MistaSparkul
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2012
- Messages
- 3,500
If you have an AMD card then why look at the PG278Q? What you really want is the BenQ XL2730Z.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
If you have an AMD card then why look at the PG278Q? What you really want is the BenQ XL2730Z.
Hah, I know that is the right answer too. Mine isn't perfect, has a stuck pixel and there's some light bleed coming through the bottom, but I've been playing csgo again and, like an idiot, start looking at stuff to buy.
Which monitor are you using, or plan on using?
Edit: Because I haven't done any research at all, so I'm still figuring out the free/G-sync stuff.
Which monitor are you using, or plan on using?
Edit: Because I haven't done any research at all, so I'm still figuring out the free/G-sync stuff.
MistaSparkul
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2012
- Messages
- 3,500
A high amount of the AUO AHVA panels found in the MG279Q will suffer from massive amounts of IPS glow. Then again TN panels have their own problems when it comes to viewing angles but the main reason why I would advise against Asus monitors is because lately their QC track record on high end gaming monitors has not been good.
short answer and this may have been covered:
I'm really happy with my Acer x34 for gaming. I recently upgraded from the curved LG34" that uses the exact same panel but Acer managed to squeeze out an extra 40 hz and tack on g-sync.
Keep in mind you need serious graphics hardware to get 100 FPS out of an AAA title with high detail settings.
I have 2 X Titan Xs and I still only get about 70-80 FPS in far cry 4 at max settings (3440 x 1440 is approx 70% of the pixels of full 4K so it requires serious graphics hardware to break 60 fps) but I notice it is much more fluid than on the LG 34.
The x34 isn't cheap (1200 USD) but if you are packing heavy graphics card(s), its really amazing in AAA titles (some older games can dont cooperate well with 3440 x 1440 but they are few and far between).
I'm really happy with my Acer x34 for gaming. I recently upgraded from the curved LG34" that uses the exact same panel but Acer managed to squeeze out an extra 40 hz and tack on g-sync.
Keep in mind you need serious graphics hardware to get 100 FPS out of an AAA title with high detail settings.
I have 2 X Titan Xs and I still only get about 70-80 FPS in far cry 4 at max settings (3440 x 1440 is approx 70% of the pixels of full 4K so it requires serious graphics hardware to break 60 fps) but I notice it is much more fluid than on the LG 34.
The x34 isn't cheap (1200 USD) but if you are packing heavy graphics card(s), its really amazing in AAA titles (some older games can dont cooperate well with 3440 x 1440 but they are few and far between).
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 273615
Guest
PC monitor selection for gaming is terrible indeed. Ignorant PC gamers go for IPS and TN panels and get an abysmal image quality, which they think is compensated by having nice viewing angles, good color accuracy, having G-Sync, 1440p+ resolutions, and/or using Bias Lighting. None of those factor compensate for having terrible black levels, low contrast ratio, possible glow, all of which directly and negatively affect image quality and game/film immersion.
Aside from the basic factors (size, resolution, input lag, G/Free-Sync, matte/glossy, etc.) there are 2 most important factors when it comes to gaming displays:
1. Contrast Ratio - the majority of color scientists, professional calibrators, display experts, HTPC enthusiasts, and just about every organization related to those fields agree that display's contrast ratio is the single most important factor in determining image quality. You can disagree with that statement all you want along with your IPS-loving buddies, but there is simply too much overwhelming evidence that contrast ratio is of utmost importance.
2. Motion clarity - this speaks for itself. Having excellent motion is important for both SP and MP gaming. The clearer the motion, the more immersive is the experience you get.
Choices we have:
TN
High response-time, low-input lag, and light-strobing TN panels are for competitive MP gaming, where having eye-candy graphics is secondary to having high frameratre, quick response, tiny input lag, and clear motion. IMO, mage quality has the priority for SP games, which means TN monitors are a very poor choice of SP gaming. TN panels of course suffer from terrible black levels and low contrast ratio. In addition to that, TN panels usually have serious problems with uniformity, viewing angles, and color accuracy (which isn't the same as image quality, but it does contribute to overall image quality).
IPS
IPS/PLS/AHVA monitors were developed for general office use, image editing, web browsing, photo viewing, 3D graphics development, etc. They are made for work-related purposes, NOT gaming. They do have good color accuracy, but once again, they have very poor black levels, contrast ratio, and even IPS glow on top of that. The image they produce is flat and and not immersive, often times flatter than TN panels' image due to IPS glow, which TN panels do not have. IPS panels used to come out polarized, which reduced IPS glow, but now polarized IPS panels are rarely seen. Just because a large crowd of people praises these IPS monitors as the best monitors for gaming, doesn't make it true. I find similarity between Gaming IPS display hype and "Gaming Headphones" hype. Any knowledgeable person knows that "Gaming Headphones" are mostly a gimmick and the best audio comes from "non-gaming headphones", like the Sennheiser HD series (HD600 or better), which produce better quality audio than Sennheiser's overly expensive "Gaming Headphones". There is experimental IPS technology from Panasonic, currently for their super high-end prototype TV, that has very high contrast ratio, higher than most VA panels have, but its not out yet and it achieves such low black levels only due to local dimming! Today's consumer IPS panels have many Pro's (color accuracy, viewing angles, great uniformity, good response time, etc.), but one major Con - image quality / game/film immersion aspect (low contrast, weak black levels, IPS glow). VA panels (see below) are the opposite of that.
VA
Today's VA panels, especially the most recent SPVA panels for high-end TV's and MVA / AMVA panels for monitors are miles better than earlier/older VA panels, which came with low contrast ratio, bad viewing angles, uniformity, and response time (blur-a-vision). Today's VA panels still have the same Con's, but nowhere near the same degree as they used to. Most importantly VA monitors have one major Pro - good (not great) image quality (high contrast, low black levels). This is why VA technology, and not IPS, became mainstream for mid-range and high-end HDTV's! Their motion is clearer than it used to be, but at the moment there are very few VA panels that do have both most important gaming display factors - image quality AND motion clarity. Today, only Eizo Foris FG2421 has both, even though it does suffer from several defects, which, IMHO, are nowhere as important as image quality and motion clarity Foris FG2421 provides. There are upcoming VA panels that will also have both and even come with G-Sync/Free-Sync, which is great news! Those wishing to upgrade their monitors should wait until those monitors get released.
Other display types
CRT - the absolute best gaming displays with near-infinite contrast ratio, excellent response times / motion, low input lag, but also heavy / cumbersome, have low white points (dimmer than LCD's), small screen size, and the best ones, like Sony FW900. Trinitron, are very expensive. Again, contrast ratio is what makes CRT image quality so much better than any LCD's image quality.
