• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

120Hz LCD Info Thread

dioxholster said:
how come monitors/TV cant do what cinema projectors do? why we need shutter glasses? and isnt ATI making their own 3d to work with monitors with new hdmi 1.4 and has nothing to do with 120hz?
Click to expand...

I assume you are referring to using polarization rather then the active shutter system. Nvidia actually does support doing 3D via polarization, in fact Zalman I think has a polarized monitor that is 3D capable but not 120hz. There are however many advantages/disadvantages of both systems, and right now the shutter system is preferred. Without comparing the quality of both systems, the shutter system at the moment has a significant cost advantage I believe, as polarized displays are much more costly to make.
 
dixholster said:
and isnt ATI making their own 3d to work with monitors with new hdmi 1.4 and has nothing to do with 120hz?
Click to expand...

dioxholster said:
they say it will be like 50% cheaper solution over nvidia. how could that be a fail?
Click to expand...

Have you got a link for that, or are you just making this up? I keep wavering on whether your posts are sarcastic or stupid.
 
evilsofa said:
Have you got a link for that, or are you just making this up? I keep wavering on whether your posts are sarcastic or stupid.
Click to expand...

in the digitalverses interview they said the glasses will cost 20 dollars as they are third party glasses of your choice. nvidia's are like 200 dollars.
 
dioxholster said:
people say acer gd24 is better, but its not bundled like this one. and asus one has a green tint to it while acer got a blue tint. all in all reviews indicate that acer's got better colors sort of and more responsive.
Click to expand...

People do? link?

I've not seen any direct review of asus vs acer.

What the reviews do show is they are both flawed to some extent. The acer has input lag which kind of defeats the point in buying a super responsive 120hz screen. The asus has a glossy screen which unless you play in a pitch back room or love your own reflection is annoying.
 
FrozenHalo said:
So then is the Alienware really worth the 500$ price tag then?
Click to expand...

I don't think any of these TN models are worth $500.

Be patient and wait for a sale if you want anything Dell offers. I ended up with $330 in my Alienware and it's worth that, though I'm still tempted to check out the e-IPS NEC.
 
I think you have response time and input lag confused. That review mentions nothing about input lag.
 
limitedaccess said:
Nowhere does that mention it has the least input lag?

http://www.digitalversus.com/duels.php?ty=6&ma1=38&mo1=631&p1=7352&ma2=150&ph=12

http://www.digitalversus.com/duels.php?ty=6&ma1=38&mo1=631&p1=7352&ma2=470&ph=12
Click to expand...

"That review mentions nothing about input lag. " Says to me that you claim the review I posted in question fails to mention input lag. I just showed that you were incorrect. So now you widen your point to a question I asked, not even a statement I made trying to provide information.

I'm not here to state facts, I'm here asking questions.
 
But I posted two links with information regarding input lag from the same site comparing the Acer against the Alienware and Asus. I'm not sure why you think I'm simply being negative and not informative?

I will admit I was looking for information comparing the Acers input lag to its contemporaries in that review, as it seemed like you had gotten the impression that the Acer had been rated as having the lowest input lag, which was not the actually shown in the review. I merely phrased my query in that form as the review just compare the Acers response time however, and was making sure you were aware that is not the same thing. I was not trying to be condescending in anyway.
 
limitedaccess said:
But I posted two links with information regarding input lag from the same site comparing the Acer against the Alienware and Asus. I'm not sure why you think I'm simply being negative and not informative?

I will admit I was looking for information comparing the Acers input lag to its contemporaries in that review, as it seemed like you had gotten the impression that the Acer had been rated as having the lowest input lag, which was not the actually shown in the review. I merely phrased my query in that form as the review just compare the Acers response time however, and was making sure you were aware that is not the same thing. I was not trying to be condescending in anyway.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, I apologize. Thanks for the links.
 
Input lag is a really tough one to pin down because all the review sites seem to come out with different figures for the same monitors, so it's hard to know which site has the correct ones?

