 2014 is your CRT.

edit: Ofc it's very power hungry and takes a lot of space. Still in terms of technical parameters important for ql it owns any lcd in every aspect.

Edited by fau at 20:44 CDT, 18 July 2014

<< Comment #8 @ 21:23 CDT, 18 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Emenike

Edited by Emenike at 21:24 CDT, 18 July 2014

1%

<< Comment #39 @ 07:54 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

eburbeck ' - Reply to #8

so lifelike

<< Comment #150 @ 08:00 CDT, 26 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Badb0y - Reply to #8

running at what hz?

<< Comment #9 @ 21:43 CDT, 18 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

RAGEworthy

vg248e looks beautiful.

<< Comment #10 @ 22:34 CDT, 18 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

schizm

CRT forever u cross eyed mules

2%

<< Comment #11 @ 11:55 CDT, 19 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

mmaluco

Prolite 2488 is awesome for the money

3%

<< Comment #12 @ 16:29 CDT, 19 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

FlashSoul

If you have a good CRT, just stick with it. Otherwise, well, it's your choice. I chose the Asus VG248QE.

<< Comment #15 @ 17:11 CDT, 19 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

108 - Reply to #12

http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleID=789

Samsung syncmaster 1100p plus 21 inch! :)
Not aperture grill, and not the biggest size but i think its pretty ok.

Never owned the top rated models so i cant really compare..

Im happy with it but newer games look abit wierd in 4:3 and using 1024x768-1152x864 in windows to still have 120hz+ aswell has having readable text is not the ideal way of browsing sites/watching movies. (text at higher crt resolutions sucks)

since quakelive nowadays dont stretch the resolution to widescreen but actually gives you more view on sides with proper aspect ratio, i imagine having a bigger screen with a close fov an advantage in hitscan weapons since the enemy model simply is alot bigger for you. /and better surrounding awareness with the extra view.

Edited by 108 at 17:13 CDT, 19 July 2014

8%

<< Comment #31 @ 01:36 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

noacc - Reply to #15

it isn't. Since you get larger area of view enemy model size stays nearly the same.

<< Comment #41 @ 08:32 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Emenike - Reply to #31

Since you have same horizotal area model size will be bigger.

<< Comment #58 @ 14:06 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

noacc - Reply to #41

so i took the pics somehow it is indeed slightly smaller width

Edited by noacc at 15:42 CDT, 21 July 2014

<< Comment #13 @ 16:49 CDT, 19 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Apheleon

I have the VG248QE and I highly recommend it.

<< Comment #14 @ 16:58 CDT, 19 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

108 - Reply to #13

do you have recent experience with crt ? ;)

<< Comment #19 @ 23:21 CDT, 19 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Apheleon - Reply to #14

i haven't used a crt since 2003 :)

<< Comment #85 @ 20:06 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Something - Reply to #14

I have a 21" crt as my main with a Samsung 2233rz as my secondary (prettty much the first 120hz/3D panel released).

The difference between the two is very noticeable regarding input lag at the 2233rz's native resolution, and next to unbearable at anything else. Other than that, no difference.

For a most capable quaker like yourself, I'd keep the CRT and have a second monitor :)

<< Comment #16 @ 17:33 CDT, 19 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

x3n

108
0
8

<< Comment #17 @ 18:25 CDT, 19 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

108 - Reply to #16

X3n
3
n

<< Comment #40 @ 07:55 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

eburbeck ' - Reply to #17

get a room

<< Comment #18 @ 19:30 CDT, 19 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

zkyp

CRT best.
BenQ XL2411 series "nearly" as good in gaming, a lot better at all the rest.

<< Comment #20 @ 16:55 CDT, 20 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Yakumo - Reply to #18

except colour, and non native rez, and viewing angles...

<< Comment #32 @ 01:37 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

noacc - Reply to #20

whats about their non native res?

<< Comment #75 @ 17:05 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Yakumo - Reply to #32

CRT owners will always relent losing the fact they give unscaled image at any rez. If you've only ever known LCD's which always have to have a native rez, you'll never know how much better it was...

<< Comment #76 @ 17:15 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

noacc - Reply to #75

well I used to play on CRT but it was long time ago. Tomorrow I will be able to compare xl2411t which I own with sony G520. Can't wait to see what 170Hz looks like.

