The over-60Hz LCD thread

TechonNapkins

Weaksauce
Joined
Oct 20, 2010
Messages
94
[H]ardOCP seems to have a more active monitor-enthusiast forum userbase, so I'm moving this...

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?p=4582652#post4582652

... here. Assuming I get more contributions here. Anyway, the second post will contain the list, which I will constantly update.


***UPDATE*** How to tell the tell if your monitor skips frames at a higher refresh

I set my camera to it's longest exposure time and drew a smooth curve with the cursor. This is the Acer X193W monitor at 60Hz:

2r4l9c9.jpg


Notice the relatively smooth spacing of the cursor images. Now, set to "75Hz":

23swtu9.jpg


Notice the frequent breaks in the curve. This is frame skipping in play. The monitor may be taking a 75Hz input, but it's dropping frames down to a level the monitor can actually handle. So, this is why pics such as these are needed to move a monitor from unconfirmed to confirmed. It's not confirmed until we all know it can do it's supposed supported resolution without skipping frames. If you find out a monitor in the unconfirmed list skips frames, please post so.


***UPDATE 2*** Getting a CPU to feed those high frame rates.

The Athlon X3 has been heralded as an excellent budget gaming CPU... and it is... but if you're going for a 120Hz monitor, pass on the Athlon X3. It won't hold most games back at 60Hz, or even 75Hz, but it will at 120Hz. I tried a comparison recently with an X3 vs a Phenom II X6, with 3 cores disabled, and overclocked to match the L3-cache-less X3's stock. It didn't matter what I did to the RAM timings and CPU-NB on the Athlon II, I just couldn't get it to make up for the L3 deficiency in games (when keeping core clocks the same). With that in mind, also note that a Phenom II gets firmly beat in games by Intel's competing chip unless you overclock it's CPU-NB (at the very least, you should have it at 2300, which shouldn't require any extra voltage).

So, if you intend to take advantage of all those extra possible frames, make sure you have the CPU to drive the framerates up past 100FPS... that's either any of Intel's current chips, or a Phenom II with overclocked L3 (determined by CPU-NB)
 
Last edited:

TechonNapkins

Weaksauce
Joined
Oct 20, 2010
Messages
94
Format: [Model] [Technology] [Size] [Native Resolution] [Max Refresh Rate]

Confirmed:

Acer V193W - TN -19" - 1440*900 - 75Hz over D-sub
LG IPS226 - IPS (e ?) - 22" - 1920x1080 - 76 Hz
LG IPS236v - IPS (e ?) - 23" - 1920x1080 - 76 Hz
Dell 2209WA - e-IPS - 22" - 1680x1050 - 75Hz (can get 76Hz with custom timings)
Dell E2209W - TN - 22" - 1680x1050 - 75Hz
Samsung 226BW (A panel) - TN - 22" - 1680x1050 - 77 Hz
NEC EA231WMi - e-IPS - 23" - 1920x1080 - 74 Hz over DVI, 83 Hz over DisplayPort
Samsung F2380 - c-PVA - 23" - 1920x1080 - 76 Hz
Samsung 2333T - c-PVA - 23" - 1920x1080 - 76 Hz
Acer HN274H - TN - 27" - 1920x1080 - 120Hz
Acer GD245HQ - TN - 24" - 1920x1080 - 120Hz
Acer GD235HZ - TN - 23" - 1920x1080 - 120Hz
Alienware OptX AW2310 - TN - 23" - 1920x1080 - 120Hz
ASUS VG236H - TN - 23" - 1920x1080 - 120Hz
ASUS VH242H - TN - 23.6" - 1980z1080 - 75Hz over HDMI
BenQ XL2410T - TN - 23.6" - 1920x1080 - 120Hz
LG W2363D - TN - 24" - 1920x1080 - 120Hz
LG W2363DB - TN - 24" - 1920x1080 - 120Hz
NEC F23W2A - TN - 23" - 1920x1080 - 120Hz
Samsung 2233RZ - TN - 22" - 1680x1050 - 120Hz
ViewSonic VX2265wm - TN - 22" - 1680x1050 - 120Hz
ViewSonic VX2268wm - TN - 22" - 1680x1050 - 120Hz


