Anything around $300 worth a crap or what?

S

spaceman

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jan 7, 2005
Messages
14,925
CES is here and I have not seen anything entry level that is exciting. I guess we are still waiting on a 24" 144hz IPS at 1080P? Any idea when that will be coming out? I have a 290 so I would like to get free sync but man I am tired of my 2011 Acer GD235hz.......

I have $325 budgeted now but really do not see anything worth getting at that price point.
 
I'd say that you have a better chance of getting a 1440p 144hz/120hz IPS panel rather than a 1080p panel. 1080p IPS is relatively common, but 1080p, IPS along with 144hz is almost unheard of. People are going to pay premium for IPS with a high refresh rate, which is why 1080p isn't very common. Dare I say it, but in terms of high end monitors, 1440p is where it's at, at least at the moment.
 
I'm in the same boat...... Need to know what's a good $300 monitor. Doesn't have to be 144hz though.
 
I'd grab a Crossover 2795 qhd from one of the Ebay sellers with a sending point in the US (easier to return if damaged). Good compromise imo, input lag free 1440p IPS at 96hz is glorious.

There are also Freesync monitors at around 300$. Nixeus Vue 24 specifically (did they cancel the G2460PF in the US?). The XG270HU dropped to 300$ briefly at some point as well, but I wouldn't hold my breath.
I think Asus announced a 24" 1080p Freesync monitor as well, but the handful of sites reporting it are calling it a 4K 144hz IPS monitor, so I'm not sure what they're making
 
I do not see anything better than the Nixeus Vue 24 for my situation. I need a FAST monitor for BF4. Nothing less than 1 ms will do. Pity bc I really want a better PQ than a TN but what can you do? I can't afford much more than $300. I have to have a 24" bc anything bigger you lose a bit of reaction time.

Speed kills or the lack of it gets you killed.
 
you are definitely not going to "lose reaction time" gaming on a 27" monitor. i've been highly ranked in multiple games (league of legends, quake live, csgo, l4d (yes l4d)) and played a few at a very high level competitively and if anything going from a 23" to a 27" has improved my reaction time because things are bigger on screen. it really doesn't matter all that much for a game like BF4 either where 99% of people may as well be playing blindfolded, that is if you play on public servers. you can also look to fazz who is an ex-pro quake player that uses a PG278Q as well and shits on everyone just the same or even harder than he did when he used a smaller monitor. i even asked him if he found there was any difference in gameplay between the two sizes and he said not at all.

i don't know all the specifics of your personal situation but honestly after going from a VG236 to a PG278Q i would definitely encourage you to save up or whatever you need to do to increase your budget to at least $400, as there's nothing at 24" or <$300 worth upgrading to from your current monitor in my opinion.
 
Try the Section 8 BF4 server sometime. There are some decent players there. Especially on the weekends.

The Acer XG270HU looks like the most likely bet then.
 
spaceman said:
Try the Section 8 BF4 server sometime. There are some decent players there. Especially on the weekends.

The Acer XG270HU looks like the most likely bet then.
Click to expand...

I looked at jet.com with stacking the coupons in the recent [H]otDeals thread to get the XG270HU at ~$360. The only thing making me hesitate is having to deal with a return on the monitor, as I hear jet doesn't have the best customer service. I'd like an IPS also but those are $600.
 
I want 1 ms response time. IPS looks better but the motion blur has to be absolutely minimal. That Acer looks to be the fastest FPS friendly monitor under $500.

Jet is iffy. I have $200 in amazon giftcards anyway. Also, if the monitor is not up to snuff. Best to deal with amazon for returns.
 
Just an FYI, advertised 1ms response does not meant 1ms real world response. Anytime I've seen a review of a "1ms" panel by Prad, PC Monitors, TFTCentral, etc., their best was about 2.5ms GtG at the highest overdrive, which had horrible RTC overshoot. These monitors usually had to be dialed back to a medium-ish overdrive setting for a good balance between ghosting and overshoot (inverse ghosting), which put them squarely in the 5-8ms range. Today's best IPS monitors are in that range as well (TN closer to 5ms, IPS closer to 8ms, but the difference is minimal).