<< Comment #97 @ 17:17 CDT, 22 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

noacc - Reply to #75

man... CRT is brilliant got Sony G520... It really gives the feeling of connection to the game even though I am using same 144Hz as I used to on xl2411t. Lightboost is somewhat comparable, but it lacks something, hard to figure it... Maybe that instant reposnse to mouse/kb input is doing the trick?

Edited by noacc at 17:18 CDT, 22 July 2014

<< Comment #103 @ 00:26 CDT, 24 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Emenike - Reply to #97

It's called input lag caused by LightBoost. One man measure it 4 ms but it's noticeable.

<< Comment #125 @ 21:18 CDT, 25 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

odellus - Reply to #97

because crt has zero input lag

1%

<< Comment #21 @ 17:27 CDT, 20 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Frazer

I had enough CRTs in my life to say that well, they're good but my desk can't hold that monstrosity.

Also, sorry but electromagnetic radiation is a biatch.
I play on a plain 5-yr old DELL LCD panel and I'm happy.

Also, more often than not these "gaming" LCDs are just marketing ploys to charge u more for "the gaming monitor".

<< Comment #22 @ 17:54 CDT, 20 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

gienon - Reply to #21

Yeah, this whole 120hz gaming mumbo jumbo is just a bunch of baloney. Human eye can't even distinguish anything above 30 FPS anyway, right? Those marketing folks...

Edited by gienon at 17:55 CDT, 20 July 2014

14%

<< Comment #23 @ 19:51 CDT, 20 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Anonymous (96.54.32.50) - Reply to #22

Some people are happy being bad gienon. Don't hate.

<< Comment #87 @ 03:10 CDT, 22 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Frazer - Reply to #23

Yeah, suck on that. Monitors? Monitors are for pussies. I draw each QL frame on paper and hang it on the wall, who's more hardcore?

<< Comment #156 @ 23:13 CDT, 26 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Gobotz - Reply to #87

that's a pretty good description of how the game feels.

<< Comment #25 @ 20:16 CDT, 20 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

cerno - Reply to #22

I have had this said to me so many times haha.

<< Comment #30 @ 01:32 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Frazer - Reply to #22

Relax, some people feel they need to buy a precise and responsive monitor, some don't. I'm used to play on shitty monitors so there. used to play on ASUS VE247 and still have it - but maybe my eyes are too simple and too unprepared to see the difference.

<< Comment #34 @ 03:53 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

solobeNNN - Reply to #22

yea fuckin idiots... i use 30 hz and my brain and eyes bleed sometimes and my mouse movement feels like aboslute shit and is slower then a snail but atleast i didnt over pay for some 120hz marketing garbage

<< Comment #62 @ 16:08 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Frazer - Reply to #34

Gotcha y'all with that monitor story didnt I.

I love to troll nerds.

<< Comment #65 @ 16:40 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

solobeNNN - Reply to #62

i was trolling to mate.. might needa tune ur social skills

<< Comment #67 @ 16:50 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Frazer - Reply to #65

It wasnt aimed at u Droid...more @ gienon :P

<< Comment #69 @ 16:55 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

solobeNNN - Reply to #67

oh.... well i still wanna fite u irl

8%

<< Comment #77 @ 17:25 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Frazer - Reply to #69

Lets settle this like men:

JACKSTRAWS DEATHMATCH

The first one to pull all jackstraws wins. No Quad.

<< Comment #83 @ 19:55 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

solobeNNN - Reply to #77

i heard ur such an online at jackstraws tho

<< Comment #86 @ 03:09 CDT, 22 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Frazer - Reply to #83

THEY LIE.

<< Comment #92 @ 07:29 CDT, 22 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

solobeNNN - Reply to #86

| ]

<< Comment #24 @ 20:10 CDT, 20 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

*b0se

XL2420Z or if you don't want additional ports; XL2411T/Z.

Make sure it has V2 firmware and then follow this:

http://www.blurbusters.com/benq/strobe-utility

Edited by *b0se at 06:02 CDT, 22 July 2014

<< Comment #26 @ 21:32 CDT, 20 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Mental Patience

just found this review of an Aoc monitor. has the lowest input lag of any lcd claims the review.