Plasma - the 2nd best displays when it comes to image quality and motion, but due to usually high input lag, these TV's are not good for gaming. Again, contrast ratio is what makes plasma image quality so much better than any LCD's image quality.
OLED - even better image quality than plasma displays have, but motion still pales to plasma motion due to LCD-alike "Hold" technology. These TV's also have high input lag as far as I know. Yet again, contrast ratio is what makes these displays so special when it comes to image quality.
If by now you have not realized that right now contrast ratio is the driving factor when it comes to developing new technologies and TV's, then you can go ahead and go back to your IPS/TN-cave and live in blissful ignorance.
Bias Lighting
Bias Lighting can improve the perception of contrast by changing the size of your eye's iris, but it does not compensate for low contrast ratio and black levels. In addition, Bias Lighting can potentially "kill" the subtle shadow details by turning them all to (perceptually) black. High contrast does not produce such an effect.
Right now, console gamers have the best display choices because they usually use TV's, not monitors, as their console gaming displays. TV industry has advanced further and farther than gaming PC monitor industry. Today's HDTV's have the best of the best LED LCD panels, especially the new SPVA's that are hitting 4000:1+ contrast ratio without local/micro dimming, have near-IPS-level viewing angles, excellent uniformity, little-to-no center-screen black-crush, and of course great black levels of about 0.03cd/m^2 @ 120cd/m^2 for white point. Most of such TV's come with decent color accuracy and full calibration controls. Sony's "Clearer" series also comes with true light-strobing at 60Hz, one very similar to Eizo Foris FG2421 light-strobing, although FG2421 can perform light-strobing @ 120Hz.
Few words about color accuracy
These days panel color accuracy is of little meaning because you can now create dispcalGUI 3DLUT's for ReShade, which include both grayscale and colorspace corrections. There is no more need for ICC profiles, LUT enforcers (CPKeeper, Monitor Calibration Wizard), and Borderless Window Mode. 3DLUT's for ReShade work for 99% of games and do it in FullScreen + V-Sync with ease. So far only MGS V - Ground Zeroes and Phantom Pain do not work with the latest ReShade, but they do work with ReShade 0.10, which can very much apply 3DLUT (aka - it works in MGS V too!).
Aside from the basic factors (size, resolution, input lag, G/Free-Sync, matte/glossy, etc.) there are 2 most important factors when it comes to gaming displays:
1. Contrast Ratio - the majority of color scientists, professional calibrators, display experts, HTPC enthusiasts, and just about every organization related to those fields agree that display's contrast ratio is the single most important factor in determining image quality. You can disagree with that statement all you want along with your IPS-loving buddies, but there is simply too much overwhelming evidence that contrast ratio is of utmost importance.
2. Motion clarity - this speaks for itself. Having excellent motion is important for both SP and MP gaming. The clearer the motion, the more immersive is the experience you get.
Choices we have:
TN
High response-time, low-input lag, and light-strobing TN panels are for competitive MP gaming, where having eye-candy graphics is secondary to having high frameratre, quick response, tiny input lag, and clear motion. IMO, mage quality has the priority for SP games, which means TN monitors are a very poor choice of SP gaming. TN panels of course suffer from terrible black levels and low contrast ratio. In addition to that, TN panels usually have serious problems with uniformity, viewing angles, and color accuracy (which isn't the same as image quality, but it does contribute to overall image quality).
IPS
IPS/PLS/AHVA monitors were developed for general office use, image editing, web browsing, photo viewing, 3D graphics development, etc. They are made for work-related purposes, NOT gaming. They do have good color accuracy, but once again, they have very poor black levels, contrast ratio, and even IPS glow on top of that. The image they produce is flat and and not immersive, often times flatter than TN panels' image due to IPS glow, which TN panels do not have. IPS panels used to come out polarized, which reduced IPS glow, but now polarized IPS panels are rarely seen. Just because a large crowd of people praises these IPS monitors as the best monitors for gaming, doesn't make it true. I find similarity between Gaming IPS display hype and "Gaming Headphones" hype. Any knowledgeable person knows that "Gaming Headphones" are mostly a gimmick and the best audio comes from "non-gaming headphones", like the Sennheiser HD series (HD600 or better), which produce better quality audio than Sennheiser's overly expensive "Gaming Headphones". There is experimental IPS technology from Panasonic, currently for their super high-end prototype TV, that has very high contrast ratio, higher than most VA panels have, but its not out yet and it achieves such low black levels only due to local dimming! Today's consumer IPS panels have many Pro's (color accuracy, viewing angles, great uniformity, good response time, etc.), but one major Con - image quality / game/film immersion aspect (low contrast, weak black levels, IPS glow). VA panels (see below) are the opposite of that.
VA
Today's VA panels, especially the most recent SPVA panels for high-end TV's and MVA / AMVA panels for monitors are miles better than earlier/older VA panels, which came with low contrast ratio, bad viewing angles, uniformity, and response time (blur-a-vision). Today's VA panels still have the same Con's, but nowhere near the same degree as they used to. Most importantly VA monitors have one major Pro - good (not great) image quality (high contrast, low black levels). This is why VA technology, and not IPS, became mainstream for mid-range and high-end HDTV's! Their motion is clearer than it used to be, but at the moment there are very few VA panels that do have both most important gaming display factors - image quality AND motion clarity. Today, only Eizo Foris FG2421 has both, even though it does suffer from several defects, which, IMHO, are nowhere as important as image quality and motion clarity Foris FG2421 provides. There are upcoming VA panels that will also have both and even come with G-Sync/Free-Sync, which is great news! Those wishing to upgrade their monitors should wait until those monitors get released.
Other display types
CRT - the absolute best gaming displays with near-infinite contrast ratio, excellent response times / motion, low input lag, but also heavy / cumbersome, have low white points (dimmer than LCD's), small screen size, and the best ones, like Sony FW900. Trinitron, are very expensive. Again, contrast ratio is what makes CRT image quality so much better than any LCD's image quality.
Plasma - the 2nd best displays when it comes to image quality and motion, but due to usually high input lag, these TV's are not good for gaming. Again, contrast ratio is what makes plasma image quality so much better than any LCD's image quality.
OLED - even better image quality than plasma displays have, but motion still pales to plasma motion due to LCD-alike "Hold" technology. These TV's also have high input lag as far as I know. Yet again, contrast ratio is what makes these displays so special when it comes to image quality.
If by now you have not realized that right now contrast ratio is the driving factor when it comes to developing new technologies and TV's, then you can go ahead and go back to your IPS/TN-cave and live in blissful ignorance.
Bias Lighting
Bias Lighting can improve the perception of contrast by changing the size of your eye's iris, but it does not compensate for low contrast ratio and black levels. In addition, Bias Lighting can potentially "kill" the subtle shadow details by turning them all to (perceptually) black. High contrast does not produce such an effect.