Unconfirmed:

Acer G245Hbmid
Gateway HD2201
HP W2207
LG L227WTG
NEC AccuSync LCD224WXM
HP 2475w
HP 2275w
HP 2409m
HP 2209m
Dell U2311H
Dell 2407WFP
LG W2353V-PF
Samsung BWX2335
Acer AL1715
EMPREX LM2201
Viewsonic vx922

*** All refresh rates listed assume DVI unless otherwise stated.
 
Last edited:

ToastyX

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 12, 2005
Messages
1,400

TechonNapkins

Weaksauce
Joined
Oct 20, 2010
Messages
94
If there is any contributor who doesn't need to prove himself, it's ToastyX! Thank you. Updated.
 

Cehr

Weaksauce
Joined
Sep 18, 2010
Messages
107
I did some tests on this, with a CRT. I definitely noticed the difference between 60hz and 75hz, but 85hz was no different. My old 17" TN was capable of 75hz max, and it was definitely better than 60hz, but that was with an 8ms response time.

I really wish they'd make a 30" 120hz panel, with HDMI 1.4.
 

dandapice

Weaksauce
Joined
Nov 14, 2005
Messages
122
Was anything special done to get the 120Hz rates? Any .ini files worked on? Was the 120Hz confirmed with 3D or without? Just trying to get all the facts before picking up a 120Hz...
 

Godmachine

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 7, 2003
Messages
10,472
Was anything special done to get the 120Hz rates? Any .ini files worked on? Was the 120Hz confirmed with 3D or without? Just trying to get all the facts before picking up a 120Hz...

Those are on 120hz rated monitors so nothing special done.
 
Joined
Mar 5, 2010
Messages
28
I did some tests on this, with a CRT. I definitely noticed the difference between 60hz and 75hz.

Yeah, I concur with that... I'm a big time user of CRTs (since my first computer in 2001 or so, and haven't really used any LCD much cause the tech always disappoints), and I can't stand 60hz... It's almost like I can see the flickering at 60hz. It actually does look different to me, and it also makes me feel bad/weird. And many times when the HZ has been accidentally set to 60 (in Windows or in a game, or if I was near a friends monitor that was set to 60hz), I can tell that it's 60hz.

But 75hz... Major difference. It's like night and day.

72hz (vs 60) is also a major difference. Can't see or feel (as in detect) any difference between 75 and 72, but 75 is what I've always used.

Currently I'm on a CRT capable of going up to 120hz (in HD-esque resolutions), and to me there's not much difference between 75hz and 120hz. Yes, in FPS games it's a notable difference, and it makes sensitivity in games faster and the arrow and some behavior in Windows also faster (how random...), but other than that there's not much difference.

The difference between 60hz and 75 (or 72) is extreme, though.
 

natty

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 7, 2008
Messages
163
Great idea for a thread. Thanks for posting this.

It's disappointing that there are only 2 IPS monitors with >60hz capability.
 

TechonNapkins

Weaksauce
Joined
Oct 20, 2010
Messages
94
It's disappointing that there are only 2 IPS monitors with >60hz capability.

I know, right? Back in the Doublesight's heyday, I had the following wishlist:

-IPS
-excellent uniformity/very little backlight bleeding
-very low input lag, low actual response time
-120Hz
-high gamut LED backlight with local dimming
-26", 1920x1200 or 1920x1080 (that's where I like dot pitch to be)
-full array of contemporary inputs (including display port)
-under $1000 (which I now expect under $600)

Some laughed back then, but any of those specs (other than the local dimming high gamut LEDs) you can get in models under $600 then, or $400 now.

I agree 100%... where's all the nice 120Hz LCDs?!

I have no desire to move on from my 2209WA until I see something holistically better.
 

Squalish

Gawd
Joined
Aug 23, 2002
Messages
647
Evidently, those of you who weren't around when LCDs started to replace CRTs didn't get this lecture a few dozen times.

CRTs and LCDs render an image very differently. On a CRT the pixel is painted and immediately begins to fade, until it is painted again at the next level of brightness. On an LCD the pixel is set to a certain level and gradually shifts to the next level over 1-15ms.