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/aoc-g2460pqu-14...991-9.html

Edited by Mental Patience at 10:52 CDT, 21 July 2014

<< Comment #27 @ 22:27 CDT, 20 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Emenike - Reply to #26

Their result is joke.

<< Comment #28 @ 22:29 CDT, 20 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Yakumo - Reply to #26

Tomshardware seems to think 16ms is great but pcmonitors gave the XL2411T less than 2ms...

http://pcmonitors.info/reviews/benq-xl2411t

<< Comment #29 @ 22:40 CDT, 20 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Shin-obi - Reply to #26

they're testing it in 60hz, ffs

<< Comment #33 @ 03:50 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Pushpabon

Make sure to get one that supports displayport. Freesync incoming.

<< Comment #36 @ 07:16 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

*b0se - Reply to #33

That needs a supporting panel doesn't it?

"Project FreeSync is AMD's name for the complete solution: a compatible AMD Radeon� graphics card, an enabled AMD Catalyst� graphics driver, and an Adaptive-Sync-aware display"

I.e. AMD Freesync = Nvidia GSYNC.

<< Comment #38 @ 07:41 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Yakumo - Reply to #36

Yup.
They both need specific hardware in the panel,

BUT
If you change his comment to 'make sure to get one that supports displayport 1.2a' AND specifically says it's 'adaptive-sync' enabled.

Then you ARE getting the required hardware \o/

freesync has been taking into the standard, and re-named 'adaptive-sync'

This is, perhaps, another reason why g-sync monitors seem to have been delayed indefinitely. Maybe they're canning it and just going with the standard because it's VESA

http://www.brightsideofnews.com/2014/05/12/ve...-standard/

Edited by Yakumo at 08:51 CDT, 21 July 2014

4%

<< Comment #42 @ 08:42 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

*b0se - Reply to #38

Ahhh, I had no idea it was a standard. Although 'Freesync' did strike me as odd if it was AMD only and hardware specific.

I assume DP1.2 (the latest Benq Z series) != 1.2a?

<< Comment #44 @ 08:53 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Yakumo - Reply to #42

Correct 1.2 is different from 1.2a

Edited my post above,though, according to the wiki, adaptive-sync is "an option" on 1.2a, that implies it's not mandatory :/

That really sucks, it should be mandatory, if the rest of the screen doesn't fully support adaptive-sync then they should mandate that they can only state they're displayport 1.2 at best :( It just really confuses the market.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DisplayPort

Edited by Yakumo at 08:55 CDT, 21 July 2014

<< Comment #45 @ 09:55 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

*b0se - Reply to #44

Gah (on both counts).

Yes it does indeed.

<< Comment #46 @ 10:24 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Pushpabon - Reply to #38

Iinm variable sync will be in the displayport standard and undercuts nvidia's Gsync by not requiring any HW and thus it's infinitely more better.

edit:
"DisplayPort� Adaptive-Sync is an ingredient feature of a DisplayPort� link and an industry standard that enables technologies like Project FreeSync."

So you need a dp 1.2a monitor and a suitable radeon card and you're set. No idea if nvidia continues to be a greedy money grabbing shit or if they'll drop their proprietary garbage and come into the fold.

Edited by Pushpabon at 11:08 CDT, 21 July 2014

<< Comment #50 @ 12:12 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Yakumo - Reply to #46

read post #44
It only 'doesn't require any hardware' in the same way that g-sync doesn't, if you buy a g-sync display, and happen to have a capable nvida card.

matching displayrefresh to whatever your frame rate is doesn't come magically the monitor internals have to support it.

g-sync = needs displayport + g-sync module built into monitor (don't bother mentioning the asus 'upgrade kit' lol, it replaces about all the display internals) + nvidia card

adaptive-sync (formerly freesync) = requires displayport 1.2a + 'adaptive sync' capable monitor (this will be hardware) + ATI (nvidia will they'll surely opt to support a VESA standard too, but no comment yet)

<< Comment #53 @ 12:29 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Pushpabon - Reply to #50

Yeah I read the faq and thought my edit made it clear I was in error. Difference being that one is an open standard and the other is expensive and proprietary.