Right now, console gamers have the best display choices because they usually use TV's, not monitors, as their console gaming displays. TV industry has advanced further and farther than gaming PC monitor industry. Today's HDTV's have the best of the best LED LCD panels, especially the new SPVA's that are hitting 4000:1+ contrast ratio without local/micro dimming, have near-IPS-level viewing angles, excellent uniformity, little-to-no center-screen black-crush, and of course great black levels of about 0.03cd/m^2 @ 120cd/m^2 for white point. Most of such TV's come with decent color accuracy and full calibration controls. Sony's "Clearer" series also comes with true light-strobing at 60Hz, one very similar to Eizo Foris FG2421 light-strobing, although FG2421 can perform light-strobing @ 120Hz.
Few words about color accuracy
These days panel color accuracy is of little meaning because you can now create dispcalGUI 3DLUT's for ReShade, which include both grayscale and colorspace corrections. There is no more need for ICC profiles, LUT enforcers (CPKeeper, Monitor Calibration Wizard), and Borderless Window Mode. 3DLUT's for ReShade work for 99% of games and do it in FullScreen + V-Sync with ease. So far only MGS V - Ground Zeroes and Phantom Pain do not work with the latest ReShade, but they do work with ReShade 0.10, which can very much apply 3DLUT (aka - it works in MGS V too!).
Last edited by a moderator:
I agree that as far as LCDs go, VA is superior. The problem is that there are few options, especially if you want G-Sync. The only one I am aware of is the upcoming Acer Z35. But it's resolution is only 2560x1080.
I guess I have to use two different displays for what I want from them until we get some really good progress in the PC monitor market. I still like playing some games in 3D with 3D Vision so I picked up a PG278Q at a discount price and was pleased that it had no apparent issues. I will also use that display when I want to take advantage of G-Sync and twitch gaming. I put the 48" Samsung JS8500 off to the side and use that when I want to kick back in my comfy chair and play SP games like Witcher 3 with my controller. The colors and picture quality on that TV is amazing.
I am hoping we will see the industry take advantage of the higher bandwidth input types out or coming out soon. I would love to have a G-Sync VA panel capable of 100Hz or something.
I am hoping we will see the industry take advantage of the higher bandwidth input types out or coming out soon. I would love to have a G-Sync VA panel capable of 100Hz or something.
How are you connecting your PC to the JS8500 and switching between them? I have one in the living room that is mainly used by the family, but I wouldn't mind occasionally connecting my PC to it.
MistaSparkul
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2012
- Messages
- 3,500
Most of us know that LCDs in general just plain suck and we need some OLED monitors already. But how long are we gonna have to wait for an OLED monitor with a 120Hz+ refresh rate and gsync/freesync/ulmb? I'm pretty sure we would all love to have that, or at least a high quality VA panel, but again it just doesn't exist. Just have to settle for what we can get for now until that day comes.
I have them both hooked up to the same video card on my SLI system. My PC sees them as an extended desktop even though most of the time the Samsung is being used as a TV. Witcher 3 allows me to select which display to output to so I can jump back and force when I want to. I can do the same thing with GTA 5. I use Steam's big picture mode to choose the output display for other games, like Trine 2 and Risen 3. By the way, Trine 2 looks amazing on the 4K TV with it's colors and picture quality, even more so in 3D.
Nightingale007
Weaksauce
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2008
- Messages
- 118
After viewing and playing around with today's mid to high end 4K displays, I can no longer stomach the idea of paying $1000 for a fisher price display also known as a gaming PC monitor. I can't believe people are willing to dish out high dollars for sub par display's with second rate quality control and craftsmanship. Furthermore we know that VA type panels exist that can produce fast response time, High Contrast(for LCD tech), good color accuracy and reduced VA gamma shift, but instead is used exclusively only in high end TV's. So instead we are given second rate, poorly implemented VA monitors for the PC.
IPS is a great panel technology for it's intended purpose, but for gaming and movies or any media content it's simply bland, and leaves much to be desired. You'll notice when LG display's there IPS TV's all there demos consists of bright colorful scenes, like a tropical jungle or the ocean and flowers etc..I still to this day have not ever laid eyes on an IPS display able to produce anywhere near the level of contrast able to give off the proper amount of depth and immersion, bias lighting or not.
As for the new 4K TV's, one flaw with most of them is the use of PWM for brightness control. Other than Sony who has been using the superior implementation of DC dimming for the last 2 years. I'm confident this will change in 2016.
If my 2013 Panasonic ST60 didn't have such high input latency, I would be using it as my casual gaming monitor. Motion clarity, colors, uniformity, contrast, and shadow detail puts every LCD to shame.
IPS is a great panel technology for it's intended purpose, but for gaming and movies or any media content it's simply bland, and leaves much to be desired. You'll notice when LG display's there IPS TV's all there demos consists of bright colorful scenes, like a tropical jungle or the ocean and flowers etc..I still to this day have not ever laid eyes on an IPS display able to produce anywhere near the level of contrast able to give off the proper amount of depth and immersion, bias lighting or not.
As for the new 4K TV's, one flaw with most of them is the use of PWM for brightness control. Other than Sony who has been using the superior implementation of DC dimming for the last 2 years. I'm confident this will change in 2016.
If my 2013 Panasonic ST60 didn't have such high input latency, I would be using it as my casual gaming monitor. Motion clarity, colors, uniformity, contrast, and shadow detail puts every LCD to shame.
MistaSparkul
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2012
- Messages
- 3,500
I think one of the main reasons why we started having IPS panels in gaming monitors as opposed to VA is because of all the idiots running around trash talking TN panels left and right and calling IPS the "holy grail" of monitors. It only gives the manufacturers the idea that IPS is what everyone is looking for.
When everything else is equal (Contrast, resolution, refresh rate and colour accuracy), there is little TN can do better than IPS (EG response time) [see the difference between XB270HU vs PG278Q], but often it is not the case (as in monitors are not often equal).
I went from a TN Samsung 24" to a ViewSonic IPS 27" 1080p, and when I compared them side by side, the IPS was miles better, as the colours didn't look like if someone poured a layer of milk on the monitor. So I really took a gamble with Swift, knowing full well it was TN, but I was in a rush to get one, as at the time I was in a situation where my life would change rapidly (the situation has since disappeared due to circumstances I cannot control).
After getting the Swift, and then comparing the ViewSonic IPS side by side (VX2770-SMH), I immediately knew I would have no regrets getting Swift: the IPS glow on the VS was far more noticeable than Swift, to the point where I could barely use Calibrilla to calibrate the VS because the glow was making the bars invisible. So I embraced the Swift, and so far, apart from the viewing angle, it has not failed me since.
