IPS or TN for a gamer?

[Cartman]

My old monitor (BenQ, 19", 4:3) is dying and i'm in a need to get a new one.

it's been a while now since it started causing problem (2 weeks or so) and I have made tens of hours of extensive research and have yet to come up with an answer for the best monitor for my needs.

I know my way around hardware but as it turns out that when it comes to monitors specifically I have no clue as to what to do.

I use my computer mainly for gaming purposes so gaming performance is the only thing that matters to me.

I don't know if i'm better off with an IPS monitor (more quality, longer response time) or a TN one (less quality, shorter response time, but NOT cheaper). To my understanding, response time is very important when it comes to gaming.

Considering the fact that i'm on a budget of up to 300$ I have come up with 3 options (1 IPS and 2 TN), they are:
1. Dell U2311H (IPS)
2. LG W2486L (TN)
3. Samsung BX2450 (TN)
4.(EDIT Addition - reference at the end) - Samsung 2233RZ 120Hz (TN)

A side note: I come from Israel, and here, for some reason, we don't get a lot of the monitors that came out during the last 2-3 years (plus we pay tons for the pre-shipped item) so the choices above is as good as it gets here, unfortunately, we don't have those efficient budget vs performance monitors like the XL2370 or PX2370.

Back on topic, I have read in many places that, although considered slower, modern IPS monitors can give a relatively decent response time (or in the U2311H vs TN case it's 8ms vs 2ms). And the "ghosting" effect is barely noticeable if at all, and don't compare to the image quality i'll be earning from a IPS.

Anyway, I came across multiple topics on the subject (IPS vs TN) but the smallest monitor that was even discussed as a worthy TN replacement is the U2410 (newer monitor with noticeably better performance, image quality and faster response time – 6ms than the U2311H) and my budget does not cover that.

The bottom line is: Which type of monitor will be best for me as a gamer? the U2311H or a TN one? (and besides which TN one is the better of the two?).

One last thing that recently came to my attention is we do have here the Samsung 2233RZ 120Hz monitor which is covered by my budget.

Including the last one into the list, which one of the 4 is best for a gamer?

I really did not think it will take me so long to get to the dead end i'm at and my monitor can decide to take it's last breath any minute now I'll very much appreciate a fast response.
Thank you.

 

[MaZa]

If you are a hardcore gamer and play fast games, then definetly get the 120hz Samsung. Its really fast, and 120mhz (just remember to set refresh rate to 120 at your video card/monitor settings) makes motion much much smoother, if your rig is able to play that particular game above 60fps that is and it isnt fps locked. While there are better 120hz monitors now, it is still a great gaming monitor. Here is a review: http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/samsung_2233rz.htm


However if you can put up with TNs faults, particularly vertical gamma shift (where top of the screen is darker than bottom), its all up to you. Personally I cant stand it, it hurst my brain figuratively speaking of course. Majority can live with it, some do not even notice it unless it is mentioned to them. This unfortunately counts out all true 120hz monitors for to me...

 

[senna89]

if u want ips choose Asus Ml239H or LG IPS236v or LG E2370V, not Dell, it's good monitor but old, it use a older lg panel, is slower and not led.

 

[Cartman]

Even though I don't tend to play much FPS games, I would like to keep that option open as I intend for this monitor to serve me for a long period of time.

I don't want or fell the need to push games over 60 FPS.

Now, correct me if i'm wrong but (for games) the only competitor to the Dell U2311H (IPS) can be a 120Hz screen.

Assuming that is correct my options are either U2311H or 2233RZ (which offers relatively low resolution compared to others, don't how how much crucial it is though) or LG IPS236V, even if indeed picture is smoother on the 120Hz, does that makes it better overall for games (both performance and quality) than the U2311H one?

senna, unfortunately from the models you mentioned there is only 1 available here and it's the LG IPS236V although price is significantly higher and even though my budget doesn't cancel that option, I do wonder if it worth the extra price (65$).

The price for the monitors here are:
Dell U2311H - 320$
Samsung 2233RZ - 365$
LG W2486L - 385$
Samsung BX2450 - 390$
LG IPS236V - 430$

That's just for general pricing information here, I care less about the price (as long as it's not over 300$ in the US because, as you can see, prices here are ridiculously high because of high shipping rates) and more about game performance (and look of course).