Edited by Pushpabon at 12:29 CDT, 21 July 2014

<< Comment #55 @ 12:54 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Yakumo - Reply to #53

The biggest pain, by far, is nothing available to actually buy!!

<< Comment #133 @ 22:27 CDT, 25 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

byce - Reply to #55

So the XL2420Z doesn't support adaptive-sync even though it has a DisplayPort? And there's no reason for me to get the XL2420Z over the XL2411Z other than the stupid profile switch thing?

I'm going to buy a 144hz monitor soon, and was looking at the XL2411Z since it's way cheaper than the XL2420Z, but would buy the XL2420Z if the DisplayPort is worth the extra money i.e. because of the adaptive-sync thing. But if it doesn't support adaptive-sync anyway, then...

<< Comment #135 @ 22:38 CDT, 25 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Yakumo - Reply to #133

Correct.
Absolutely nothing available now has displayPort 1.2a (the a's important) and adaptive-sync.

One huge question is actually going to be the cost, G-sync monitors a WAY more expensive than the non G-sync versions atm, is adaptive sync going to try gouge people too, or be absorbed into a normal price as it's a displayport/VESA standard.

Also, again, Nvidia haven't said anything about supporting it yet.
They really should, as it's a VESA standard, they'll be really angering customers if they don't, but it depends how pissy they're going to be about g-sync.

9%

<< Comment #136 @ 22:50 CDT, 25 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

byce - Reply to #135

Thanks for the fast response.

So from what I've read, the XL2411Z is better than the ASUS because it has better color reproduction and a lower price tag? If not, what would make the ASUS better? Is LightBoost way better than BenQ's MBR?

Basically, is there any reason to spend $60 more or whatever on the ASUS than the XL2411Z?

<< Comment #137 @ 22:57 CDT, 25 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Yakumo - Reply to #136

Could be wrong, too tired to check now, but I thought the asus (1080p models) and the benq used the same panels, so the colours should be pretty similar.

Blurbusters seem to think MBR is better than Lightboost (lightboost doesn't currently work on 144hz either apparently), see http://www.blurbusters.com/benq/strobe-utility/

I'd have to search around for current thoughts on its effect on input lag, but going to crash now.

5%

<< Comment #139 @ 23:11 CDT, 25 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

byce - Reply to #137

I'm trying to keep my eyes open as well, I don't know why I only want to research monitors when I should be in bed :D

I'm leaning towards the XL2411Z for now unless you talk me out of it by telling me there is way less input lag on the ASUS. Thanks for your help. :)

<< Comment #142 @ 02:23 CDT, 26 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Yakumo - Reply to #139

see #140 too

Edited by Yakumo at 11:30 CDT, 26 July 2014

<< Comment #151 @ 09:36 CDT, 26 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

byce - Reply to #142

lol tell me the post you meant after you get some sleep :P

<< Comment #153 @ 11:31 CDT, 26 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Yakumo - Reply to #151

urp fixed

<< Comment #52 @ 12:26 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

odellus

vg236h. go buy on ebay. only difference between it and the newer gaymen monitors is lack of lightboost support and 24 hz. glossy + way, way better color. personally i play on a qnix qx2710 @ 120 hz. newer monitors not worth using until lightboost input lag is eliminated, horrifically bad ag coating is fixed, and colors are better, which isn't going to happen judging by pg278q review.

Edited by odellus at 16:06 CDT, 21 July 2014

<< Comment #59 @ 14:09 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

kevz - Reply to #52

better colors, but a bit slower response time (5-16ms, varies). for a gaming monitor, id personally go for the fastest one. but i was fairly happy with my 236, now it functions as secondary monitor here :)

<< Comment #60 @ 15:55 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

odellus - Reply to #59

it has <3 ms input lag.

http://wecravegamestoo.com/forums/monitor-rev...post615943

Edited by odellus at 15:56 CDT, 21 July 2014

<< Comment #61 @ 16:05 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

kevz - Reply to #60

dont have to throw reviews my way, ive bought it knowing it had decent greyscale response time but colors can vary upto 16ms. cant even remember the review ive read years ago, but im 100% sure it was accurate. the 246 seems very fast though, maybe i am placebo'ing but it just feels snappy like a gaming monitor should.

