I'd recommend the U2414H instead, I think. It has 2 HDMI inputs, along with DisplayPort. What it doesn't have is any legacy (DVI or VGA) inputs. It's around $300 and also has low input lag.
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/dell_u2414h.htm
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
"Gaming" Monitors
- Thread starter Kuro
- Start date
I'd recommend the U2414H instead, I think. It has 2 HDMI inputs, along with DisplayPort. What it doesn't have is any legacy (DVI or VGA) inputs. It's around $300 and also has low input lag.
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/dell_u2414h.htm
HDMI is DVI + audio, it is passive converter so will not make a difference. Says it supports HDCP over DVI.
No lag and no compatibility issue, it's the exact same signal going through a different wire. With the console you'll have to get the audio through the optical out, so hopefully your sound solution can accept optical in.
Yeah, that one is slightly better. It's calibrated, has 2 HDMI inputs (the P2414H only has DVI) and input lag etc is about the same as the P2414H.
But yeah, it's a little more expensive as well. Oh yeah, that one also has a very small bezel which looks quite good.
Not worth the $80+ extra I'd have to pay for it from Amazon.
Edit: This is the right model of the P2414H right? That WHXV7 number is throwing me off.
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
I guess that's just my opinion. The increase in motion quality going to 60-120fps is just as large as going from 30fps to 60fps. With black frame insertion (i.e. Lightboost) it's an even greater difference. You can eliminate a ton of input lag by running without vsync, and even vsync at 120hz has much less input lag. I'm also testing the Human Benchmark and getting around a 30ms improvement in my reaction times at 120hz compared to 60. I don't really have an explanation for that one.
Because of those benefits, I wouldn't trade my 144hz monitor for any 60hz PC monitor, and it doesn't even have good color quality. But, to be fair, I mostly play online shooters.
Saving this post.
Which is not what I care about in a monitor. Image quality takes priority with input lag and response time second.
Yeah, there's only one P2414H. That WHXV7 is probably a region code or whatever.
And yeah, I did the same as you. The extra money for the U2414H wasn't worth it for me. And I come from a 120hz monitor myself. 120fps is great to have, but I couldn't keep it up on the high-end games I play with my single GTX 770. And I like playing on ultra quality so yeah, switched back to 60hz.
Okay thanks for all the help. I've found the right monitor it seems.
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
Monitor blur also ruins your image quality when you have any kind of motion on the screen. More than most people realize. Lightboost is what finally made me retire my CRT.
I say try both types of high end monitors if you can afford it, so you can judge for yourself. Then send the one you don't like back to the store. Which is what I did.
Astral/H3X
Member
Getting my tax return soon, I'm thinking about getting a new monitor. My absolute priorities are input lag (Huge!), followed shortly by colors. I'm mainly upgrading because my current monitor has worse contrast/colors than the Wii U Gamepad, which honestly is ridiculous.
Also, I'd be hooking up my Wii through VGA to this, it doesn't have any weird known latency from that, right?
EDIT: AGH. What I'm looking at is this monitor.
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00B17C5KO/?tag=neogaf0e-20
Does this seem like a good buy?
Also, I'd be hooking up my Wii through VGA to this, it doesn't have any weird known latency from that, right?
EDIT: AGH. What I'm looking at is this monitor.
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00B17C5KO/?tag=neogaf0e-20
Does this seem like a good buy?
That one comes in a 23 inch version which is better IMO if you want a crisper image. 1080p on a 27 inch monitor is pushing it.
Astral/H3X
Member
I play a lot of games, and lately it's been more the controller friendly type, so that's where I'm thinking to do this. Might settle for a 25" though...
I'd take a really good 60hz IPS or VA monitor over a 120/144hz TN monitor every time. Slight motion blur is not as big a deal to me as horribly washed out colors, contrast, or cloudy light bleed.
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
As long as that's based on experience and not speculation then that's perfectly fine. Everyone is different.
If I had the money I would get the best of both worlds with that Eizo.
Honestly, I probably wouldn't recommend 27" at 1080p. With the distance you sit from a monitor, pixel density will likely be too small.
Shmuely Bully
Member
I'd love to find something decent in a 16:10 aspect ratio without killing my wallet. Unfortunately as no such thing seems to exist I'll just have to keep rocking my old Acer.
NervousXtian
Thought Emoji Movie was good. Take that as you will.
What's one of these good 27" Korean monitors I keep hearing about... lead me GAF.
thunder_snail
Member
If you haven't ordered your monitor already, I'd recommend a good VA monitor. VA monitors in your budget range will have more motion blur than IPS monitors in similar price range but they have more contrast and a lot less light bleed. Most cheaper IPS monitors have this purple glow that are noticeable in dark games if you play in a dark room.