For the record, I play only SP games, I don't do multiplayer.
That being said, if I was in the position to get a new monitor now, I definitely would prefer IPS, assuming that it is similar to a TN barring just the response time. EG I would have gave XB270HU a greater thought than I would have to PG278Q, given that XB270HU matched it in almost every possible way (at least on paper, I don't know if XB270HU have that distinctive IPS glow, but I imagined it would have reflected on contrast tests). However, Swift definitely changed my opinion on what a TN is capable of.
VA is a different story... So far the only VA panels I have used all exhibit a yellow tint (though granted, they are old monitors), and I have personal vendetta against tints of any sort, but I notice the warm colour tints more so than cool colours, and thus VA panels never came into my consideration (FG2421 had QC issues and it was expensive, and it lacked G-Sync, which was a deal breaker). Not sure if all VA panels exhibit that tint, but I have a stigma about them.
I went from a TN Samsung 24" to a ViewSonic IPS 27" 1080p, and when I compared them side by side, the IPS was miles better, as the colours didn't look like if someone poured a layer of milk on the monitor. So I really took a gamble with Swift, knowing full well it was TN, but I was in a rush to get one, as at the time I was in a situation where my life would change rapidly (the situation has since disappeared due to circumstances I cannot control).
After getting the Swift, and then comparing the ViewSonic IPS side by side (VX2770-SMH), I immediately knew I would have no regrets getting Swift: the IPS glow on the VS was far more noticeable than Swift, to the point where I could barely use Calibrilla to calibrate the VS because the glow was making the bars invisible. So I embraced the Swift, and so far, apart from the viewing angle, it has not failed me since.
For the record, I play only SP games, I don't do multiplayer.
That being said, if I was in the position to get a new monitor now, I definitely would prefer IPS, assuming that it is similar to a TN barring just the response time. EG I would have gave XB270HU a greater thought than I would have to PG278Q, given that XB270HU matched it in almost every possible way (at least on paper, I don't know if XB270HU have that distinctive IPS glow, but I imagined it would have reflected on contrast tests). However, Swift definitely changed my opinion on what a TN is capable of.
VA is a different story... So far the only VA panels I have used all exhibit a yellow tint (though granted, they are old monitors), and I have personal vendetta against tints of any sort, but I notice the warm colour tints more so than cool colours, and thus VA panels never came into my consideration (FG2421 had QC issues and it was expensive, and it lacked G-Sync, which was a deal breaker). Not sure if all VA panels exhibit that tint, but I have a stigma about them.
we all know the tech is not perfect, basically when choosing your display type you basically choosing which con's you prefer.
CRT - I can never imagine going back to CRT out of choice, big, heavy, dim, flickering etc.
OLED - these do have nice viewing angles and contrast, but they have limited life. Heavy users will probably be buying a new monitor every 2-3 years due to life expiry.
IPS - modest viewing angles, not great tho as it seems modern ips is nowhere near as good as classic ips for viewing angles, good colours, reasonable response times. IPS glow is evident on a all black screen but in practice not an issue.
VA - my only modern device that uses VA is my tv, I think it has comparable viewing angles to my new IPS monitors. Never used it for a pc so hard to comment on other stuff, is good enough for gaming with a ps4.
TN - I think colour shift on anything other than direct on viewing is something I consider unacceptable, although some TN's seem better than others in this regard.
Personally I would like to see TN removed from the market, I think IPS can be fast enough for gaming. In addition I think the market needs things like 120hz and gsync on smaller displays, currently those things seem limited to large/high end monitors only when they dont need to be.
I expect they have managed to get the cost of IPS down lower than VA which is why VA doesnt have much usage on products. Remember IPS was rare until e-IPS hit the scene. Then it exploded.
Also I that the dell 2209wa which started the IPS craze off for gamers was actually supposedbly H-IPS not e-IPS which may explain why it got withdrawn quickly, they may have been selling those things at a loss, just to get IPS a foothold in the budget market.
CRT - I can never imagine going back to CRT out of choice, big, heavy, dim, flickering etc.
OLED - these do have nice viewing angles and contrast, but they have limited life. Heavy users will probably be buying a new monitor every 2-3 years due to life expiry.
IPS - modest viewing angles, not great tho as it seems modern ips is nowhere near as good as classic ips for viewing angles, good colours, reasonable response times. IPS glow is evident on a all black screen but in practice not an issue.
VA - my only modern device that uses VA is my tv, I think it has comparable viewing angles to my new IPS monitors. Never used it for a pc so hard to comment on other stuff, is good enough for gaming with a ps4.
TN - I think colour shift on anything other than direct on viewing is something I consider unacceptable, although some TN's seem better than others in this regard.
Personally I would like to see TN removed from the market, I think IPS can be fast enough for gaming. In addition I think the market needs things like 120hz and gsync on smaller displays, currently those things seem limited to large/high end monitors only when they dont need to be.
I expect they have managed to get the cost of IPS down lower than VA which is why VA doesnt have much usage on products. Remember IPS was rare until e-IPS hit the scene. Then it exploded.
Also I that the dell 2209wa which started the IPS craze off for gamers was actually supposedbly H-IPS not e-IPS which may explain why it got withdrawn quickly, they may have been selling those things at a loss, just to get IPS a foothold in the budget market.
Market perception has a lot to do with it.
A lot of people, including hardware forums, strongly advocate the fact that people cannot distinguish the difference between a 60hz panel and a 120/144 hz panel, because human brain, as most people cannot perceive higher than 60fps, and many only 30fps.
Somehow that got stuck in a lot of people's heads, which is really disappointing because a 60fps vs 120fps movie comparison (which is I suspect what the test is using) is a completely different comparison than a 60hz vs 120hz monitor comparison.
Also, a lot of people seem to think that "If I get a 144hz screen, I must use a GPU that can drive it, but if my FPS is only around 60, there is no point in getting a 120hz screen", which again makes the whole high refresh rate monitor adoption slow.
Home PC's are also getting slaughtered by smartphones, so less people are getting new computer, which impedes widespread adoption for high refresh monitors. In fact, if G/FreeSync never made it to the market, I suspect that high refresh rate adoption would be even slower.
Lastly, I prefer TN staying around unless IPS can be consistently proven that it can do everything better in EVERY regard than TN. So far my opinion on IPS vs TN is that it's relative, IPS have more advantages than TN, but some disadvantages still remain, and those are completely incompensatable ones (major one being the glow). If IPS glow can be definitely fixed and that all IPS will adopt it, then I will agree TN is a thing of the past.
