Clarification on 120hz monitors

[unoimkll]

Hi there,

I am currently looking for a new monitor. I play fps games a lot (drooling over black ops) and am interested in a 120hz monitor. I have a few questions for those who have/experienced 120hz monitors.

1. If my pc cannot generate more than 60fps, does this make a 120hz refresh rate pointless? If so, do you think i7 950 3.06Ghz, nvidia gtx275 and 6gb ram will be able to run 120fps at 1920x1080 for COD Black Ops (or relative intensity game).

2. Will I be sacrificing image quality (considering I get the ASUS VG278 27" led backlit instead) for faster refresh rate? If so, is it a significant sacrifice (opinions?).

3. Link with q2, is the increased "smoothness"/"responsiveness" REALLY noticeable? Is it REALLY worth the loss of image quality and size. (24" vs 27").

4. Which 120hz? Alienware Optx AW2310 vs Asus VG236H vs Acer GD235HZ. Which is best based solely on performance? Is it worth waiting for the Benq XL2410T?

5. Is 3D gaming worth investing in just yet? Does 3D capability play a deciding factor when choosing 120hz vs Asus vg278h?

I would appreciate any help on the above questions. I am lost in the 120hz world and need your insight/thoughts. Please answer all questions if you can.

Thank you in advance. =]

 

[Inu]

1. Less tearing, less to none overdrive trailing, regardless of framerate. I argue that there the screen appears smoother regardless of framerate, some agree, some don't. May just depend on the person.

For your performance question, no clue. Probably be fine, but stay away from laggeh smoke.

2. Image quality wise, they are all TN's, unless you suggest an E-IPS or better, image quality is similar on top of the line TN's.

3. NOTE: My personal perspective: Having compared my own current 60hz 3ms monitor to my friends 120hz. The smoothness is easily noticeable. You may need to do this to convince yourself. You'll feel like you have been hurting your eyes this entire time. If you just plug it in and start using it you will be like... Doesnt seem different...

4. The alienware seems to get favorable image quality reviews and negligible Input lag results extremely flexible warranty from what i understand. The LG has perfect results in Input lag tests, matte screen. Could fill this part up with 100 more lines, and i dont have time. No idea on the BENQ.

5. For single player, 90% of the time its awesome. Can be annoying and buggy rarely. For multiplayer its more of a gimmick and can hurt you, people are on the fence about that mostly though. It is frigging cool, if you need to save money, don't get it.

 

[achalas]

1. Also, I notice a big plus if I can get significantly over 60fps consistently. (This will also be a big boost to 3D,)

Have you read AT's review?

 

[unoimkll]

I appreciate the help guys. I guess I'm just stuck between a rock and hard place =] I love to game but have this urge to have a larger screen for my browsing and photoshoping etc. It really comes down to an increase in size or better performance. An important point you guys brought up is quality remains the same (pretty much) while performance is visibly better. I have never experienced 120hz so all the claims for better responsiveness and such are all imaginary to me. And I have no way of trying it before I buy ;_;
Again appreciate the help I guess I'll have to flip a coin or find somewhere to try 120z. Any suggestions? (I live in Australia by the way so......)

 

[JustinSane]

So funny that you made this thread yesterday. I was about to make one just like it when I saw it. I think I'm gonna wait for the BenQ. Keep us updated on what you decide.

 

[unoimkll]

So funny that you made this thread yesterday. I was about to make one just like it when I saw it. I think I'm gonna wait for the BenQ. Keep us updated on what you decide.

I went through that stage. haha
At first I was like I need 27". Then I said 120hz was more important. Then I settled for the asus pg276h 27" 120hz. But the delays for mid next year got me off waiting. So I resorted to waiting for the benq xl2410t. BUT, I read an interesting "german" forum (google translation was terrible) - soz read on phone, dont have link - in which people were having problems with the benq. (For some reason they already have it). Anyway, looked like a lot of hassle for them. Things popped up like, "My computer can't run 120fps so I feel like I wasted my money." So I end up writing this thread and once again returning to, 27" or 120hz.

If you don't mind, what are your reasons for waiting for the benq? I would love to hear them.

 

[JustinSane]

Not really any particular reason. Just waiting to see the price of it. I know I definitely don't wanna go any bigger than 24 inches though haha. Any bigger feels like it would be hard to see everything on the screen.

Hopefully BenQ gets all the problems sorted out you mentioned before the wider release.

 

[unoimkll]

Not really any particular reason. Just waiting to see the price of it. I know I definitely don't wanna go any bigger than 24 inches though haha. Any bigger feels like it would be hard to see everything on the screen.

Hopefully BenQ gets all the problems sorted out you mentioned before the wider release.

My problem is I haven't experienced 27" or 120hz so my opinion/thoughts are rendered useless. I don't know about you but I wont be able to make a decision before I try at least one.

