• 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

Acer GN245HQ Digital Versus Review

for reference

Acer GD245HQ Digital Versus Review

GN245HQ VS GD245HQ Direct comparison

+GN has less input lag (13.2ms according to DV) but the lag is more likely around 0ms when measured with the more accurate SMT Tool (PRAD.de will be reviewing this soon)
+GN Better contrast and screen uniformity
-GN has worse color presets
+/-GN has reverse ghosting (is it noticeable?) but is still the fastest panel around
? Will the GN have the same firmware issues as Acers last 120hz panel?
 
the 120hz lg w2363d is getting cheaper and cheaper
already seems to be below 200$ in some asian countries

the reason is lg won't produce 120hz monitors any more in the future
their w2363d sold badly and had pretty high return rates (probably related to the horrendous colors)
now they plan to produce only line-interlaced 3d displays in the future

if you plan to get one you should do so in the next few months
 
Dims said:
which monitor you would recomment for fps gaming?
Click to expand...

Nothing.

Wait for reviews of the new Samsung 120hz range and the Acer HS244HQ which should be out in the next month or so before buying.
 
Except the Benq sucks, unless you like Non-existent quality control, bad color presets and paying 350$+ for a 120hz panel that is infact slower than most 200$ 60hz TN panels. But go ahead, it is your money.
 
NCX said:
Except the Benq sucks, unless you like Non-existent quality control, bad color presets and paying 350$+ for a 120hz panel that is infact slower than most 200$ 60hz TN panels. But go ahead, it is your money.
Click to expand...

I got a Apple Cinema Display that I can use when I want bright and vibrant colors. The Benq would only be used strictly for competitive gaming (CSS and CoD4). In those games the settings are so low that you don't need a monitor with vibrant colors. All I want is 1920x1080 (or 1200), 2ms (give or take) and 120Hz. This one seems like the best one. I've heard different stories about all the 120Hz-monitors out there. Some say this is the best. Some say it sucks. I'm not THAT picky when it comes down to colors and brightnes (since I got a ACD 23") so I think this one "will do" :p Besides, it can't suck balls. It's just not 100%, but lets face it, which monitors nowadays are?
 
Yes it can suck if it does not function the way it was intended. Read this review, look at the color presets and responsiveness sections. It has horrible presets and pretty much every one who gets one reports horrible backlight bleed and screen uniformity. Then look at the response time section to see it is slower than most 60hz panels, thus defeating the enitire purpose of getting a 120hz monitor. The other 120hz panels like Alienware, Asus, and new Acer all have decent color presets and are actually faster than any 60hz panel

Why spend 350$ when you can spend 200$ on a 60hz panel like the LG W2442PA or Acer H243H, which are faster than the BenQ and have much better color.
 
Last edited:
These monitors work 120hz outside that 3d mode right? Atm i dont really care about 3d
 
To whoever was saying the Alienware had terrible PQ...I mean, sure - there is some banding, but calibrated the monitor actually looks pretty decent as long as you're within the optimal viewing angles.

Yes, they work outside of 3D - I've not tried mine with 3D yet.
 
NCX said:
Nothing.

Wait for reviews of the new Samsung 120hz range and the Acer HS244HQ which should be out in the next month or so before buying.
Click to expand...

Don't wait samsung. It'll be riddled with horrible lightbleed on 90% of the monitors like 2233RZ. Samsung doesnt care about lightbleed.
 
NCX said:
Except the Benq sucks, unless you like Non-existent quality control, bad color presets and paying 350$+ for a 120hz panel that is infact slower than most 200$ 60hz TN panels. But go ahead, it is your money.
Click to expand...

NCX it really doesn't suck man and you've never actually owned an XL2410T. The quality control for that particular model has been pretty strong (not many complaints in the owners thread). You did buy the Benq EW2420 and got a lemon... I understand your bitterness. I wouldn't blame all Benq monitors though, I've owned countless horrible LG products and I still give them a chance to disappoint me. The Pixel response argument doesn't fly either, motion looks great on it. It also has the lowest input lag of any monitor on the market and it's definitely improved my frag count. It's a night and day difference and I've bought and returned more than my share of monitors in the last year.

All the other monitors you list in your post have their own shortcomings. Non adjustable stands, reflective displays, higher input lag, worse contrast ratio...

P.S. I would never suggest someone buy the EW2420... The BL2400PU has the better stand and none of the bad panels which is worth the extra $50.
 