However I felt confident saying the acer has the worst input lag as all the sites reviewing it and other monitors tend to have it at least 16ms worse then anything else - digitial vs you were arguing about above shows up to 50ms input lag for the acer.

The one almost guaranteed to have the lowest figure is the LG as that has a specific 0 input lag thru mode, however digital vs don't agree, but then somehow they managed to review the monitor about 4 months before anyone else and don't mention the thru mode in the review at all so who knows? flat panels hd give the lg 0 input lag, and they also think the asus and the alienware both have 0 lag too.

But then this is all in this thread if you read through it...
 
Basically if you want to talk about input lag, ignore anything you see on digitalversus. Including their awesome 50ms lag on the acer (no, it doesnt lag that bad). The acer also came out first and no one, no one bothered to turn off overdrive to see how it actually performed.
 
Agreed.

There is no way in h3ll that it lags any where NEAR 50ms.

I don't think the overdrive affects input lag, because it seemingly was just a stupid sharpening setting, as opposed to a "color to color" algorithm to compensate for poor transitions that affect certain color-to-color changes often used on S-PVA.

Not a big fan of digital versus. They often publish completely inflated input lag numbers.

Ritorix said:
Basically if you want to talk about input lag, ignore anything you see on digitalversus. Including their awesome 50ms lag on the acer (no, it doesnt lag that bad). The acer also came out first and no one, no one bothered to turn off overdrive to see how it actually performed.
Click to expand...
 
Any type of "post processing" effect should add to input lag, as it delays what will be shown on screen in comparison to what is actually happening. With that in mind it would not be surprising if the Acer did have the worst input lag, as this would be the trade off have having the fastest response time. But at the same time the likely real world difference in either case is likely so small I'm not sure if people would be able to tell the difference, even if they convinced themselves they could.
 
I've seen people mention the LG has 0 input lag in a couple places. What is ment by this? Surely they don't mean absolute 0.

I'm looking for something to replace my CRT for gaming and I would like to get an LCD with the lowest possible input lag.
 
0 input lag...ok, can't wait to see people explain that away.
 
if the Asus got 0 input lag or the least then it should be the no.1 choice. the idea of lag of any kind scares me.
 
nbuubu said:
Ordered one, then second-guessed again. Will wait to see what people actually think. Not a huge fan of the bottom lights on the bezel.
Click to expand...

I've got the LG. First thing you do is turn off the bottom lights. Not a fan of the almost impossible to see capacitive buttons either - however once you set up the display don't really need to go near them again.

Colours seem fine - I took flatpanels hd's settings as a basis, although I felt that looked a bit washed out (even if it was meant to be accurate) so then dropped the gamma and upped the brightness a bit and that looks much better to my eyes. I have an HP 2105 with an M-PVA panel I think which at the time was pretty highly regarded for colours, the LG looks very similar to that.

For text and photos's it's ok, but text isn't as clear as some other monitors in my possession (e.g. I have an acer laptop with the 18.4 inch screen and that blows this one away for text and pictures, but then that is a very good screen).

It is a matt screen so no reflections which is a big plus.

Where it matters is gaming, and for that it's just amazing compared to my old monitor - everything looks so smooth and solid. Tried some ut2004 and TF2 and tbh I could never go back to a lesser LCD again. My old LCD wasn't the greatest for input lag/response, but wow does it look bad in comparison to the LG, it's like trying game drunk.

Haven't tried 3D yet, but I think I might be able to borrow a 3d vision kit so will give it a go. tbh my current set-up isn't really fast enough to game on in 3D at high fps so will have to wait for an upgrade. 3D photography really interests me, might try and get one of the new fuji real 3D W3 camera's for xmas so more likely to get the glasses for that then gaming in the short term.
 
Is the LG glossy or matte? I think I"m gonna end up deciding between the LG and Acer.
 
