Best gamng LCD ?

I think there are a ton of LCDs out there that are equally capable of displaying good fast pictures for gaming needs. I think you need to be more specific about what you want. Such as size, budget, video card being used.
 
In general here's what you want:

* 2ms GTG response time
* 23" - 24" @ 1920x1080 or 1920x1200 resolution
* Glossy

2ms panels are most commonly RTA accelerated TN panels with low input lag and no blurring. There is some artifacting, but nothing to be concerned about if you don't know what to look for. Any 23" or 24" panel will do fine. Also glossy is a personal preference of mine, but it helps to increase apparent contrast and color saturation, which is good for non-photorealistic games.

If you're looking to the future, any 120" hz panel gives you significantly less blurring and a very fast response time. Right now you'll find about 2-3 commonly known 120" panels, but there's a couple coming out as 23" 1920x1080 120hz panels.

Otherwise if you don't know what you're looking for and just need a first time or decent gaming panel, any LCD fitting the above specs will do just fine. Plan for about 250-270USD at most.
 
Why glossy ? is worst for anything it shine too much
It comming any good 120Hz refresh time ? coz samsung 2233rz looks old also VX2265wm
And is good to buy just monitor with 120Hz or also 3D nvidia glass coz without glasses it seems to me nonsense to buy 120Hz monitor.

And this 1920x1080 monitors is any difference vs 1680 x 1050 or 1920 x 1200
Is Dell 2209wa good for gaming (is 230€ in Slovenia)
 
Last edited:
Glossy just looks better imo, but as he said, its personal preference.

I'm definatly no expert on monitors, and some people around here are, but as far as 120hz goes, I think you'll get a smoother picture when you're running above 60fps. Below 60fps I'm not really sure how it works but I've always thought that if you were getting inconsistant fps, it would be to some advantage to have higher refresh, since it would reduce the worst case scenario of how long a complete frame would have to wait in the buffer. If someone wants to corrent me on that, I'd love to learn something. :p
 
Glossy vs matte I think is very individualized. I don't like glossy myself because the reflections in the monitor are distracting, especially when trying to watch a movie on it.

Response times I don't fret much over. And most of the time the numbers are probably fudged anyway. I think most people can probably go up to 8ms and not tell the difference.

120Hz panels seem to be targeted towards the 3D gamers and you really need those shutter glasses to really appreciate it. 60 FPS is more than smooth for any human eye, so if you are not doing the 3D glasses, then you don't need 120Hz monitor.

1920x1080 is the 16:9 aspect ratio that has been on wide screen TVs for a while and is now moving to computer monitors. This is just a cost savings move by the LCD manufactures. You get a little less vertical space, 1080 pixels tall instead of 1200, but they are also cheaper to make and buy.

It's up to you, you seem to be looking at 22 inch monitors with 1680x1050 resolutions. But I think a 23 or 24 inch monitor would be nicer because of the extra resolution of 1920x1080 or 1920x1200. You get more desktop space, more room for the UI in your games, and you'll have size for full 1080P HD movies if you hook up a Bluray player or stream HD content.

Dells are really nice and the U2410 seems to be a great monitor for gaming and many other things. It also includes a DisplayPort for down the road when you get a video card with it. But all that quality is kinda pricey. On the opposite end of the spectrum is the Acer H233H. I just picked one of these up for the office and it's also a pretty nice gaming monitor and can be had very cheaply. And there are probably a dozen good choices between the two depending on how much you wanted to spend (or what's available in your area).
 
samsung 2233rz. 120hz is not just for 3d, it makes everything better. 60hz refresh rate limits the response time on the pixels.
 
Ravynmagi said:
120Hz panels seem to be targeted towards the 3D gamers and you really need those shutter glasses to really appreciate it. 60 FPS is more than smooth for any human eye
Click to expand...

This is absolutely not true and it is my duty to stop the spread of such virus-like ignorance on the internet.
 
Regarding the 'good fight', 60hz on a LCD is not the same effect on your eyes as 60hz on a CRT. Different beasts, scanlines vs pixel refresh rate. 60hz on a CRT was unbearable, 60hz on a LCD is a non-issue.
 
I wouldn't mind displays that actually sample at 120Hz instead of using image processing to achieve a 120Hz effect, but as I understand it, HDMI/DVI doesn't have the bandwith to support that over 1650x1080, so until display port or some other connection type becomes standard, don't count on seeing much in the way of true 120Hz displays.

Glossy vs. matte is a matter of personal preference. Matte may produce truer images, but I dislike the graininess that they impart. Glossy is just prettier to look at, so long as you can control the light where your display is.
 