What's your opinion on gaming on a 27"? One can assume that larger screen with same res will show peoples' heads in fps games larger (easier to aim?) Regardless of personal performance, how do you think gaming on a 27" can compare to a 24"? Does a matter of "too" big come into play? I wouldn't know =]

 

[sadbuttrue]

You won't convince any serious fps gamer to swap their 120hz monitor for a larger 60hz version. Hell, they wouldn't even swap for a similarly priced IPS 60hz monitor, despite the improved image quality. This should tell you everything needed about size vs speed for fps games. Once you go 120hz, you can't go back.

Reasons 120hz > 60hz for fps games:
Using triple buffering or vsync = 50% the PC generated input lag
Without vsync tearing is minimal
Mouse movements are visually updated twice as fast, resulting in smoother turning
Motion clarity is hugely improved, allowing you to see the enemy while turning at high speed much easier*.

There is one downside to 120hz in that using vsync/triple buffering requires you to achieve an AVERAGE of 150fps for constantly smooth gameplay. Regardless of game, this will require medium or lower detail settings.

*It's still not at CRT levels due to the ~8ms actual response time and constant colour transitions, but that's not important if you've moved on

 

[caifan0]

Well if your computer can only run games at 60 fps then 120Hz is not that useful.

Tbh if you are not THAT serious on gaming (like playing game to win some money) you don't really need 120Hz. 120Hz is indeed awesome because of the smoothness. I tried it at my friend's house and fall in love with it. However, gaming level depends more on you, the player, not the monitor. 120Hz do help improve aim, but not as great as some ppl think. Good player is still good player with 60Hz monitor, bad player is still bad player with 120Hz monitor. A 60Hz monitor with nice picture quality, low light leakage etc. is more than enough for enjoying fast paced FPS games IMO. If you just play games for fun, why buying an expensive TN panel? All up to you, whether you think that price is worth the smooth feeling or not.

3D gaming is a good idea, but I really hate wearing glasses. Personally I won't consider it unless ppl produce 3D things w/o glasses at reasonable price (like nintendo 3DS).

edit: just adding something. For serious gaming big screen is really not favored. Since you have to react quickly to everything happening on the screen, you have to restrict the disaply area within your 'focus' sight. During intense gaming, things happening outside of this sight will be well ignored by the player. If you are not sitting very far from the monitor, 17 inch 4:3 screen is more than enough. If the monitor get larger you have to sit farther away from it. You see, large screen has nothing good for serious gaming.
Also, this is the reason why I don't like 16:9 or 16:10 monitors. The horizontal 'extra' bit won't help you in games at all. Crap.

 

[dr.stevil]

1. If my pc cannot generate more than 60fps, does this make a 120hz refresh rate pointless? If so, do you think i7 950 3.06Ghz, nvidia gtx275 and 6gb ram will be able to run 120fps at 1920x1080 for COD Black Ops (or relative intensity game).

No (IMO). You wont really notice a benefit unless you're running at higher FPS.. at least I don't really notice any kind of improvment over 60hz when running low frame rates. will your rig be able to run black OPs @ 120fps? Probably not maxed out but 80 or so FPS should be doable... or just lower some of the settings and enjoy the smooth gameplay (this is what I do)

2. Will I be sacrificing image quality (considering I get the ASUS VG278 27" led backlit instead) for faster refresh rate? If so, is it a significant sacrifice (opinions?).

No. Image quality will be ok. The biggest complaint about mine so far has been the black and contrast levels. A few mins in the nvidia CP and I was able to adjust the gamma, contrast and saturation to make it look just fine I wouldn't use it for any of my artwork, but then again, I would use my IPS for games either

3. Link with q2, is the increased "smoothness"/"responsiveness" REALLY noticeable? Is it REALLY worth the loss of image quality and size. (24" vs 27").

absolutly. I went from a 30" to a 22" and while the reduced screen size took some getting used to, it's probably been one of the best upgrades I've ever made (outside of my SSD). It's just hard to explain... it's something you have to use to understand. It's helped my K-D ratio a lot too.

4. Which 120hz? Alienware Optx AW2310 vs Asus VG236H vs Acer GD235HZ. Which is best based solely on performance? Is it worth waiting for the Benq XL2410T?

No idea. I've only use the viewsonic/samsung panel

5. Is 3D gaming worth investing in just yet? Does 3D capability play a deciding factor when choosing 120hz vs Asus vg278h?

That all depends on how worth while it is to you. I don't really care for it all that much but only because I'd rather be running the game at 120fps opposed to 60fps. I'm sure plenty of people would disagree though too


either way, good luck with whatever you decide to purchase

 

[unoimkll]

Wow thanks for the GREAT feedback guys.