 

[silverbull1tt]

Regardless of how many frames you're pushing 120Hz will look and feel smoother in-game then 60Hz, especially in First Person Shooter titles. Now I imagine if all you're playing are games like League of Legends, then it doesnt matter as much because you're not moving the screen around that much.

 

[mahdiy85]

image quality vs speed, eh?

i would go for the ips monitors, or the one with the best static contrast

 

[WaTaGuMp]

I have gamed on my IPS and not seen any issues. Granted I don't play as much as I use to, but my last monitor was rated slower than the one I have now and both seemed fine for me. I had a Benq FP241W before my HP.

 

[NCX]

The IPS2x6V/IPS231p monitors are not as good as the Dell for gaming

The Samsung BX2450/LG W2468L are extremely over priced. if you are just playing games get the 2233rz, especially if you are all ready sensitive to ghosting.

 

[Jonte]

.....


I don't know if i'm better off with an IPS monitor (more quality, longer response time) or a TN one (less quality, shorter response time, but NOT cheaper). To my understanding, response time is very important when it comes to gaming.
....

No, it is not.
It is just something that have been repeated over and over and over again by tens of thousands of people who don't really know that much.

Ask yourself, do you see much ghosting on your old 19" TN monitor?
Please, let us all know the answer to that.

Back on topic, I have read in many places that, although considered slower, modern IPS monitors can give a relatively decent response time (or in the U2311H vs TN case it's 8ms vs 2ms). And the "ghosting" effect is barely noticeable if at all, and don't compare to the image quality i'll be earning from a IPS.

....

They're considered slower by people looking at arbitrary numbers in a spec. sheet. People who believe those numbers say something about real world performance.
The TN monitors that are faster, are the 120 Hertz ones.

As you might know, we prefer to examine the responsiveness of a monitor by counting the number of frames of ghosting, those traces that take too long to disappear and end up on top of images that are currently on show, rather than in milliseconds. That's because you can't really compare figures for response time from one display technology to another. Even on two typical 2 ms TN monitors, the results aren't identical. Here's an idea of how the different technologies stand up:

* 5 ms TN: 1.1 colour frame, 0.5 transparent frames (for example: Iiyama Prolite E2208HDS)

* 6 ms e-IPS: 0.4 colour frames, 0.35 transparent frames (for example: Dell 2209WA)
* Average 2 ms TN: 0.8 colour frames, 0.5 transparent frames (for example: Samsung T220)
* 8 ms C-PVA 8: 0.95 colour frames, 0.2 transparent frames (for example: Samsung F2380)
* The best 2 ms TN 2 (not including 120 Hz): 0.35 colour frames, 0.5 transparent frames (the Samsung 2253BW).

http://www.digitalversus.com/acer-gd245hq-p357_7352_38.html



http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1036598645&postcount=13

 

[Cartman]

Ok, thanks all for the comments, since now the only decision is between IPS, and I have changed my mind about the monitor like 200 times over the last month, and many different monitors were discussed here, I would like to open a new topic with the proper title comparing the two IPS.

I know both IPS are a great choice but since it's going to serve me for a very long time and here the price is almost identical I would like to be confident that i'm buying the best one for my needs.

 

[Scoobydo]

I just changed from a TN panel to an IPS (The LG IPS 23" inch that was listed above).

In my experience, I haven't noticed much difference between it and any other monitor I've owned. It has better colors but not to the degree I was expecting. I am not going to spend $200-$300 for a calibrator to get the most out of it. I also have not noticed any input lag or response issues with the IPS, but I am again 35 years old and hardly play first person shooters, so my aging reflexes might not be so good anymore where I'd notice.

If you were going to spend $260 on a TN, or $280 on an IPS with similar stats, might as well get the IPS... But if its $180 vs $280, I'd get the TN... I wouldn't worry too much about it. Both IPS and TN are not perfect, there isn't a perfect display out there.

Worry more about resolution, size of the screen, input types, stand, etc.

 

[TehQuick]

I've played very intensive FPS online on an IPS monitor and it was just fine. Input lag is overrated, really, I had a slow ass LCD and still pulled off impossible shots - like once I shot guy who swore he was looking at my back when I shot him... and no, I was not cheating, I just turned around and pulled the trigger in like a nanosecond lol OK, it's more of an example of internet lag than monitor but it still proves my point: even with a slow-ass IPS you can still enjoy fast action FPS

 

[kalston]

I can only recommend IPS, because one day you might start noticing the flaws of the TN technology, and trust me you won't we be happy.