Last edited:
I read over a year ago 27" 120hz monitors were going to be released... Its been over a year in the waiting. I think a lot of people are going to be further disappointed.
 
NCX said:
"I like it so it must be good"=:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Any chance we can get you to stay out of 120hz monitor threads if all you're going to do is recommend 60hz screens every chance you get? Seriously you're annoying :rolleyes:
 
DumpALump said:
Any chance we can get you to stay out of 120hz monitor threads if all you're going to do is recommend 60hz screens every chance you get? Seriously you're annoying :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Thing is, he is right about the BenQ XL2410T being terrible. It has noticeable motion blur despite the 120hz, which kind of defeats the purpose of such a monitor in the first place, doesn't it? It looks almost like a 5ms TN...
And there are very few reliable input lag test protocols so I honestly don't believe the BenQ is better than the others. Heck, the best Quake 3 players did say recently that they prefer the Samsung 2233rz over the BenQ, and those guys can tell the difference between 10 and 20 ping.

Also, NCX did say that the other 120hz monitors work as intended. If you really care that much about responsiveness they are your best bet. They have their issues but if you can live with them go ahead.
 
Just a heads up:

Fry's now has a 15% and 15 day return policy on all monitors. I purchased and returned the 120hz LG. I did not have to pay the extra return fee's because my receipt did not have this printed on the back (after I argued for 10 minutes). Just a head up for those out there that like to go there and buy and return monitors.

As far as the LG itself it was a pretty good monitor for gaming. The colors were terrible but after calibrating it using the nvidia calibration tool with in the nvidia drivers it looks okay. However the text on the monitor was not good because over drive feature can't be disabled. This was the reason I returned the monitor.

http://3dvision-blog.com/review-of-the-23-lg-w2363d-120hz-full-hd-3d-gaming-monitor/

Ive already mentioned that you cannot disable the Overdrive function here on the LG (using higher voltages to make pixels switch their state faster in order to improve their response time). The Overdrive needs to be active when you are displaying stereo 3D content on the monitor as otherwise the response time of the pixels might drop too much and thus the ghosting youll be getting might increase significantly. On the other hand, when in 2D mode as a side effect of the overdrive you might notice that the picture is a bit too sharp, and this oversharpening might not be convenient for some people, but might as well be just fine with others a matter of personal preferences. For me personally that is not an issue, but for some people the oversharpening of the image is a serious problem. And since you cannot disable the Overdrive function you cannot get rid of that sharpening on the LG, unlike on the Acer.
 
rfisher983 said:
Just a heads up:

Fry's now has a 15% and 15 day return policy on all monitors. I purchased and returned the 120hz LG. I did not have to pay the extra return fee's because my receipt did not have this printed on the back (after I argued for 10 minutes). Just a head up for those out there that like to go there and buy and return monitors.

As far as the LG itself it was a pretty good monitor for gaming. The colors were terrible but after calibrating it using the nvidia calibration tool with in the nvidia drivers it looks okay. However the text on the monitor was not good because over drive feature can't be disabled. This was the reason I returned the monitor.

http://3dvision-blog.com/review-of-the-23-lg-w2363d-120hz-full-hd-3d-gaming-monitor/

Ive already mentioned that you cannot disable the Overdrive function here on the LG (using higher voltages to make pixels switch their state faster in order to improve their response time). The Overdrive needs to be active when you are displaying stereo 3D content on the monitor as otherwise the response time of the pixels might drop too much and thus the ghosting youll be getting might increase significantly. On the other hand, when in 2D mode as a side effect of the overdrive you might notice that the picture is a bit too sharp, and this oversharpening might not be convenient for some people, but might as well be just fine with others a matter of personal preferences. For me personally that is not an issue, but for some people the oversharpening of the image is a serious problem. And since you cannot disable the Overdrive function you cannot get rid of that sharpening on the LG, unlike on the Acer.
Click to expand...

That's exactly why I didn't buy a monitor. I drove down to Frys to look at the BenQ. Its hooked up to a garbage signal therefore it looked like ass. I then find out there is a 15% restocking fee if it doesn't match up to MY standards. They will only refund the money if it physically doesn't work. (Spoke to a manager for about 10 mins)

I didn't know they sold the LG 120hz. I must have missed that. I narrowed my purchase down to the Alienware the BenQ or mainly the LG (because its only $320). Does it really look that bad?
 