My only IPS panel was the aforementioned ViewSonic, so I may not have an accurate picture (no pun intended) of IPS, but I know its glow was absolutely massive compared to the Swift, and on many of the IPS threads, the glow is often cited as a reason for RMA/return of the monitor, or a drawback that most tolerate in lieu of viewing angles, where as I prefer it the other way round. BL3201PH is my next planned monitor as NCX spoke very highly of it, and he made a point that the glow on this monitor was less than other IPS/AHVA panels of smaller sizes, something that is very seldomly discussed in IPS monitor reviews in general, so hopefully that monitor will change my opinion about IPS.
Being able to sit in whatever way you want and not affecting your PQ is definitely a plus, but I couldn't tolerate glow, and I do play quite a lot of dark games. Hopefully the BenQ lives up to my expectations.
A lot of people, including hardware forums, strongly advocate the fact that people cannot distinguish the difference between a 60hz panel and a 120/144 hz panel, because human brain, as most people cannot perceive higher than 60fps, and many only 30fps.
Somehow that got stuck in a lot of people's heads, which is really disappointing because a 60fps vs 120fps movie comparison (which is I suspect what the test is using) is a completely different comparison than a 60hz vs 120hz monitor comparison.
Also, a lot of people seem to think that "If I get a 144hz screen, I must use a GPU that can drive it, but if my FPS is only around 60, there is no point in getting a 120hz screen", which again makes the whole high refresh rate monitor adoption slow.
Home PC's are also getting slaughtered by smartphones, so less people are getting new computer, which impedes widespread adoption for high refresh monitors. In fact, if G/FreeSync never made it to the market, I suspect that high refresh rate adoption would be even slower.
Lastly, I prefer TN staying around unless IPS can be consistently proven that it can do everything better in EVERY regard than TN. So far my opinion on IPS vs TN is that it's relative, IPS have more advantages than TN, but some disadvantages still remain, and those are completely incompensatable ones (major one being the glow). If IPS glow can be definitely fixed and that all IPS will adopt it, then I will agree TN is a thing of the past.
My only IPS panel was the aforementioned ViewSonic, so I may not have an accurate picture (no pun intended) of IPS, but I know its glow was absolutely massive compared to the Swift, and on many of the IPS threads, the glow is often cited as a reason for RMA/return of the monitor, or a drawback that most tolerate in lieu of viewing angles, where as I prefer it the other way round. BL3201PH is my next planned monitor as NCX spoke very highly of it, and he made a point that the glow on this monitor was less than other IPS/AHVA panels of smaller sizes, something that is very seldomly discussed in IPS monitor reviews in general, so hopefully that monitor will change my opinion about IPS.
Being able to sit in whatever way you want and not affecting your PQ is definitely a plus, but I couldn't tolerate glow, and I do play quite a lot of dark games. Hopefully the BenQ lives up to my expectations.
Richard Jones
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2014
- Messages
- 385
I like the title of this thread, it summarizes the situation well.
I'm not okay anymore with throwing 700~1000€ into a 'gaming' monitor which still has the weaknesses of LCD technology whatever the panel type. I've had enough of that crap.
I'll reconsider throwing more, even significantly more money than that into a new display when the industry finally gets its fingers out of it's ass and give us OLED with real above 60Hz refresh + adaptive sync options.
I don't even give a damn about 4K, I just want a display wich is competent at...displaying stuff.
The thing is really until that happens I don't feel like buying LCD's anymore, actually I'm going back to CRT's and fixing/restoring those oldies until the times get better.
Seriously: kill LCD, boycott LCD.
@MonarchX: you're mixing together actual facts and total bullcrap, which makes your post the weirdest thing I've read in a while lol.
I'm not okay anymore with throwing 700~1000€ into a 'gaming' monitor which still has the weaknesses of LCD technology whatever the panel type. I've had enough of that crap.
I'll reconsider throwing more, even significantly more money than that into a new display when the industry finally gets its fingers out of it's ass and give us OLED with real above 60Hz refresh + adaptive sync options.
I don't even give a damn about 4K, I just want a display wich is competent at...displaying stuff.
The thing is really until that happens I don't feel like buying LCD's anymore, actually I'm going back to CRT's and fixing/restoring those oldies until the times get better.
Seriously: kill LCD, boycott LCD.
@MonarchX: you're mixing together actual facts and total bullcrap, which makes your post the weirdest thing I've read in a while lol.
Last edited:
I tolerate LCD because it is the only type of monitor that is currently produced. I don't mind old tech if there are new ones being produced, but unfortunately that is not the case. I will never EVER buy refurbs or second hand anything, let alone something that is 10 years old. Nothing against CRT tech, it's just that everything CRT related are old and I don't fancy buying physically old stuff.
If there are new CRTs being actually produced, let me know, until then, I'll make do with LCD.
If there are new CRTs being actually produced, let me know, until then, I'll make do with LCD.
Falkentyne
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2000
- Messages
- 1,868
What's completely sad is how the 60 fps rumor got STARTED.
It's already been proven by ARMY TESTS of PILOTS (who need extremely fast reaction time) that they can see upwards of *250 FPS* and can distinguish it. And about the upper limit of human perception (on a NON sample and hold based display..e.g. strobed or scanning backlight) is 300 fps.
Note: This is completely DIFFERENT and totally SEPARATED from Sample and Hold PERSISTENCE. CRT's had strobed backlights so the persistence of a 120hz CRT running at 120 fps vsynced (since you only saw the image during the phosphor strobe) was similar to a LCD running at 1000hz and 1000 fps vsynced without strobing---if such a thing existed (which it doesn't).
The 60 fps bullshit argument started back when we found out that 60 fps is the *BEGINNING* of where the human brain starts to perceive true motion as smooth. This was mentioned back during the 3dfx Voodoo2 era, where we finally for the first time, had video cards powerful enough to output 60 FPS in games. (And at that time, every monitor was a CRT screen). You needed 60 fps in order to trick the human brain into believing an object was at motion. On a normal LCD, this entire argument is irrelevant because the entire image is a blurry mess. Even on a 144hz LCD at 144 fps, it's STILL a blurry mess!! Just LESS of a blurry mess.
Hell, part of this goes back even farther, back to 1992, with the advent of "Flicker free" CRT monitors. The flicker free refresh rate at the time was "72 hz." 60 hz CRT's created noticeable flicker due to the strobing (which eliminated motion blur). 72hz was the beginning of where the flicker stopped being blatantly noticeable and where people could use CRT's without getting a headache. Even though even 150hz isn't flicker free, it was at advent of 85 and 90hz CRT's where many people could no longer see flicker in normal use anymore, even though some could detect it, it didn't bother anyone unless they were just sensitive to strobing in general.
Just throwing some facts out there, since it seems like everyone forgot everything.
The only thing VA panels do well is their on-axis contrast ratio.