Don't fall for the advertised 1ms. And I'm not claiming IPS > TN. I'm simply stating that you're not getting a 1ms panel, you're getting a panel that has a much higher than advertised response time, and as a result you're not as good at detecting motion blur as you think you are (this is a good thing, not an insult).
 
Well I sure can see motion blur on my current 1 ms monitor. It is a 2011 model acer gd235hz. I know it is ok but I also know I miss shots in bf4 all of the time bc I am just a bit behind the target. I have a need for speed and yeah. Tired of missing.
 
spaceman said:
Well I sure can see motion blur on my current 1 ms monitor. It is a 2011 model acer gd235hz. I know it is ok but I also know I miss shots in bf4 all of the time bc I am just a bit behind the target. I have a need for speed and yeah. Tired of missing.
Click to expand...

To be fair, your monitor isn't 1ms. Also, you're confusing response time and input lag, two separate things that use the same unit of measurement (milliseconds). That said, we can clarify these, and with better understanding comes a better chance of finding the ideal monitor upgrade for you.

Response Time - As you've noted, higher response time leads to more perceived motion blur. You think that your monitor is 1ms. Acer actually advertised it as 2ms (which was typical of overdriven TNs around its release).

Here's the problem with your monitor. TN panels released in the 2009-2012 range, like yours, were typically 8ms without overdrive. Some, like Samsung, came with 3 levels that were essentially 8, 5, and 2.5ms. The 8ms setting was just right with most people, minimal ghosting. The 5ms setting was a good compromise, negligible ghosting and overshoot (inverse ghosting). The 2.5ms setting was absurd, noticeable overshoot. Unfortunately, you're stuck on this setting. Your response time is TOO low. You need to slow this aspect of the monitor down to reduce the overshoot. But you can't on this model (as far as I can see based on the manual, though there are some tweaks in the hidden service menu that can help to a limited degree).

If you want a true 1ms panel, or close to it, you need a TN advertised as 1ms with lightstrobing (sometimes called ULMB).

Input Lag - When you talked about being behind your opponent, this is what you were referring to, not response time. This figure isn't advertised by monitor manufacturers, and it's definitely not 1ms on your monitor. According to NCX, he saw reviews on Prad and DV as 17ms/17.8ms respectively. I trust him on this, and here's a link to his comment on that:

http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1036702742&postcount=13

Let's say that you are able to push your system to the full 120fps allowable by your monitor (full frames, as I'm aware that you can go higher). That's 8.33ms per frame. Your monitor has at least 17ms of input lag, meaning that your action isn't rendered on the first two frames after you press the button. It's on the third frame. You are 2-3 frames behind before network latency even comes into play. That's what can hurt you in competitive games. You need (or rather, want) a monitor that is as close to 0ms as possible. But that's not possible so you want to be below these thresholds:
- 60hz < 16.67ms
-120hz < 8.33ms
-144hz < 6.94ms

And again, that's not the response time falsely advertised by the monitor manufacturer. You need to look for reputable reviews to find out the true input lag. I'll give you two examples. Up through today I've had two monitors in for testing - BenQ EW2750ZL and HP 25xw. These aren't high end monitors, with typical prices being around $200. The BenQ is a 27", 1080p, VA panel. The HP is a 25", 1080p, AH-IPS panel. Great monitors within their budgets, but nothing special. However, both have outstanding input lag. The BenQ was measured at 5.63ms input lag (source) by PC Monitors. The HP was measured at <2.5ms input lag (source) by NCX. This means less than 1 frame input lag on each of these monitors.