<< Comment #63 @ 16:12 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

odellus - Reply to #61

16 ms would be more like ips panel on the slow end of the spectrum, lol. my qx2710 which is pls averages 12 ms response time. if you are talking about input lag, it is less than 3 ms. the only other "proper" review i can find is anandtech and they're completely useless when it comes to monitors.

Edited by odellus at 08:52 CDT, 23 July 2014

<< Comment #66 @ 16:45 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

kevz - Reply to #63

any review comes to the conclusion the VG236 isnt the fastest gaming monitor on the market, but fast enough for anyone to enjoy gaming in general. and yeah, i do 100% believe those reviews, since in my own experience the 246 feels more snappy with its true sub 3ms input lag. if the 236 was indeed 3ms then they would be identical. that just isnt the case. btw, how do you explain the ghosting the 236 still has, if it was truely 3ms?

not to say the 236 is bad, cause frankly its one of the best gaming monitors that came out a few years ago; superior color and picture quality compared to any gaming panel at the time (even now!), and fast enough to enjoy any game with (if you dont mind it slightly lagging behind a crt, only esr could complain about that :P )

<< Comment #68 @ 16:55 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

odellus - Reply to #66

vg236 is "true" <3 ms input lag. it was measured using the second most accurate method of measuring input lag available. input lag =/= response time. higher response time (slower pixels) = more ghosting. my qx2710 also has basically zero input lag but more ghosting than vg236 because the pixels are slower. if you think you can notice the difference between 2-3 ms and 0.5-1 ms input lag, i'm just going to laugh at you. i don't know what 246 is either. you mean 248 as in vg248qe? it probably feels faster because it has almost no ghosting.

Edited by odellus at 16:57 CDT, 21 July 2014

<< Comment #71 @ 16:58 CDT, 21 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

kevz - Reply to #68

fine, just laugh at me then :)

the 248 is indeed the asus one. and its one of the fastest panels around at the mo. albeit with average color reproduction at best.

<< Comment #130 @ 21:29 CDT, 25 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

108 - Reply to #71

kevz, did i understand correctly u say u use vg248qe as secondary monitor now? wwell then what is your primary?

<< Comment #145 @ 04:44 CDT, 26 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

kevz - Reply to #130

other way around :P

248 main 236 secondary

<< Comment #91 @ 06:11 CDT, 22 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Freiya

CRT.

<< Comment #94 @ 11:53 CDT, 22 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

f-shawn

I have the VG248QE w/ gsync and I love it. G-sync on for demanding games (mid-range video card) and 144hz or 120hz/ULMB for fast/competitive games.

<< Comment #99 @ 17:38 CDT, 22 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

doped - Reply to #94

so how does gsync stack up for smoothness, does it matter when most games have shit mouseinput at lower framerates? what about stuttering when a game is already struggling?

<< Comment #101 @ 18:13 CDT, 22 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Yakumo - Reply to #99

read http://www.blurbusters.com/gsync/preview2/
pay note to the polling behaviour issue they say nvidia is working on.

Basically you'd want it for modern games where you're not getting higher FPS than your screens refresh, but you wouldn't want it enabled for Quake.

<< Comment #105 @ 20:12 CDT, 24 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

f-shawn - Reply to #99

it def matters. in fact the mouse feels way better during drops than it did before with the stutter out of sync fps/hz.

i dont want to go back to non-gsync basically, it is like when i first got a 120hz screen.

<< Comment #100 @ 18:06 CDT, 22 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

puritan '

CRT is still the best choice for playing fps games. That wont change until OLED monitors make a decent progress.

<< Comment #104 @ 01:54 CDT, 24 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Frazer

OK, for real now. I use SONY GDM-FW900 for gaming. Can't beat that monster even though it destroys my desk and requires a small powerplant to operate.

Pluses: All the pluses of CRT in high-end version. LCDs can't compare IMHO. GORGEOUS display.
Minuses: Size, power requirements, EM radiation. Standard CRT fare.

Unless they make the same OLED for the same price, I won't convert. That thing is a beauty.