The viewing angles and response time are still terrible on the latest panels, and even if you're looking dead center on them, only a very small portion of the middle of the screen will actually be high contrast.
An A-TW polarizer fixes IPS viewing angles. I don't know why so many new panels skip them.
~1200:1 contrast is certainly not amazing, but it looks considerably better with an A-TW polarizer.
I agree that LCD is clearly lacking in some areas, but I'd be happy to pay the current price for say the new PG279Q if it had an A-TW polarizer and I could be guaranteed a good panel. Of course you have to play the panel lottery right now, and none of the new gaming IPS monitors have an A-TW polarizer, so I think they're very overpriced for what you're getting.
Plasma TVs are not high quality displays. They have good color and contrast, but they have lots of dither, posterization (false contouring), use pwm, and have that "phosphor lag" problem. (same thing as DLP rainbows only worse) Motion is terrible on them since they're strobing multiple times per frame. Unsuitable for game/monitor use due to burn-in.
CRT contrast is not "near infinite." The best CRTs have about 200:1 ANSI contrast and properly calibrated on/off is 10,000:1. You can get better black levels at the expense of image quality if you don't calibrate them properly though.
OLED has the potential to be good but it's years away before it will be suitable for use as a PC monitor. And it's also being a bit overhyped. Response times are not perfect on them - though they are significantly better than LCD - and the panels need to get a whole lot brighter/energy efficient before strobing becomes a possibility.
The viewing angles and response time are still terrible on the latest panels, and even if you're looking dead center on them, only a very small portion of the middle of the screen will actually be high contrast.
An A-TW polarizer fixes IPS viewing angles. I don't know why so many new panels skip them.
~1200:1 contrast is certainly not amazing, but it looks considerably better with an A-TW polarizer.
I agree that LCD is clearly lacking in some areas, but I'd be happy to pay the current price for say the new PG279Q if it had an A-TW polarizer and I could be guaranteed a good panel. Of course you have to play the panel lottery right now, and none of the new gaming IPS monitors have an A-TW polarizer, so I think they're very overpriced for what you're getting.
Plasma TVs are not high quality displays. They have good color and contrast, but they have lots of dither, posterization (false contouring), use pwm, and have that "phosphor lag" problem. (same thing as DLP rainbows only worse) Motion is terrible on them since they're strobing multiple times per frame. Unsuitable for game/monitor use due to burn-in.
CRT contrast is not "near infinite." The best CRTs have about 200:1 ANSI contrast and properly calibrated on/off is 10,000:1. You can get better black levels at the expense of image quality if you don't calibrate them properly though.
OLED has the potential to be good but it's years away before it will be suitable for use as a PC monitor. And it's also being a bit overhyped. Response times are not perfect on them - though they are significantly better than LCD - and the panels need to get a whole lot brighter/energy efficient before strobing becomes a possibility.
This still only applies to TN panels you find in cheap crap displays like those on many laptops. The new 8-bit panels found in ASUS, Acer and Dell G-Sync displays only have viewing angle issues and only sRGB gamut. sRGB gamut is fine for anything except professional print and photography work. The viewing angles at least on the ASUS PG278Q are acceptable - there isn't much color shift from the side and you have to stand up or sit on the floor to see the vertical shift.
Plasma TVs, depending on the model are perfectly fine for gaming. They're not a good choice for desktop use but gaming is ok. I've been playing console games on my Panasonic plasma for years now without issues. It also has very low input lag according to reviews. Image quality and motion has been said to be excellent in reviews and I've noticed none of the issues you mentioned, it has just been a great TV all around to my eyes.
i love my PG278Q but that's really not true at all. the shift is visible regardless of how you're viewing the screen; looking at it head on you can plainly see that the top is darker than the bottom.
ech
ech
great color reproduction, great viewing angles, perfect black, 10 µs response time (that may as well be perfect) "overhyped" my ass
strobing OLEDs already exist. when displaying anything that isn't an all-white image OLED screens can get up to around 300 cd/m2, not really that dim. power consumption is pretty damn bad though.
Last edited:
Plasma TVs are 1-bit displays and make all their gradation using PWM/dithering.
- Panasonic VT60 displaying a static image
- Panasonic VT60 displaying a static image with eye (camera) movement
It's the same problem that DLPs have, only it has a very different cause, and personally I find it much more noticeable.
Since Plasma TVs are 1-bit displays that build up the image over multiple sub-frames, there are multiple strobes per frame and you get judder. Later model plasmas use >10 sub-frames per frame at 60Hz, and will display a lot of judder.
Most people using a strobed LCD will tell you to avoid things like 60 FPS at 120Hz because you get really bad judder. Or if you've ever used an LCD with 250-500Hz PWM you will have seen it.
Same thing with these plasma TVs. With 10 strobes per frame, you get lots of little after-images which are more closely spaced together.
Are we talking about large OLED displays, or small OLED displays?great color reproduction, great viewing angles, perfect black, 10 µs response time (that may as well be perfect) "overhyped" my ass
Large OLED displays are all RGBW now, which are not really suitable for computer use.
Response time near black is not 10µs. That's why there were smearing problems on the Oculus Rift and they had to implement overdriving to try and correct it, or raising the black level to be non-zero.
300cd/m² is very dim if you want to have CRT-like motion handling. (1-2ms) You lose 90% of your brightness when strobing the display that much.
D
Deleted member 273615
Guest
Anybody can provide enough evidence to make ANY display type look awful. It all falls right back to what I said - each display technology has its Cons and Pros, but image quality is the ultimate Pro to have and to get that quality a display needs to have very high contrast ratio. Today, only CRT's, plasma, OLED displays, and some VERY expensive high-end projectors have high contrast ratio, which require perfectly-black environments to achieve. The second Pro to have it clear motion, which brings us to plasma and CRT monitors. Image Quality + Motion trump just about every Con out there. When it comes to gaming, input lag is also a rather big deal, so that really leaves CRT as the best choice if you are willing to carry it and do whatever else is necessary to maintain it.
Last edited by a moderator:
You are planning to purchase a non-G-Sync monitor? I am not trolling, just wondering why.
Well, it's at least got Freesync... at least one door is open.
For a fairly simple reason: XB280HK is TN.
Nothing against TN, but since I am already using a TN, I didn't want my second monitor to also be TN, but XB280HK is the only 4k G-Sync, which meant I had little choice but to go non G-Sync. I may wait for the rumoured XB321HK though, but I am not sure if I can wait a year for it, assuming half a year delay between now and US release, and then another half for Taiwan release, as Acer took their bloody sweet time releasing XB270HU here, and even then the IPS version is hard to be hold of, and on top of that, assumes the panel is of the same quality.