On Fry's website it shows that they have the Benq, Asus, LG, Viewsonic, Acer, and alienware in stock at my location. However, I only saw the LG and Acer on displayed and they did not use the supplied dual-link dvi cable. Prior to buying the LG the unit it was connected to was not powered on. I was only able to see the boxes on the shelves for the Viewsonic, LG, and alienware. I did not see the asus or benq on the shelves or a display unit.

As far as the LG monitor I was only able to test it playing bc2 nam. Compared to my CRT I was able to see spot enemies easier at a distance and more clearly running at 1920x1080, I was able to drop 60+ kills a couple of times when in the gunners seat with the chopper. However in regards of input lag and response time I only played bc2. This game isn't as fast passed as quake live or brink. I could still tell my CRT was faster but I was defiantly contemplating keeping the LG unit because it was a very good LCD for gaming.

Like I said on my previous post, the text was just horrible looking in windows and browsing the internet. I've tried adjusting clear type etc and it did not help much. If the text looked better I would have kept the monitor.
 
That seems like a really odd reason to return it. Have you ever explored the zoom functions on your web browser, they are quite decent now. Takes a very minor amount of zooming to clear that up on webpages.
 
kalston said:
Thing is, he is right about the BenQ XL2410T being terrible. It has noticeable motion blur despite the 120hz, which kind of defeats the purpose of such a monitor in the first place, doesn't it? It looks almost like a 5ms TN...
And there are very few reliable input lag test protocols so I honestly don't believe the BenQ is better than the others. Heck, the best Quake 3 players did say recently that they prefer the Samsung 2233rz over the BenQ, and those guys can tell the difference between 10 and 20 ping.

Also, NCX did say that the other 120hz monitors work as intended. If you really care that much about responsiveness they are your best bet. They have their issues but if you can live with them go ahead.
Click to expand...

Despite the fact that the review states it has problems, its just that he posts a couple 60hz screens everytime someone posts they are happy with their xl2410t. If someone is looking for a 120hz screen for their FPS gaming goodness, then it is more beneficial to post some other 120hz screen which would be a better buy and maybe the reasons he believes so.

It's like if I go into a thread in which someone has purchased an AMD processor and they are happy with their purchase, but then I say why'd you buy that when you could have bought this Intel chip. Well maybe the person just likes AMD chips, I'm not here to crap on his parade unless he's asking if he made the right choice.

For one, I'm happy with my xl2410t. But because a review says its bad, I must have made a bad purchase and there should be no reason for me to be happy with it. The xl2410t was the closest fit to my criteria on what I wanted to have in a 120hz screen, so its a perfectly fine monitor to purchase. I would say if you're going to go buy one, to ask or pick one with a later manufacturing date.
 
DumpALump said:
Despite the fact that the review states it has problems, its just that he posts a couple 60hz screens everytime someone posts they are happy with their xl2410t. If someone is looking for a 120hz screen for their FPS gaming goodness, then it is more beneficial to post some other 120hz screen which would be a better buy and maybe the reasons he believes so.

It's like if I go into a thread in which someone has purchased an AMD processor and they are happy with their purchase, but then I say why'd you buy that when you could have bought this Intel chip. Well maybe the person just likes AMD chips, I'm not here to crap on his parade unless he's asking if he made the right choice.

For one, I'm happy with my xl2410t. But because a review says its bad, I must have made a bad purchase and there should be no reason for me to be happy with it. The xl2410t was the closest fit to my criteria on what I wanted to have in a 120hz screen, so its a perfectly fine monitor to purchase. I would say if you're going to go buy one, to ask or pick one with a later manufacturing date.
Click to expand...



Next time he does it, report him.

I'm very happ with my AW2310 myself...great monitor, even for just browsing.
 
I recommended and provide review links to 3 other 120hz monitors that actually work properly in my post, please learn to read, but just for you I shall quote myself

NCX said:
Yes it can suck if it does not function the way it was intended. Read this review, look at the color presets and responsiveness sections. It has horrible presets and pretty much every one who gets one reports horrible backlight bleed and screen uniformity. Then look at the response time section to see it is slower than most 60hz panels, thus defeating the enitire purpose of getting a 120hz monitor. The other 120hz panels like Alienware, Asus, and new Acer all have decent color presets and are actually faster than any 60hz panel.
Click to expand...

I recommend these 60hz screens because they have better motion performance and image quality than the BenQ at half the price, rather than having people base their purchasing decisions off of 1 "happy," users opinion they will see there are cheaper alternatives.