You come across as a competitive gamer. Look at 120/144hz monitors (whichever you prefer), then start looking for professional reviews to guage their actual input lag. Response time should be your final consideration, and at that point, it's TN > IPS > VA. While I do love VA panels, you should avoid them for your needs, but a good IPS will likely suffice.
 
And as a separate post, a recommendation. In your original post you stated that you wanted 24", 1080p, 144hz, IPS. But then you later retracted that last part due to motion blur. So, we're back to TN. I went looking for 24", 1080p, 144hz TN/IPS monitors $325 and below. The best that I could find was the ASUS VG248QE.

PC Monitors tested it at just over 2ms input lag, which is obscenely low. (source) While PC Monitors doesn't give actual pixel transition times in their response time test (they use subjective opinions based on PixPerAn), The ASUS has 6 levels of overdrive. The highest, TraceFree 100, should mimic your current monitor, while the lower levels will offer a better balance of ghosting/overshoot. Most prefer TF 40/60 on ASUS monitors, but I suspect that TF80 would be right for you (TF100 is disgusting, so I can see why you're perceiving ghosting on your current monitor).

$250-$275 is a lost to spend for a slight upgrade, but this monitor might be the upgrade you're looking for. More granular control over response time gives you the balance you need for reduced motion blur, and nearly 1/8th the input lag should assist with your competitive gaming.

That's all I've got, so whatever you decide, I wish you the best of luck on your monitor hunt.
 
As far as "worth a crap" goes, I don't really think the VG248QE qualifies. While it does have insanely good input lag and response time, the image quality suffers quite a bit. This thread details how it can be improved, but it involves using professional hardware and software to calibrate the image, and even after that is done there are still issues.
 
Armenius said:
As far as "worth a crap" goes, I don't really think the VG248QE qualifies. While it does have insanely good input lag and response time, the image quality suffers quite a bit. This thread details how it can be improved, but it involves using professional hardware and software to calibrate the image, and even after that is done there are still issues.
Click to expand...

His requirements were 24", 1080p, 144hz, low response, low input lag, and $325 or less. The ASUS meets his stated requirements (yes, he did state IPS in the original post, but he subsequently revised his needs as the thread evolved).

Once you add image quality to the list of requirements, his budget goes out the door.
 
Daniel_Chang said:
His requirements were 24", 1080p, 144hz, low response, low input lag, and $325 or less. The ASUS meets his stated requirements (yes, he did state IPS in the original post, but he subsequently revised his needs as the thread evolved).

Once you add image quality to the list of requirements, his budget goes out the door.
Click to expand...

Right. There isn't anything worth buying in the $300 range atm considering my current monitor.

I am just saving up and being patient for now. No sense in buying something just to have it and not see any real benefit. I want speed and picture quality. I know I will not get that unless I step up at least to the Acer XG270HU. Even that model has some questions about it and has a higher resolution than I really want due to my gpu limitations.

Thank you for the effort though Daniel. I am sure others appreciate it too.
 
The amusing thing is that apparently you have to spend $5000 to get something that isn't complete crap.

LCD backlights are just so fucking awful.
 
Friend of mine is selling me his BenQ XL2720Z for $200. I figure it will do for now. Especially at that price.
 
spaceman said:
Friend of mine is selling me his BenQ XL2720Z for $200. I figure it will do for now. Especially at that price.
Click to expand...

Input lag on this monitor ranges from slightly better than yours (10ms) to outstanding (<2ms) if you use the "instant mode."

As for pixel response time, the monitor has 3 modes for AMA (their version of overdrive): off, high, and premium. Premium will be likes yours, an average of 2-2.5ms GtG (real world) with lots of overshoot ghosting. TFTCentral measured the off setting as about 9ms GtG, so minimal ghosting and no inverse ghosting. The high setting strikes a balance reducing ghosting, but introduces a little inverse ghosting, with an average GtG of 5ms.

For you, I'd recommend instant mode on, and AMA set to high. Best of luck with your new monitor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top