LCDs have no flicker at any frequency. CRTs can and should be set to as high as they can safely go, and all flicker should be gone at 85hz or so. The primary reason people liked LCDs at first (other than the depth) is that so many people ignorantly left their CRTs set to 60hz - which they assumed was implicit to the technology.

No such improvement is apparent when switching an LCD to a higher frequency, because it's not a problem the LCDs suffered from in the first place.

At best, you'll get a barely-perceptible smoothening of motion with > 60hz.

NOTE: don't be an idiot and use motion-interpolation "120hz scam" LCD TVs to game. That's a vastly inferior image, and it's not what we're talking about.
 

ToastyX

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 12, 2005
Messages
1,400
Someone mentioned they were able to get the Dell U2311H to run at 75 Hz over DisplayPort, but I haven't tested that one myself: http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?p=1035818319

The DoubleSight DS-263N and the Planar PX2611W can also do higher refresh rates under certain circumstances, but I don't like to mention them because there are several problems:

1. The resolution must be at least 1826x1130. Lower resolutions skip frames.
2. It only works over DVI. VGA skips frames.
3. It switches to that ugly banding mode that 1080p has.
4. Scaling is terrible at lower resolutions in that ugly banding mode.
5. Scaling options don't work with higher refresh rates, so no 1:1 mapping.
6. There's a slight blur and minor color bleeding at the native resolution.
7. Single-link DVI doesn't have enough bandwidth to do 75 Hz at 1920x1200, but 75 Hz is possible at 1840x1150, although with the ugly scaling. 76 Hz is possible at 1826x1142 using these timing parameters: http://toastyx.net/timings.png
 

TechonNapkins

Weaksauce
Joined
Oct 20, 2010
Messages
94
Evidently, those of you who weren't around when LCDs started to replace CRTs didn't get this lecture a few dozen times.

CRTs and LCDs render an image very differently. On a CRT the pixel is painted and immediately begins to fade, until it is painted again at the next level of brightness. On an LCD the pixel is set to a certain level and gradually shifts to the next level over 1-15ms.

LCDs have no flicker at any frequency. CRTs can and should be set to as high as they can safely go, and all flicker should be gone at 85hz or so. The primary reason people liked LCDs at first (other than the depth) is that so many people ignorantly left their CRTs set to 60hz - which they assumed was implicit to the technology.

No such improvement is apparent when switching an LCD to a higher frequency, because it's not a problem the LCDs suffered from in the first place.

At best, you'll get a barely-perceptible smoothening of motion with > 60hz.

NOTE: don't be an idiot and use motion-interpolation "120hz scam" LCD TVs to game. That's a vastly inferior image, and it's not what we're talking about.

Yes, most of us have heard this lecture before. We are not trying to reduce flicker, we are increasing the rate of communication between the computer and monitor, and this has numerous benefits (as long as the monitor can accept and work with the increased rate), which are well documented in other threads.
 

TechonNapkins

Weaksauce
Joined
Oct 20, 2010
Messages
94
Someone mentioned they were able to get the Dell U2311H to run at 75 Hz over DisplayPort, but I haven't tested that one myself: http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?p=1035818319

The DoubleSight DS-263N and the Planar PX2611W can also do higher refresh rates under certain circumstances, but I don't like to mention them because there are several problems:

1. The resolution must be at least 1826x1130. Lower resolutions skip frames.
2. It only works over DVI. VGA skips frames.
3. It switches to that ugly banding mode that 1080p has.
4. Scaling is terrible at lower resolutions in that ugly banding mode.
5. Scaling options don't work with higher refresh rates, so no 1:1 mapping.
6. There's a slight blur and minor color bleeding at the native resolution.
7. Single-link DVI doesn't have enough bandwidth to do 75 Hz at 1920x1200, but 75 Hz is possible at 1840x1150, although with the ugly scaling. 76 Hz is possible at 1826x1142 using these timing parameters: http://toastyx.net/timings.png

I'll only bother listing ones that can do their native resolution, and without serious compromises like you listed, at higher refresh rates... otherwise this list would become rather ungainly. The U2311H is already on the unconfirmed list... I'll take a look at that thread to see if it's a safe bet to move to the confirmed (if so, Dell seems to be the go-to brand for LCDs with higher refresh rates). Thanks Toasty.