If a review says it is bad, and there are well reviewed 120hz monitors out there for the same price that actually work properly, then yes, it is a bad purchase.
 
Last edited:
Why do people care about presets? Why? Custom RGB, input RGB values from a trusted review site or forum member...tweak from there. Presets mean nothing in the end.
 
Because when purcahsing a premium product they want it to look good? If Dell/Asus/acer/viewsonic 120hz panels come set out of the box there is no reason for LG/BenQ/Samsung 120hz panels cant, especially when they are charging the same price.
 
NCX said:
I recommend these 60hz screens because they have better motion performance and image quality than the BenQ at half the price, rather than having people base their purchasing decisions off of 1 "happy," users opinion they will see there are cheaper alternatives.

If a review says it is bad, and there are well reviewed 120hz monitors out there for the same price that actually work properly, then yes, it is a bad purchase.
Click to expand...

120hz isn't all about ghosting though. Obviously it makes a difference, but for heavy FPS gamers input and 120hz makes the most difference. The samsung is better no doubt, but I wanted a 24" screen. A 60hz can have 0 ghosting, but is still displaying only 60 frames instead of the 120 frames a 120hz monitor can do. Reason I didn't go with the Asus is because of it's glossy screen. Just can't stand glare. The new Acer is not out yet, and the Alienware is a 23" screen (with it's own problems). Perfect color reproduction doesn't matter that much to me since my main use is gaming (FPS) and work related programs.

benq.jpg

Best case left, Worst case right

So there is a tiny bit of ghosting, I don't see how that is worse than playing a FPS game at 60hz on a 0 ghosting screen. If I wasn't a big FPS gamer, then I wouldn't bother looking into 120hz screens.
 
SO many short coming regarding all these available 120hz monitors. I want to buy one but it seems I need to compromise in order to justify one model over another. Still currently narrowed down to the LG or the BenQ. I use my PC for 90% gaming via pc and PS3. And 10% internet viewing. Sigh. Maybe I should wait.
 
NCX said:
Because when purcahsing a premium product they want it to look good? If Dell/Asus/acer/viewsonic 120hz panels come set out of the box there is no reason for LG/BenQ/Samsung 120hz panels cant, especially when they are charging the same price.
Click to expand...

OK, so...people who care about color - and know what a good color reproduction looks like....are going to go to custom RGB and use that. The average user who does't understand color accuracy is going to pick whatever preset looks best to them (and I've seen people who crank digital vibrance up to make stuff pop) and have no real care for accuracy.

We on [H] are the elite; if you CARE about the monitor's color reproduction, you need to look at the calibrated deltas, not the preset deltas. And if there happens to be something messed up where the monitor acts funny when in custom RGB mode, then that can detract from the monitor as a whole - but your crusade for good presets otherwise bewilders me. The average user just doesn't care.
 
Using Custom RGB or the OSD in general doesn't mean you can fix things. A lot of times monitors require profiling (the 120hz LG, BenQ and new Acer do) to correct things like gamma and color temperature while retaining a good brightness and black level. Low Delta E's really aren't very important as long as the average falls around 3.0.

So the average user is ignorant, cool, no reason for people on [H] to encourage this or say it's ok for monitors to look horrible out of the box because Fat Joe America doesn't know any better. If other companies can make properly functioning 120hz panels with good default color accuracy, there is no reason/excuse for others not to compete.
 
NCX said:
Yes it can suck if it does not function the way it was intended. Read this review, look at the color presets and responsiveness sections. It has horrible presets and pretty much every one who gets one reports horrible backlight bleed and screen uniformity. Then look at the response time section to see it is slower than most 60hz panels, thus defeating the enitire purpose of getting a 120hz monitor. The other 120hz panels like Alienware, Asus, and new Acer all have decent color presets and are actually faster than any 60hz panel

Why spend 350$ when you can spend 200$ on a 60hz panel like the LG W2442PA or Acer H243H, which are faster than the BenQ and have much better color.
Click to expand...

Did you read the review you linked? It says the XL2410T screen is actually a good gaming screen. The color results are good as well. Perhaps you didn't understand the results?