Besides, XB280HK is too similar in size to Swift (28" vs 27"), in fact, I even think BenQ is a bit too close, but after looking at Philips, I decided to throw the idea out, as its one of its 2 main advantages over BenQ, price, does not apply (the price diff between the two here is only $15, compared to $150 in the US). 40" is a perfect size, just came in an imperfect panel.
Looked at TV's as well, but unfortunately a lot of the models that are available to you are not available to me (for example JU6500 is not available to me, but JU6000, 6600 and 7000 are), and vice versa, making choices quite difficult. I don't trust the reviews here as I do not believe they do it to anywhere near as the same degree as US/EU reviewers, and often, the smallest sizes are not available here (the smallest I found on Samsung's website is a 48", everything else is 50" and up, which I feel are far too big). The only TV that I caught my eye was X830C due to its 1080p@120hz mode, but it seems that TV also has its problems, not to mention it's a lot more expensive, and also still too big (smallest we have is 55").
With no other large 4k G-Sync's in sight and severely limited TV options, I really don't have much choice.
Nothing against TN, but since I am already using a TN, I didn't want my second monitor to also be TN, but XB280HK is the only 4k G-Sync, which meant I had little choice but to go non G-Sync. I may wait for the rumoured XB321HK though, but I am not sure if I can wait a year for it, assuming half a year delay between now and US release, and then another half for Taiwan release, as Acer took their bloody sweet time releasing XB270HU here, and even then the IPS version is hard to be hold of, and on top of that, assumes the panel is of the same quality.
Besides, XB280HK is too similar in size to Swift (28" vs 27"), in fact, I even think BenQ is a bit too close, but after looking at Philips, I decided to throw the idea out, as its one of its 2 main advantages over BenQ, price, does not apply (the price diff between the two here is only $15, compared to $150 in the US). 40" is a perfect size, just came in an imperfect panel.
Looked at TV's as well, but unfortunately a lot of the models that are available to you are not available to me (for example JU6500 is not available to me, but JU6000, 6600 and 7000 are), and vice versa, making choices quite difficult. I don't trust the reviews here as I do not believe they do it to anywhere near as the same degree as US/EU reviewers, and often, the smallest sizes are not available here (the smallest I found on Samsung's website is a 48", everything else is 50" and up, which I feel are far too big). The only TV that I caught my eye was X830C due to its 1080p@120hz mode, but it seems that TV also has its problems, not to mention it's a lot more expensive, and also still too big (smallest we have is 55").
With no other large 4k G-Sync's in sight and severely limited TV options, I really don't have much choice.
MistaSparkul
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2012
- Messages
- 3,500
Don't do that to yourself. 60Hz already blows enough as it is, losing gsync on top of that is just a no no. Trust me you're better off waiting for something that is a lot better rather than just getting what you can now and being unhappy with it. When my Catleap broke I decided to hop on the 4k hype train and get the only cheap 4k monitor available at the time, the Samsung U28D590D and it was the biggest regret I've ever had for any electronics purchase. Waiting sucks, but you'll be a lot happier in the end.
Thanks, that's exactly what that little tiny voice in my head is saying lol. I am starting to notice the difference between 60hz and higher hz now on swift, unfortunately, which makes me want to not even consider 4k panels at the moment lol.
I think I will steal an unused 1080p for now and call it a day. It's a Chimei monitor, not top quality by any means, but should suffice as desktop extension.
Nightingale007
Weaksauce
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2008
- Messages
- 118
A couple of things. Both the Sony and the Vizio are able to accept 120Hz input@1080p from the PC if you want to run your monitor at higher Hz. The reality is even if you could run 4K at a higher Hz you don't have the GPU power to do so, plus HDMI 2.0 lacks the bandwidth need for above 60hz at that res.
Visio is not available in Taiwan, and Sony TV's, even the cheapest one X830C (it's X8300C here), still cost twice as much as BL3201PH, and it only comes 49" as their smallest size.
Besides, even here the reputation for that particular panel is not great, and the higher end ones are so expensive that I may as well get LG OLED TV for their asking price.
Hence my reason for completely ditching TV as an option, it's just too expensive for what it does.
Besides, even here the reputation for that particular panel is not great, and the higher end ones are so expensive that I may as well get LG OLED TV for their asking price.
Hence my reason for completely ditching TV as an option, it's just too expensive for what it does.
I too got bored with this lcd monitor lottery as i have to return my Acer X34, i have an Panasonic TX-P65VT60Y as an monitor now, playing GTA V with 60hz and i think it's perfectly smooth, no need for 100hz on 144hz lcd displays, maybe it's just me but i'm happy with it. Black is really black, no IPS glow or BLB with these, lucky one to buy one before they went out of market.
D
Deleted member 273615
Guest
Panasonic VT60 is one of the best, if not the best, consumer TV in the world right now. 60Hz on plasma display is much smoother than 144Hz on LCD due to the way plasma technology works. Your TV has one of the highest contrast ratio's and one of the lowest black levels out there for a TV display, which results in very realistic and most awesome image quality! Its THE TV to have for true image quality enthusiasts! Only Samsung PNG8500 and Panasonic ZT60 can compete with Panasonic VT60.
If you play games on PC and watch films on PC with your VT60, then you need to be using "Pure Direct" mode or "Pure Direct" mode within "Cinema" mode or at the VERY VERY VERY least use "Cinema" mode. Only "Pure Direct" mode, which bypasses most of fake and image-degrading post-processing, provides the lowest input lag and the best-quality 4:4:4 Chroma Subsampling that all monitors use. TV's default to 4:2:2 Chroma Subsampling in other modes, which can make the text look funky. I do not remember which gimmicks still come enabled in "Pure Direct" mode on VT60 by default, but for the lowest input lag, and the best image quality, you definitely need to set:
Vivid color - Off.
Color Remaster - Off (the option/setting may appear grey when disabled/unavailable).
Photo Enhancement - Off (the option/setting may appear grey when disabled/unavailable).
CATS - Off.
Video NR - Off.
MPEG Remaster - Off.
Caption Smoother - Off.
Brilliance Enhancer - Off.
Motion Smoother - Off.
HDMI / DVI RGB Range - Nonstandard (or Full or 0-255)
Sharpness - set to 0, unless that makes the text very blurry, in which case you should set it to 50.
Brightness/Contrast/Gamma/White Balance/Colorspace - leave all those at defaults (unless you know how and can calibrate your TV)
I assume you have VT60 hooked via HDMI cable (hopefully High-Speed HDMI cable). In that case, go into your AMD/NVidia Control Panel and under "Change Resolution" (in NVidia CP), scroll down and select "RGB" for "Output Color Format", "Full" (or "0-255, but not "16-235") for "Output Dynamic Range" and for for "Output Color Depth" select the highest value available (which should be 12 or 10 if you're using High-Speed HDMI cables, which DO differ from regular HDMI cables).