And ToastyX is definitely right about IPS vs TN speed. TN will be faster for some things and slower for some others.

However I disagree with Jonte, I find the blur extremely noticeable and bothering on all LCDs (although on the fastest ones it's not too bad), yet I haven't even used a CRT in a very long while. I'm just sensitive to it.
But I can't stand TN panels anymore therefore 120hz panels aren't an option for me even though I game a lot, and even though my IPS has more blur than my previous TN panel.
I've decided to live with it. Plus I'm the lucky owner of a 1080p IPS that does 72hz, which is absolutely amazing in games & films (vs 60hz). (LGIPS226, I'd expect the IPS236 to be able to do the same)

 

[Rokodo]

I can only recommend IPS, because one day you might start noticing the flaws of the TN technology, and trust me you won't we be happy.

Exactly what happened to me with gamma shift. IPS and IPS variants from here on out, or at least until something better comes along.

 

[Spooony]

If you can afford a IPS with a low enough response time

 

[GuyClinch]

Pretty much all the TN's bring to the table is the higher frame rates (useable) and the 3d effects. Those are pretty nice advantages - don't get me wrong..

But the high end IPS displays - the 2560 x 1440 - bring higher pixel count, higher density, better viewing angles and better colors too the table. So I think for me the big budget choice is IPS. On a limited budget or with unlimited space (something I dont have) I'd look at a 120hz TN. But I hate going down in pixel count..

One thing is that my g/f and I play world of warcraft and the 'extra' pixels REALLY help there. I realize most gamers here wouldn't believe it but end game raiding is actually pretty tough and you want something that can put the most visual information on the screen at the same time - but without having to move your head around..

So i am holding out for the Samsung SA850 - but if that sucks probably the glossy apple display. Personally I have found ghosting to be not a huge issue in most games I play - I think the new generation of IPS screens (and hopefully PLS) are fast enough with regards to pixel response.

 

[kalston]

Pretty much all the TN's bring to the table is the higher frame rates (useable) and the 3d effects. Those are pretty nice advantages - don't get me wrong..

But the high end IPS displays - the 2560 x 1440 - bring higher pixel count, higher density, better viewing angles and better colors too the table. So I think for me the big budget choice is IPS. On a limited budget or with unlimited space (something I dont have) I'd look at a 120hz TN. But I hate going down in pixel count..

One thing is that my g/f and I play world of warcraft and the 'extra' pixels REALLY help there. I realize most gamers here wouldn't believe it but end game raiding is actually pretty tough and you want something that can put the most visual information on the screen at the same time - but without having to move your head around..

So i am holding out for the Samsung SA850 - but if that sucks probably the glossy apple display. Personally I have found ghosting to be not a huge issue in most games I play - I think the new generation of IPS screens (and hopefully PLS) are fast enough with regards to pixel response.

I agree, having a huge res is indeed very important in MMORPGs.

 

[elvn]

You need an ips monitor that doesn't have a scaler to get low input lag (13ms or less). The ones with scalers are 30 - 40ms and higher. (Two notable ones that don't have scalers are the hp zr30w and the 27" apple cinema display, though they are more than 3x and 4x your budget).

You can say you don't notice it, just like people can say they don't notice ghosting/blur on fast mouse-looking... but its there and it can affect your aim and player-motion accuracy and timing. Any input device lag, monitor input lag, network lag, etc all adds up.

If you did look toward getting an ips, I'd recommend you read about the over-aggressive anti-glare coatings on most of the current-generation ips models before you buy. If possible, see one in person. Some people who bought them even returned theirs. Other say things like "its not that bad" .. or " I got used to it ", "I don't notice it too much".

Just fyi -- I've used a '24inch' fw900 graphics pro crt for a few years.. they are 23" widescreen viewable trinitrons that used to go for over $2k, and can be had used in 'A' condition for around $350 - $430 usually. .. I used to play on that at 1920x1200@85hz. I also have a 34" widescreen hdtv with hdmi input that does 1080i and "720p". Very timing intensive pc games, and very time intensive console games on those like rockband are like night and day vs lcd monitors and tv's.

I agree about the higher rez too. I love 2560x1440 on my 27" that I got a few weeks ago. Using multiple monitors can add a lot of real-estate as well though.

There are a lot of threads about ips monitors that touch on these and more issues. Just browse the most recent two or three pages in the display area and [H] and do some reading.