The XL2410T has an average DeltaE of 3 from factory (standard preset) which is perfectly fine for gaming. Everything from DeltaE 3 and below is fine for everyday usage. DeltaE less then 1 cannot be seen with the naked eye and calibrated the XL2410T got a DeltaE of 0.6 which is excellent even in terms of color critical tasks (though its a TN so I would recommend against that due to bit depth and image consistancy). In comparison, the other 120hz monitors you linked were (ranking from worst to best):

Asus VG236H = DeltaE 4.7
Acer GN245HQ = DeltaE 3.9
Alienware AW2310 = DeltaE 2.8

In other words, the XL2410T is second best from your recommandations and the DeltaE of 2.8 (AW2310) doesn't offer anything practical compared to the DeltaE of 3.

The FPS preset is a gaming tweak. A gamma value of 1.8 makes it easier to spot campers hiding in the dark. Simon Baker suspected as much and he was correct, since the BenQ is marketed to be tweaked especially for gaming. FPS preset is what you want to use if you are in COD BO, CS or any other multiplayer FPS game. For the single player part, standard preset is better.

As for the PixPerAn test, its a pixel response test and only good to check for artifacts during pixel movement (ghosting, overshoot etc). It has nothing to do with 60hz vs. 120hz. 120hz, means it refreshes 120 times per second and can display 120 different frames per second. The purpose of getting a 120hz screen isn't so that its free of any overdrive artifacts or similar, but to get more frames per second displayed. A higher refresh shows more frames and makes movement more fluid.

You are probably trying to help and offer an opinion, but please learn what the numbers mean in practical terms. The XL2410T should be an excellent choice for fps gamers (though I would have more recommended an IPS based screen for those that doesn't need the extra edge of a 120hz and prefer better PQ).

Edit:

Ah, and the overdrive overshoot seems to have been corrected in at least firmware v005
 
Last edited:
To me the purpose of a 120hz display is to have the lowest pixel response time possible coupled with 120 frames per second.

Displaying 120 frames per second is pointless is there's ghosting, sure it "feels" better but it won't help much in a fast paced FPS like a 120hz blur free display would.
Do note that I'm a blur hater though, I always turn off the motion blur setting a lot of games have nowadays, as I can't stand the effect.

And the Alienware not only has a better DeltaE than the BenQ, but it also has less ghosting and according to most reviews a great colour reproduction for a TN panel (I mean shadow detailing etc). Plus it doesn't suffer as much from backlight bleeding issues AFAIK.
 
kalston said:
To me the purpose of a 120hz display is to have the lowest pixel response time possible coupled with 120 frames per second.

Displaying 120 frames per second is pointless is there's ghosting, sure it "feels" better but it won't help much in a fast paced FPS like a 120hz blur free display would.
Do note that I'm a blur hater though, I always turn off the motion blur setting a lot of games have nowadays, as I can't stand the effect.

And the Alienware not only has a better DeltaE than the BenQ, but it also has less ghosting and according to most reviews a great colour reproduction for a TN panel (I mean shadow detailing etc). Plus it doesn't suffer as much from backlight bleeding issues AFAIK.
Click to expand...

I hate motion blur myself, so you have my full sympathy. :)

The pixel response time on the XL2410T is excellent (I've tested it extensively with firmware V005 in COD BO). Image is sharp upon movement and its everything that one should expect if buying a screen made for FPS gamers. Heck, even the Zowie mousepad and mouse performed well and tracking was good. Endorsed gaming gear isn't always what you expect, but this time I wasn't disappointed. The mouse was a bit too light though after my taste and I would prefer some weight adjustment.

There is no practical difference between the Alienware monitors DeltaE and the XL2410T. If anyone should claim that they can spot the DeltaE 0.2 difference with their eyes, I can spot a liar.

Talking about DeltaE difference of 0.2 between two gaming grade TN screens is pretty much a waste of time anyway. Its a paper difference without any practical meaning.

And, what do you mean that the Alienware doesn't have backlight bleed issues? Try this link:
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=AW2310+backlight+bleed

Lots of people have issues with it and backlight.

Its ok if you prefer one screen over the other, but this is grasping for straws.
 
Of course 0.2 DeltaE is nothing, just saying that the BenQ isn't better than the Alienware by any means, appart from the price.
And if you think the image is sharp upon movement on the BenQ, you simply are not that sensitive to it, not that there's anything wrong with that. At least you're not bothered by it like I am and you can enjoy your purchase.

Note that I don't support Alienware (ridiculously overpriced stuff), or any other display manufacturer for that matter, and none of the 120hz monitors suit me for general usage, so I don't even have one at home.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top