^ Samsung 2233rz and ViewSonic VX2268wm are true 120Hz LCD monitors since they're using Dual-Link DVI cable (one cable but it's got more pins) to be able to provide the needed bandwidth. These 120Hz LCDs beats any 60Hz in gaming, period. But as an "overall" monitor this is questionable, the quality you get for the price premium might not be worth it for everyone but personally for me these 120Hz LCDs are better than any 60Hz LCD no matter the cost cuz the higher refresh rate is that important for me because any movement on the screen will look a lot smoother, both ingame and on your desktop, moving around windows, scrolling up/down webpages the text remains clearer etc.
 
CajunPower said:
I wouldn't mind displays that actually sample at 120Hz instead of using image processing to achieve a 120Hz effect, but as I understand it, HDMI/DVI doesn't have the bandwith to support that over 1650x1080, so until display port or some other connection type becomes standard, don't count on seeing much in the way of true 120Hz displays.

Glossy vs. matte is a matter of personal preference. Matte may produce truer images, but I dislike the graininess that they impart. Glossy is just prettier to look at, so long as you can control the light where your display is.
Click to expand...
you do realize that the 2233rz is a true 120hz display right?
 
housecat said:
60hz on a LCD is a non-issue.
Click to expand...
wrong. 60hz on my lcd is much much slower than 120hz on my lcd and pretty much unusable after you experience 120hz smoothness. A 60hz refresh rate limits the response time of the lcd to 16.6ms regardless of how fast the screen is, which is not nearly good enough. Now I'm done talking about this anymore, seems like no matter what we say the ignorance persists (not referring to your comments, just speaking generally).
 
shiznit said:
you do realize that the 2233rz is a true 120hz display right?
Click to expand...

I do, I wasn't very clear in my original post. There are.. 3? 120Hz displays out right now and I don't think any of them do even 1080 due to bandwidth limitations. The point I was trying to make was that until Display Port becomes the standard, true 120Hz screens won't become pervasive in the marketplace.
 
Dual link DVI is good for up to 1920x1200 but since industry is trying to push for 1080p the upcoming ones will prolly all be full hd 1920x1080 like this 23.6" Acer that should be released in January.

For me 22" @ 1680x1050 is perfect as higher res than this the requirements also becomes quite hefty, a shame neither of these 22" are far from perfect, both have their specific problems.
 
shiznit said:
wrong. 60hz on my lcd is much much slower than 120hz on my lcd and pretty much unusable after you experience 120hz smoothness. A 60hz refresh rate limits the response time of the lcd to 16.6ms regardless of how fast the screen is, which is not nearly good enough. Now I'm done talking about this anymore, seems like no matter what we say the ignorance persists (not referring to your comments, just speaking generally).
Click to expand...

Prad is pretty knowledgeable about these things, I used them to research the LCD in my signature.. and they don't remark about this 16.6ms issue on 60hz panels. If I'm wrong, please link me, I'd like to know.
 
housecat said:
Prad is pretty knowledgeable about these things, I used them to research the LCD in my signature.. and they don't remark about this 16.6ms issue on 60hz panels. If I'm wrong, please link me, I'd like to know.
Click to expand...
basically 1000/60=16.67, that's gonna be the latency of every 60hz frame. I'm not an engineer so I may be wrong on whether that caps the response time of an lcd but my eyes are very good and my monitor is much faster at 120hz, just moving the cursor on the desktop feels much better.

this should help you http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/monitors/display/samsung-sm2233rz.html
 
That link agrees with what I had thought, but the cause of the 120hz advantage was not what I was expecting. I wasn't even aware of RTC before reading that honestly. Anyways, I still have a ton of questions about the timing in LCDs. One being, if a monitor has a response time of 5ms at 60 hz, does that imply 5ms AFTER the frame has been sent to the monitor? Is the time during which the computer is waiting to send another frame due to refresh rate not taken into account? To me that means that if a frame is sitting in the buffer when the monitor requests a new frame, and immediately after that another frame is ready, which could happen anywhere above 60fps, the second frame will be displayed at (refresh rate) + (response time) later? This doesn't even take into account that video cards use double or triple buffering (I usually dont enable vsync/triple). Oh and since LCDs refresh downwards (if i remember right), its the response time of the top of the screen measurably different than the bottom of the screen?

If anyone feels like answering those questions, I appreciate it. What would be ideal though is a link that really explains the whole process. Whenever I see posts like this I feel like there's alot of opinions being stated as if they were fact, and I'd like to finally get it cleared up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top