<< Comment #106 @ 20:56 CDT, 24 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

storm

Makes me laugh when people have this idea that using CRT gives them some kind of advantage and maybe makes them better in gaming. The way I look at it is: cypher/rapha etc use LCD at all their tournaments, their aim and reaction times are unreal. I doubt CRT would make them any better, so why think it gives the average layman an advantage?
Basically my conclusion is: CRT doesn't make you better, all it does is give you a large electric bill and dodgey eyes that can't focus by the time you're 40. Just enjoy a beautiful new and healthy 120hz LCD monitor.

<< Comment #107 @ 21:30 CDT, 24 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

FlashSoul - Reply to #106

So basically none of your arguments are technical and you assume that they aren't good because they aren't easily available.

<< Comment #108 @ 01:49 CDT, 25 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Frazer - Reply to #107

"maybe"
"The way I look at it"
"I doubt"
"my conclusion is"

I found a great way to use your own words to answer you:

Maybe my conclusion is I doubt the way you look at it.

Edited by Lolzy at 01:50 CDT, 25 July 2014

<< Comment #109 @ 01:50 CDT, 25 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

storm - Reply to #107

I said it makes me laugh, much like your response, lol!
Edit: and since when is it illegal to have an opinion?

Edited by storm at 01:54 CDT, 25 July 2014

<< Comment #110 @ 03:06 CDT, 25 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

pacmanpl ' - Reply to #109

What if your opinion stinks like poo?

<< Comment #111 @ 03:34 CDT, 25 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Frazer - Reply to #109

Again, using your OWN POST to answer you:

It is illegal to have an opinion much like your response, makes me laugh, lol!

<< Comment #123 @ 21:14 CDT, 25 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

storm - Reply to #111

Lolzy, you're just being a troll. If you have a different opinion share it. It's odd how speaking your mind attracts this kind of childish response.

Edited by storm at 21:15 CDT, 25 July 2014

<< Comment #143 @ 02:50 CDT, 26 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Frazer - Reply to #123

But I'm telling you the truth!

TBH, the CRT is better than LCD in terms of input lag, resolution capability and color palette. Compare their technical specifications and see for yourself.

CRT has a lot of drawbacks but if you have a professional high end CRT the picture quality is stunning enough to warrant monster size and electric bill.

Until the OLED monitors drop in price (5000$ for 25" - kinda tough) the CRT is the way to go if you seek for a high-performance display device.

And about your opinion: Yeah, everyone's entitled to it. Also remember that when you present your opinion you will have to defend it, as there will be people that disagree with you. You're free to defend it now. Please proceed.

<< Comment #144 @ 04:32 CDT, 26 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

storm - Reply to #143

That's more like it, thanks for a decent reply. And yeah I agree with what you say. My only point was that since the lofty reaches of skill attained by Cypher and Rapha are on LCD, why put so much faith/investment into CRT? That's a rather valid assumption I think. I'm taking a Quake skill gaming standpoint only, not other factors.

<< Comment #119 @ 09:04 CDT, 25 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

FlashSoul - Reply to #109

It's not illegal and I will always defend your right to have stupid opinions.

<< Comment #129 @ 21:22 CDT, 25 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

storm - Reply to #119

I also talk from personal experience. I used CRT for years, and I had a 21/22'' Mitsubishi diamondtron monitor a few years back. I've moved on because LCD is better for my eyes, and (in my opinion) there's not a noticeable difference between my 120hz lcd and my old CRT.

<< Comment #116 @ 05:37 CDT, 25 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

DamianLillard - Reply to #106

Ping, input lag, mouse, build a chain -before- the interaction of a player and obviously the shorter you can cut this chain, the faster you can act to said events. I don't understand what player's skill has to do with input lag or response time, the chain is separate from the player and should add buffer to their actions just like everybody else's.

<< Comment #117 @ 06:55 CDT, 25 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

mi - Reply to #106

"cypher/rapha etc use LCD at all their tournaments" - because they play on provided computers and monitors, only use own mouse / keyboard / headphones.
CRTs aren't used on tournaments, because there are no new CRTs, and the organizers would have to provide a few identical monitors. Also CRTs are big and heavy, which means problems with transport. It's better for top duelers to play on similar gaming LCDs at home as well, so they are used to them.