I've read somewhere this is because by default, when power is not given to the panel, VA defaults to blocking out the light, while IPS defaults to letting light through.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=100007617%20600012694&IsNodeId=1&name=2560%20x%201440
See the monitors priced around $400? Those are the Korean monitors. They use the same LG panels (which is a Korean company) as DELL and Apple but have worse build quality. Not sure which one can be overdriven though. I have Achieva Shimian 1440p monitor and I'm happy with it. No dead pixels either.
Skyfireblaze
Member
I'm just asking out of curiosity here as I probably will (rightfully) be ripped to shreds since I know very little about monitors but... my old Fujitsu XL3220T from 2009 broke two days ago so I needed a new screen for under 200€ and opted for the LG 23 ET 83 V-W going from the limited selection in my town. Well is this one any good?
I personally like to think of myself quite knowledgeable about technology and I easily see the difference between 60 and 30fps so my eyes have some sensitivity but I admit when it comes to screens I'm pretty much a newb
I like a nice picture as much as anyone but since I'm not exactly making much money as a student monitors and speakers are always my first saving measure.
Saying this, I'm actually really happy with the 23 ET 83 V-W for 190€ coming from the XL3220T. Truthfully my Windows Deskop still looks off to me after two days, kind of overbright but dear god once I start a game on my PC the monitor really floored me!
Also and especially my PS3 seems much much much better on this one and my PS4 looks like a beauty on it too, colors pop and all looks beautiful!
And well I just wondered what Monitor-GAF has to say about it
I personally like to think of myself quite knowledgeable about technology and I easily see the difference between 60 and 30fps so my eyes have some sensitivity but I admit when it comes to screens I'm pretty much a newb
I like a nice picture as much as anyone but since I'm not exactly making much money as a student monitors and speakers are always my first saving measure.Saying this, I'm actually really happy with the 23 ET 83 V-W for 190€ coming from the XL3220T. Truthfully my Windows Deskop still looks off to me after two days, kind of overbright but dear god once I start a game on my PC the monitor really floored me!
Also and especially my PS3 seems much much much better on this one and my PS4 looks like a beauty on it too, colors pop and all looks beautiful! And well I just wondered what Monitor-GAF has to say about it
thunder_snail
Member
Can't be a bad choice. It's an LG monitor and I doubt they'd use worse panels for their own than the ones they sell off to other monitor manufacturers.
Seriously, any IPS or VA monitor is good enough for most people. It's the people who are really competitive in fighting or FPS games that need fastest monitors.
Seriously, any IPS or VA monitor is good enough for most people. It's the people who are really competitive in fighting or FPS games that need fastest monitors.
Skyfireblaze
Member
Hmm yeah that was also what went through my head when I was going around the shop: "I heard IPS and Korean panels are good..."
I do play FPS games and fighters but I guess not nearly enough on a competitive level to notice these things and so far I haven't noticed any drawbacks in the games I play.I just find it weird that, as good as it looks inside games and the PS3 and PS4 XMB, it looks really "ehhhh...." on my desktop :/ My whole Windows seems so bright and a bit washed out which makes no sense to me since it's the exact opposite on games with no settings on the monitor changed o.o I first thought it was a gamma issue but the settings inside Catalyst look fine. I can kind of counter this by setting "Black-Level" to "Low" on the monitor settings but that makes the whole picture look like it has a gray layer above it and crushes the blacks
EDIT: Could people with comparable screens please maybe list their Brightness/Contrast values? I have a feeling it's related to these somehow
I've have the 24" version of that benq VA monitor and no longer use it. The overdrive that keeps the response time down stopped working after a few months meaning I had to turn it off and deal with the motion blur inherent to that panel. The inverse ghosting was really bad when I noticed the overdrive wasn't working correctly, but fortunately I got it rather cheap. I'm not sure if the 27" version may have that problem though.
thunder_snail
Member
Hmm yeah that was also what went through my head when I was going around the shop: "I heard IPS and Korean panels are good..."
I just find it weird that, as good as it looks inside games and the PS3 and PS4 XMB, it looks really "ehhhh...." on my desktop :/ My whole Windows seems so bright and a bit washed out which makes no sense to me since it's the exact opposite on games with no settings on the monitor changed o.o I first thought it was a gamma issue but the settings inside Catalyst look fine. I can kind of counter this by setting "Black-Level" to "Low" on the monitor settings but that makes the whole picture look like it has a gray layer above it and crushes the blacks
EDIT: Could people with comparable screens please maybe list their Brightness/Contrast values? I have a feeling it's related to these somehow
It looks like you have contrast set too high judging by overly bright and crushed blacks. High contrast washes away lots of details in bright areas as well which is really noticeable in when using Windows.
Have you tried Control Panel -> Displays -> Calibrate Colors?
I can only assume that the monitor was set to make multimedia content "pop" a little more.
Also the right brightness/contrast settings can differ even in between the same models from the same manufacturer so you have to find your own.
Skyfireblaze
Member
Thanks for the swift help!