Final steps:
- Load Lagom.nl Black Test page on your VT60 - http://www.lagom.nl/lcd-test/black.php and make sure you can see all the squares, including the very top-left one, which can be very faint, but as long as it is visible - it fine. If you do not see all the squares then recheck your HDMI / RGB Range settings on your VT60 and your "Output Dynamic Range" settings in NVidia CP (or equivalent in AMD CP) and set them as I advised above. If that does not help - PM me!
- Load Lagom.nl White Saturation page on your VT - http://www.lagom.nl/lcd-test/white.php and make sure that you can see all the squares, including the bottom-right one, which can be very faint, but as long as it is visible - its fine. If you do not see all the squares then recheck your HDMI / RGB Range settings on your VT60 and your "Output Dynamic Range" settings in NVidia CP (or equivalent in AMD CP) and set them as I advised above. If that does not help - PM me!
- ***Optional*** Assuming that you could see all the black and all the white squares from the 2 Lagom.nl tests above, you can further increase your VT60's contrast ratio and black levels to improve image quality (which may decrease image accuracy or not) by lowering your TV's Brightness to the lowest value that still allows you to see the top-left black square on Lagom.nl's Black Test page. For example, if you can see top-left black square at Brightness = 50, keep lowering until your reach a value that makes the top-left black square completely disappear, at which point you should raise your Brightness enough by 1 or few notches until the top-left black square becomes visible again.
- ***Optional*** Assuming that you could see all the black and all the white squares from the 2 Lagom.nl tests above, you can further increase your VT60's contrast ratio to improve image quality (which may decrease image accuracy or not), raise your TV's Contrast to the highest value that still allows you to see the bottom-right white square on Lagom.nl's White Saturation page, but make it isn't too bright for your eyes because it can cause strain.
CALIBRATION - very important for VT60 experience!!!
I really hope you had your Panasonic VT60 professionally calibrated - its a MUST for such an amazing TV and I mean it! Most of the time people who can afford such a TV can afford a $400-$500 visit from a real professional calibrator. Do not be a fool and ask BestBuy to calibrate it because BestBuy are horrible at it 90% of the time and often use old and inaccurate equipment. You MAY find a local pro-calibrator, but he/she may suck. You would need to read reviews about him/her and it really helps to know about calibration basics and equipment to make a decision about a calibrator (person). You can PM me with whichever local calibrator name you find and I can tell you which questions to ask him/her, and then give you a recommendation based on the answers received and available reviews. Do you live in USA? I advice on going with a very well-known traveling calibrator, Chad B., because he has the top-most equipment, great skills, and he doesn't compromise or use shortcuts when it comes to calibration quality. He, just like other pro-calibrators, does tours around the USA and you would have to schedule a visit/appointment with him months ahead.
Your other choice is to calibrate your TV yourself, which is an awesome skill to learn once and use it for the rest of your life on all of your displays and projectors. It does require buying a hardware colorimeter (preferably i1Display Pro for $250 or at least ColorMunki Display for $175, NOT any Spyder-series) and it is advised to at least rent a spectrophotometer (like ColorMunki Photo for $60) or buy one (used i1Pro Revision D from eBay for $400+ or new i1Pro 2 for $1000+ from manufacturer. All-in-all, you would need to spend $300 tops (ColorMinki Display purchase + ColorMunki Photo rent) for the necessary hardware and $0 for the necessary software. That hardware and software would provide you with good and worthy levels of accuracy, but not as extreme of accuracy as you would get from pro-calibrator's equipment ($15,000+). In simple, non-technical terms, going from non-calibrated display to properly calibrated display (using $300 package I advised earlier) would get you within 80-100% of reference-level (perfect) accuracy, while a pro-calibrator will get you within 95-100% of reference accuracy. In worst-case scenario, going from un-calibrated display to one properly calibrated with 80% accuracy would be very noticeable and would greatly improve film & game immersion and realism. Going from 80% accuracy to 100% accuracy would provide a very small, if visible at all, improvement. That means that if you've done a great job calibration your TV with the tools I advised, then asking a Pro calibrator to to improve those possible 20% would be a waste of money.
Pro's of buying the equipment and calibrating TV's yourself are:
- Awesome skill to have to use on all your (and other people's) displays and/or projectors.
- The hardware you purchased does not need upgrading, making it a one-time expenditure to, again, use on all your (and other people's) displays and/or projectors for many yeas to come
- Great image accuracy
- A sense of pride
- Cheaper (with least-expensive $300 package advised) than a pro-calibrator's services
- Can become a great hobby
- Calibration skills are valued and can be used to make a living if you can get certified, get the right (expensive - $15000+) equipment and become a pro. Passing the exam is not hard, calibrating displays and projects can be often easy, but getting your private calibration business to make money for you is very hard and 90% of those who try - fail.
Con's of buying the equipment and calibrating TV's yourself are:
- Difficult to find all the needed learning materials and information in one place
- Takes quite some time to learn
- Takes many hours to practice
- Can be tedious and annoying
- Achieved image accuracy is likely not be as high as the one achieved by a good pro-calibrator, which is mostly the case with plasma and OLED displays, but less so with LCD displays IMHO.
Pro's of a calibration performed by a real pro:
- Very high probability of achieving an excellent image accuracy
- Specific day-time and night-time modes that take your environment's ambient light into consideration
- No hassles, no annoyance, no need to learn, etc.
Con's of a calibration performed by a real pro:
- More expensive than buying your own hardware that you re-use on as many displays as you have for years to come
- Extra costs for calibrating additional displays
- Not knowing what's actually going on since you'd have no knowledge of calibration basics.
PM me (or spacediver) if you want to know more
Last edited by a moderator:
Thank you for your great post, i'll be definently looking to get the best picture out of this TV with your instructions! Any more gamers with plasma TV's out there?
i was quite impressed how GTA V looked at night and daytime playing with this plasma tv.
Last edited:
TwistedMetalGear
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2005
- Messages
- 2,199
Did you seriously just say that?
Plasma TVs have some of the best motion quality out of any display, damn near rivaling CRTs. The whole reason I bought a Plasma TV was to get away from the motion blur of LCDs. Gaming on this thing is glorious.
Cool Vibrations
Gawd
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2008
- Messages
- 660
Yeah, I'm going to have to disagree with him as well. People who usually dismiss plasmas have probably never seen a Kuro live.
It says enough that people on numerous home theater forums like avsforum/highdefjunkies/flatpanelhd/etc. still haven't upgraded their plasmas to OLED because the differences are marginal at best.
Even people who have bought the EG9600 have this to say about it:
I'll give it maybe 3-5 more years till a successor to the ZT60 appears...