Looks like I'm convinced. I can sacrifice some quality to run 120fps and I don't NEED a 27".

Now all I have left is two things:

1. Which 120hz monitor
2. Convince my dad (Who believes any monitor not above 27" isn't an "upgrade") that 24" is the way to go.

Any help for my arguments sake? I reckon this thread will be a good decider.

Again, thanks so much guys.

 

[Sycraft]

You won't convince any serious fps gamer to swap their 120hz monitor for a larger 60hz version.

Define "Serious FPS gamer."

Something I think that goes around WAY too much on Hardforum is this idea that all the gamers here play for money or something. If you are a professional video gamer, playing for money, then you do what you need to do to be the best you can be. Nobody will tell you that you are wrong on that.

However I am going to guess that is all of nobody here. That being the case, the reason to buy stuff is because you it makes games more enjoyable for you. You aren't the best and you probably won't be the best, and it doesn't matter since you are just playing for fun.

So that means this "120Hz and/or CRTs are GOD!" stuff is silly. I am not saying don't get a 120Hz monitor, or that they aren't good. What I'm saying is that the attitude that you can't be a "serious" player without it is silly.

I play FPSes a fair bit, and I play them on an NEC 2690WUXi. That is an IPS panel with 33ms of input lag. Now I don't claim to be a great player, but I have fun, and I seem to be effective. In 103 hours of playing Bad Company 2 I've got 41 ace pins (means I was the best player on either team for a round), 128 gold squad pins (meaning I was one of 4 people in the best squad on either team for a round), 63 combat efficiency pins (meaning I killed 6 or more people without dying) and so on. In other words by the game's own tallies, I'm not useless, I'm not just standing around getting shot, even though I have a "slow" monitor.

You do NOT need a 120Hz monitor to be a "serious" gamer, not for that matter are you probably a "serious" gamer you are likely a "fun" gamer.

The choice between 120Hz or IPS (excluding price) more or less comes down to one of motion quality vs image quality. A 120Hz monitor gives you superior motion, Everything will just be more fluid, in particular if you card can support more than 60fps in a game, which isn't that hard for many cards these days. IPS will give you a superior image, colours will be better, as such details will be clearer, there's little to no gamma shift, and so on. Things look prettier more or less.

Which to get? Just depends on what you like more. There isn't a right answer, just depends on you. You can play shooters just fine on either, strategy games just fine on either and so on.

So please, when advocating 120Hz monitors, do so on their merits (which they certainly have) not on this silly personal appeal that you have to have one to be a "serious" gamer, that somehow someone isn't a "real" gamer or they won't be skilled if they don't have one.

 

[unoimkll]

Define "Serious FPS gamer."

Something I think that goes around WAY too much on Hardforum is this idea that all the gamers here play for money or something. If you are a professional video gamer, playing for money, then you do what you need to do to be the best you can be. Nobody will tell you that you are wrong on that.

However I am going to guess that is all of nobody here. That being the case, the reason to buy stuff is because you it makes games more enjoyable for you. You aren't the best and you probably won't be the best, and it doesn't matter since you are just playing for fun.

So that means this "120Hz and/or CRTs are GOD!" stuff is silly. I am not saying don't get a 120Hz monitor, or that they aren't good. What I'm saying is that the attitude that you can't be a "serious" player without it is silly.

I play FPSes a fair bit, and I play them on an NEC 2690WUXi. That is an IPS panel with 33ms of input lag. Now I don't claim to be a great player, but I have fun, and I seem to be effective. In 103 hours of playing Bad Company 2 I've got 41 ace pins (means I was the best player on either team for a round), 128 gold squad pins (meaning I was one of 4 people in the best squad on either team for a round), 63 combat efficiency pins (meaning I killed 6 or more people without dying) and so on. In other words by the game's own tallies, I'm not useless, I'm not just standing around getting shot, even though I have a "slow" monitor.

You do NOT need a 120Hz monitor to be a "serious" gamer, not for that matter are you probably a "serious" gamer you are likely a "fun" gamer.

The choice between 120Hz or IPS (excluding price) more or less comes down to one of motion quality vs image quality. A 120Hz monitor gives you superior motion, Everything will just be more fluid, in particular if you card can support more than 60fps in a game, which isn't that hard for many cards these days. IPS will give you a superior image, colours will be better, as such details will be clearer, there's little to no gamma shift, and so on. Things look prettier more or less.

Which to get? Just depends on what you like more. There isn't a right answer, just depends on you. You can play shooters just fine on either, strategy games just fine on either and so on.

So please, when advocating 120Hz monitors, do so on their merits (which they certainly have) not on this silly personal appeal that you have to have one to be a "serious" gamer, that somehow someone isn't a "real" gamer or they won't be skilled if they don't have one.

You have a good point Sycraft. We are not all professional gamers and the occasional exaggerated comments on 120hz monitors may seem misleading.