Basically, the difference is that CRT has less lag than LCD. Lets say LCD has 5ms, 4ms behind CRT:

5 > 1
and your response: "Makes me laugh", "I doubt", and ohh, that beautiful, shiny monitor frame.

<< Comment #124 @ 21:17 CDT, 25 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

storm - Reply to #117

I understand they don't have a choice at tournaments. My point is that which ever way you look at it, the pinnacle of quake skill all over the world is on LCD. Now that's just a fact, deal with it.

<< Comment #132 @ 21:33 CDT, 25 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

cumrag - Reply to #124

That's because LCDs now are good enough imo. Pros also probably play on LCDs to get used to tournament conditions.

CRTs are lagless, have no ghosting, etc. You have a higher potential to play better on a CRT than a LCD.

6%

<< Comment #149 @ 07:57 CDT, 26 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Badb0y - Reply to #106

CRT gives you advantage at home, fact. 2 players, same ping, crt player shoots faster - in theory.

Edited by Badb0y at 07:58 CDT, 26 July 2014

<< Comment #112 @ 04:24 CDT, 25 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

M1zzu

Just gonna quickly steal the thread to ask a question:

I've been skimming through a swiss auction site lately and found a ASUS VG248QE for 100 CHF (= 110$/ 86�) and it even has warranty until october 2015. Benq monitors (new) come in at roughly 300 CHF (the xl2411z at least) and the ASUS is new about 350 and higher.

Is there even a debate to be had at that prize? Does the Benq have an edge in any way over the ASUS?

<< Comment #114 @ 04:44 CDT, 25 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

pvh - Reply to #112

Yeah the BenQ has the MBR feature, which is backlight strobing from 60-144Hz with adjustable timing and length with the blurbusters utility. If you don't intend on using that feature or consider it worth the extra cash, the VG248QE is a solid 144Hz performer.

4%

<< Comment #126 @ 21:21 CDT, 25 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

odellus - Reply to #114

vg248qe also supports lightboost so i'm not sure why you talk like this is exclusive to the benq

<< Comment #138 @ 23:03 CDT, 25 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

pvh - Reply to #126

Lightboost:
* only works at 100-120hz
* has to be activated through software
* more lag than MBR due to fully buffering a frame before doing an accelerated scanout
* worse colours
* no adjustable strobe timing

If none of these appear to be problems for you, then you don't need to care about BenQ MBR

9%

<< Comment #141 @ 02:19 CDT, 26 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

DamianLillard - Reply to #138

Don't forget the weird interlacing.

<< Comment #152 @ 10:53 CDT, 26 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

odellus - Reply to #138

*and that matters why? you want to use less than the highest refresh rate your monitor supports? you can use lightboost with 144 hz if you create a custom resolution using lcd reduced timing.
*so? it stays locked on until you turn it off. if anything it's less of a hassle than having to go through osd menus.
*source. lightboost only adds 4 ms input lag so it's not like it matters anyway.
*all new high refresh rate monitors have complete shit color already. if you want good color go buy an fg2421. the gamma changes from lightboost can be compensated through software entirely.
*again, who gives a fuck?

Edited by odellus at 11:18 CDT, 26 July 2014

<< Comment #154 @ 15:49 CDT, 26 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

byce - Reply to #152

Geez, you defend the vg248qe like it's your own son lol. You seem to confirm everything he says so what's wrong with him giving useful information? It was helpful to me.

<< Comment #115 @ 04:51 CDT, 25 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

noacc - Reply to #112

I have xl2411t, sony trinintron g520 crt and I used to test VG248QE. I can feel difference in input lag between benq and sony easely. However benq vs asus is tricky. Those lcds that I used to test acted identically in term of input lag.
However some reviews reported noticable bigger input lag for asus. So if you are not sensitive to that kind of nitpicking go for that 100CHF offer .

4%

<< Comment #120 @ 09:06 CDT, 25 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

FlashSoul - Reply to #112

Like with anything else, just make sure it's not refurbished.

3%

<< Comment #127 @ 21:21 CDT, 25 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

odellus - Reply to #120

i've never had an issue with refurbished products

<< Comment #134 @ 22:33 CDT, 25 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

FlashSoul - Reply to #127

Well if you know what you're getting into I guess that's fine.