Well the crushed blacks only happen when I set Black-Level to Low instead of High but yeah it seems true that multimedia content is the main thing that pops out to be really beautiful which makes sense. Thanks for the tip with Windows and calibrating colors I have to try this tomorrow as I'm about to sleep now. And ah okay I guess I should try to play with Contrast a bit more though one thing that I noticed now real quick, setting it below 70 to even only 69 seems to diminish the colors greatly somehow and I actually, while writing this post saw that, with a value below 69 white starts to become gray o.oEDIT: I _think_ it's the Gamma setting on the monitor, by default it was set to Gamma1 and Gamma0 seems to look much better on first glance though I will also test this more tomorrow as I don't trust my half-asleep eyes at the moment
thunder_snail
Member
Thanks for the swift help!
Unfortunately accurate colors and contrast are not what many people perceive as nice looking (Thanks, TV manufacturers!). However, artists spend a lot of time getting their colors right and the way images are displayed on a well calibrated monitor is how they were meant to be seen.
Added benefit of good contrast is being able to see in darker games. It's too easy to miss items with bad contrast and for looters, that's not acceptable.
MidgarBlowedUp
Member
Whew, glad I don't have to deal with the new tech.
GDM-FW900 still kickin.
GDM-FW900 still kickin.
I'm not sure what's going on here now but it looks like you're changing the subject of how they called you out on making stuff up about the Gsync-like ability of "any" monitor with displayport. I haven't experienced Gsynch first-hand yet but I think I'll trust what Durante says about it. I'm sure monitors can have some sort of software implementation of something similar to gsync but its something that doesn't seem to exist at the moment.
thunder_snail
Member
Monitors that are advertised as 1ms or 2ms actually have average refresh rate of about 8ms.
SLI/Crossfire helps a lot at 1440p, my 4GB 670s do fine for the games I run.
Can someone please tell me if either of these monitors are any good:
HP Pavilion 20xi 20" IPS Monitor
or
ASUS® PA238QR 23" LCD Monitor with LED
HP Pavilion 20xi 20" IPS Monitor
or
ASUS® PA238QR 23" LCD Monitor with LED
LeeRoyBrown
Banned
Comments like this make no sense to me at all.
I've seen 120hz... I don't get it.
I can barely tell the difference between 30 and 60 fps... am I missing something here?
Sidewinder
Member
If you can't tell the difference then you don't have to care about it when you buy a screen and you don't need überspecced PC components, win-win!
LeeRoyBrown
Banned
As long as I max out the graffixx...
Sorry, this is off-topic.
You say that all monitors with a display port interface support a variable refresh. This is not true and you can read an explanation as to why in this article:
http://techreport.com/news/25878/nvidia-responds-to-amd-free-sync-demo
Prophet Steve
Member
If you barely can see the difference between 30 and 60 fps you are unlikely to see a significant difference between 60 and 120 fps.
Skyfireblaze
Member
Ehehe well I admit with my old screen I cranked up the Brightness in Dark Souls itself because else I couldn't see much in Blighttown but then again I'm easily scared too so it might not have been that much needed from a visual point of view...
And I also admit I'm probably one of these people who got "corrupted" by TV manufacturers though for me it really depends on the content I'm watching. When I watch anime I want vivid and bright colors, same with games and Sci-Fi series usually. Though when I watch The Big Bang Theory, How I met your Mother and all these I want more neutral colors so I would say I'm not totally a lost cause yet
As for my monitor brightness I'm fairly sure now it's related to the Gamma setting of the monitor, as soon as I set it to Gamma0 instead of the default Gamma1 the bright effect seems to stop but I still need to test this with all the games that look lovely on Gamma1.
quote for truth
If you want to know the true specs, read tftcentral/pcsmonitor/prad.de reviews. Never trust what manufacturers promote their monitors with. I've seen monitors with "2ms" refresh that are worse than IPS screens.
If he can't see the difference between 30 and 60 he's better off just sticking to consoles.
It's worth noting that this happens because most manufacturers measure grey-to-grey response times, which are always the lowest and the least taxing on the monitor. They're also mostly irrelevant to the discussion of response times.
It's not really about seeing the difference. I would assume that a lot of people can't easily "see" the difference. However, just about everyone can feel the difference; the effect that it has on input and interaction is pretty drastic.
I'm using a really cheap but good colours and good response time monitor for gaming on my PS3(even has built in speakers I use headphones through the monitor).
http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B00A46Y678/
http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B00A46Y678/
This is true, they usually state this by adding "G2G" after the response time. However, they know a lot of people aren't exactly experts when it comes to the more advanced stuff of technology so when it states "1ms" or "2ms", people will automatically think it is a very good screen. They do this on purpose to mislead people somewhat.
Prophet Steve
Member
Don't act like an elitist. Even if you do not see or feel much of a difference between 60 and 30 fps does not mean you can have plenty of reasons to get a PC.
Resolution, customization, price, games, or maybe just preference, it does not matter. There are also plenty of PC gamers that just aim for 30 FPS in many games. I do, my GPU can't handle many games at 60 FPS.
Similar threads
- Poll