However, it still tells you something. I can only speak for myself when I say, seeing so many people (not just in this forum) comment on the benefits of 120hz, regardless of over enthusiasm or insubstantial claims, it shows how people like them.

I understand that if a herd of IPS panel supporters came and boastfully argued superior image quality and the insignificance of refresh rate in terms of game-play they can sway opinions.

I guess it comes down to what you want to hear. For me at least, I love gaming. No money, just good-old killing fun. I am currently in the market for a new monitor with gaming as a high priority. With this in mind it helps hearing lots of comments about how much better games are with 120hz. Needless to say, someone else may find these comments misleading and flawed.

So to conclude, I completely agree with you. It can be very misleading hearing the words "Serious FPS gamer... 120hz are god" etc being tossed around to promote 120hz monitors. However, when you hear enough people say the same thing (fps gaming = 120hz) you tend to take it for granted. At least that's if you want it to be true. Otherwise it all becomes a stupid fan-boy debate.

Thoughts?

 

[caifan0]

Ja, I agree.

IMO, a 75Hz IPS panel monitor is much more suitable for a causal gamer. 60Hz, well, it's alright too.

Unless you are really serious about gaming (I mean really competitive gaming, such as online CS/Quake tourneys - remember, at lan parties you probably have to use the 75/60Hz LCDs they provide anyways) or just cant bear the 60Hz feeling (some people do, like one of my friend who has worked as a game tester for quite a while), 120Hz TN panel is not neccessary.

Still, it's personal choice. I myself would go for a 120Hz LCD since I already have a good IPS panel monitor and can do dual screen. Just opinions

 

[Sycraft]

Thoughts?

Well I think many of the 120Hz fanboys are just that, fanboys who are parroting on about what they are fans about. You see it with videocards all the time, people who will argue that nVidia/ATi makes the only good cards and that ATi/nVidia cards blow and only an idiot would choose them. Truth of the matter is, of course, they both have merits and either can be right depending on what you want and what the current offerings are.

Also they may be the sort of people who put too much ego in to gameplay. Their being better than other people is the number one thing and they don't care about anything else. They don't play to have fun, they play to puff up their ego.

Now as for your case, and basically any case where you are talking a monitor for fun, it depends on what you are more interested in. As I said, 120Hz monitors get you better motion, in particular if you've got a good video card. Things will just be a kind of smooth that 60Hz monitors can't match. This is particularly true in games that don't do motion blur and so on, of which there are plenty. IPS monitors get you a better image. It is more uniform, more pleasing to look at, better colour detail, that kind of thing.

Which is right? I can't say, only you can. For me, I decided IPS, and high end at that, was right (though at the time 120Hz wasn't an option). I wanted best looking image, no holds barred. I want everything to be as pretty as possible, and I got that. However that is not the One True Way(tm) for monitors. Maybe you care more about the fluidity of motion than you do about image quality. Not a problem.

Also it isn't as though TN monitors are horrible, unusable items. I've got one here at work I'm typing on now and it is fine. I don't hate them, I just like IPS much better. However they still produce a fine image, and indeed most monitors (and basically all budget monitors) are TN.

Flip side of that is that 60Hz monitors are also not a jerky, slow, mess like some people pretend. No, they don't quite get the smoothness of a 120Hz monitor, but they aren't bad, particularly if your GPU feeds them a solid 60fps.

There isn't a right or wrong choice in this matter, it is all up to what you care about the most. In the size you are talking about you can have either kind of monitor and the money is similar (though IPS probably costs a bit more). So choose based on what you want more.

Also you can consider the kind of games you play the most too. If you are a big Civ 5, C&C 3, etc kind of player you'll probably see less of the benefit of a 120Hz monitor than if you are big in to Bad Company 2 and TF2. Not saying it doesn't make everything smoother, including the Windows desktop, just that you will notice it more in games with fast, full screen, motion than you will in a strategy game.

Finally you need to think about 3D, if you care at all. If you want it, well then a 120Hz monitor is mandatory. If possible, I'd suggest trying it first as not everyone likes it, and not everyone can deal with it. A coworker of mine gets bad headaches when he looks at a 3D LCD display, as an example. If you decide it is a feature you really like, then 120Hz is what you need. If you don't really care, then don't worry.

No matter what you choose though, it'll work for anything you do. You can play any kind of game and have fun on either kind of monitor.

 

[achalas]

So please, when advocating 120Hz monitors, do so on their merits (which they certainly have) not on this silly personal appeal that you have to have one to be a "serious" gamer, that somehow someone isn't a "real" gamer or they won't be skilled if they don't have one.

i agree, i know some very good fps players, who have 60hz monitors, so i'm not sure if it (120Hz) would help people get better, but i think they would like how it feels..