<< Comment #128 @ 21:22 CDT, 25 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

odellus - Reply to #112

that's a nobrainer, dude. prepare for complete shit color, though, that is if you're coming from a decent monitor.

Edited by odellus at 21:23 CDT, 25 July 2014

3%

<< Comment #113 @ 04:32 CDT, 25 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

MarzenGold

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/asus_rog_swift_pg278q.htm

Or the AOC 144hz G synch.

Very low input lag.

<< Comment #118 @ 07:27 CDT, 25 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

ischju

800*600 @144hz crt beats hardly anything.

<< Comment #131 @ 21:31 CDT, 25 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

108

So out of the modells available, most people seem to recommend vg248qe infront of the benq?

I might have a deal for a used vg248 for 150 euro, seems pretty good since the new benq cost about 300-340 euro..

<< Comment #140 @ 23:15 CDT, 25 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

quakeisalive

crts still win in terms of input lag and refresh rate but the input lag diff between crt and lcd is very tiny and sooner or later we will have non-interporlated 240hz lcds so unless your a hardcore freak lcds > crt

<< Comment #147 @ 07:01 CDT, 26 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Anonymous (95.130.9.190)

NERDS

<< Comment #155 @ 20:07 CDT, 26 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

108 - Reply to #147

:)))

<< Comment #146 @ 05:16 CDT, 26 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

eh

Any opinions on this one? http://www.amazon.de/Acer-Predator-GN246HLBbi...B00IG0Z0HY

<< Comment #148 @ 07:55 CDT, 26 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Badb0y

>What is the best monitor to buy for quakelive 2014?
for mp games stay on crt. i had a dell trinition monster.

but for all other stuff buy a tft. sharpness, colors etc. i played many singleplayer games again after buying a tft because it looked so much better. a monitor is a consens thing for many applications. i dont go back to crt, even if i have a lag in mp in comparison to crt.

<< Comment #157 @ 23:27 CDT, 26 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Petru

http://forums.blurbusters.com/viewtopic.php?f...3cc183ccb9
"768x480x1100Hz"

<< Comment #159 @ 07:39 CDT, 27 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

thuNDa - Reply to #157

it's all fantasy.
a monitor which is better than everything existing, in every aspect, for under 1000$? suuuuuuuuuuuuuure...

<< Comment #163 @ 19:40 CDT, 27 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

eh - Reply to #159

His sources are wikipedia so it must be legit.

<< Comment #160 @ 08:08 CDT, 27 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

mi - Reply to #157

That resolution is a bit low, I'd use (monitor 8):
1280x800x800Hz or 1536x960x700Hz - for QL
1920x1200x325Hz - desktop
2560x1600x225Hz or 3200x2000x150Hz for some ultra high resolution tasks.
ok, enough dreaming :)

<< Comment #161 @ 17:27 CDT, 27 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

FlashSoul - Reply to #157

In terms of image quality, CRT, SED, and FED displays are considered superior to LCD and OLED monitors, because CRTs, SEDs, and FEDs have higher refresh rates, the ability to natively run multiple resolutions and refresh rates without stretching, no input lag, instant response times, better black levels, better color representation, and better contrast ratios.

There's something I don't understand. How can SED/FED monitors display multiple resolutions "natively" if they consist of a matrix of electron guns shooting electron beams which aren't bent?

<< Comment #158 @ 00:36 CDT, 27 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

chace

Get the Benq XL2411Z.

<< Comment #162 @ 18:27 CDT, 27 July 2014 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

Kokain

Even Asia Carrera knows which the best monitor is

Edited by Kokain at 18:27 CDT, 27 July 2014

3%

<< Comment #164 @ 04:56 CDT, 8 July 2015 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

LIQUID_ES

XL2411Z have the monitor and my question is whether you can set it to 1290x1024 with 144Hz with �Aspect� mode viewing,
I could only make it 120HZ with this resolution.
If someone could help me I would appreciate it .
THNX !!!

<< Comment #165 @ 05:32 CDT, 8 July 2015 >>

(Link, Reply)

By

GogettO - Reply to #164

Create custom resolution in the Nvidia control panel.