Did you get any dead pixels in your LG? I despise dead/stuck pixels with an unnatural passion and the fact newegg has a standard, 30 day return policy for it makes me happy. With their 15% restocking fee it'll essentially cost me $60 to try it out in case I get unlucky.
 
Last edited:
nbuubu said:
Did you get any dead pixels in your LG? I despise dead/stuck pixels with an unnatural passion and the fact newegg has a standard, 30 day return policy for it makes me happy. With their 15% restocking fee it'll essentially cost me $60 to try it out in case I get unlucky.
Click to expand...
That's one of the main reasons I went with the Alienware - 3 years standard zero dead pixel policy. :)
 
nbuubu said:
Did you get any dead pixels in your LG? I despise dead/stuck pixels with an unnatural passion and the fact newegg has a standard, 30 day return policy for it makes me happy. With their 15% restocking fee it'll essentially cost me $60 to try it out in case I get unlucky.
Click to expand...

That's why I try to find the monitor I want through tigerdirect a lot, 0 dead pixel policy. Although they don't get new stuff in as quickly.
 
DeadSkull said:
How is ATI doing with latest 120Hz monitors with latest drivers?
Click to expand...

^ This. I also wonder if it works in 120Hz in non-native res yet and if scaling is OK (if you can choose to have black borders with a 4:3 res etc if you want). With Nvidia cards both works fine. I've been interested in maybe upgrading to a HD 6xxx series cards when they get released but I'm unsure if the 120Hz support is still lacking.
 
RPGWiZaRD said:
^ This. I also wonder if it works in 120Hz in non-native res yet and if scaling is OK (if you can choose to have black borders with a 4:3 res etc if you want). With Nvidia cards both works fine. I've been interested in maybe upgrading to a HD 6xxx series cards when they get released but I'm unsure if the 120Hz support is still lacking.
Click to expand...

What exactly is the issue with ATI cards and 120 hz displays? I want to eventually get a 120 hz monitor strictly for gaming, but if there's an issue with ATI cards and 120 hz displays, then forget it. I have a Radeon 5970, btw.
 
Samson4EiT said:
Is the LG glossy or matte? I think I"m gonna end up deciding between the LG and Acer.
Click to expand...

Matte - as it says in the post directly above your one ...

nbuubu said:
Did you get any dead pixels in your LG? I despise dead/stuck pixels with an unnatural passion and the fact newegg has a standard, 30 day return policy for it makes me happy. With their 15% restocking fee it'll essentially cost me $60 to try it out in case I get unlucky.
Click to expand...

I haven't noticed any but I haven't gone over the thing with a magnifying glass looking for them, will take a look later.

addictedto60fps said:
What exactly is the issue with ATI cards and 120 hz displays? I want to eventually get a 120 hz monitor strictly for gaming, but if there's an issue with ATI cards and 120 hz displays, then forget it. I have a Radeon 5970, btw.
Click to expand...

I thought it was basically the 2D clock speed was set to low - fast enough to drive a 60hz screen, but not fast enough to drive a 120hz one. As far as I know ati eventually fixed this but don't quote me on that - I've got an nvidia card so never really paid that much attention.
 
sbuckler said:
Matte - as it says in the post directly above your one ...
Click to expand...

Haha god thanks for pointing that out, I even read that some time before I made the post but I guess it just didn't stick ha.

Have you ever used/checked out any other 120hz monitors? Kinda specifically the Acer one, I'm wondering how this compares overall.
 
nbuubu said:
Did you get any dead pixels in your LG? I despise dead/stuck pixels with an unnatural passion and the fact newegg has a standard, 30 day return policy for it makes me happy. With their 15% restocking fee it'll essentially cost me $60 to try it out in case I get unlucky.
Click to expand...

No dead pixels :)
 
Just an FYI to those with a Fry's Electronics nearby, the LG is currently available on their website and for store pickup in all the NorCal stores I checked. Going to pick one up tomorrow and check it out for myself, with a proper return policy should something go wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top