Also, know of any 1920x1200 monitors that support dual link? Those should be the ones to see if they can do higher refresh rates.
 

ToastyX

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 12, 2005
Messages
1,400
I don't know of any that support dual-link DVI, but there are a few with DisplayPort. So far, I haven't heard of any that can do higher refresh rates.
 

natty

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 7, 2008
Messages
163
Evidently, those of you who weren't around when LCDs started to replace CRTs didn't get this lecture a few dozen times.

CRTs and LCDs render an image very differently. On a CRT the pixel is painted and immediately begins to fade, until it is painted again at the next level of brightness. On an LCD the pixel is set to a certain level and gradually shifts to the next level over 1-15ms.

LCDs have no flicker at any frequency. CRTs can and should be set to as high as they can safely go, and all flicker should be gone at 85hz or so. The primary reason people liked LCDs at first (other than the depth) is that so many people ignorantly left their CRTs set to 60hz - which they assumed was implicit to the technology.

No such improvement is apparent when switching an LCD to a higher frequency, because it's not a problem the LCDs suffered from in the first place.

At best, you'll get a barely-perceptible smoothening of motion with > 60hz.

NOTE: don't be an idiot and use motion-interpolation "120hz scam" LCD TVs to game. That's a vastly inferior image, and it's not what we're talking about.

delete this garbage...... don't post lectures when you are the one that is confused
 

LAMER_CZ

n00b
Joined
Nov 2, 2010
Messages
7
Maximum for Dell U2311H:
1920x1080@66Hz with swapped polarity (H+ V-)
1280x720@77Hz with swapped polarity (H+ V-)
 

TechonNapkins

Weaksauce
Joined
Oct 20, 2010
Messages
94
Maximum for Dell U2311H:
1920x1080@66Hz with swapped polarity (H+ V-)
1280x720@77Hz with swapped polarity (H+ V-)

Is that with DVI or Displayport? And any testing for skipped frames? (no need for confirmation on 1280x720, this thread just lists native res refresh rates)

Thanks.
 

TechonNapkins

Weaksauce
Joined
Oct 20, 2010
Messages
94
The specs for the 27" Asus VE276Q says it can accept 76Hz vertical. Anyone have this model that can chime in? I'm adding it to unconfirmed for now.
 
Last edited:

LAMER_CZ

n00b
Joined
Nov 2, 2010
Messages
7
Is that with DVI or Displayport? And any testing for skipped frames? (no need for confirmation on 1280x720, this thread just lists native res refresh rates)

Thanks.
It's VGA. I can test through DVI later. I don't think it skip frames, it runs smooth. It should be the same through VGA or DVI or DP ..... but maybe not:) I try DVI this evening, but I don't have DP:(

UPDATE: I have single DVI cable only, so it's unable to run more than 60Hz in 1080, so I try DP sometimes in next two weeks when I gen new graphic card with DP.
 
Last edited:

serpretetsky

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Dec 24, 2008
Messages
1,912
delete this garbage...... don't post lectures when you are the one that is confused
that's very hasty of you.

His point still stands, there were two users here that pointed out a major difference they felt moving from 60hz to 75hz on a crt. It's not AS major of a difference on an lcd since there is no refresh rate flickering

But just to clarify there is still a difference on lcd's as well.
Some say it's a general smoothness and more responsive feeling.
For me, i hate screen tearing.
And no, triple buffering is not an option for me.
 

TheManko

Weaksauce
Joined
Jun 13, 2004
Messages
122
I have the Benq 120hz monitor and a 60hz NEC 2490WUXI2 side by side here and the difference is huge between them. Of course the Benq screen is benefitting from better response time, but just moving the mouse between the screens the difference in mouse smoothness is very obvious. In games also the smooth feel makes 60 fps look like 30 fps on the NEC compared to the Benq. I have compared 60hz and 120hz on the Benq and the Benq screen does get the same "slow" look to it when it's running a game at a steady 60 fps like the NEC, so I feel like 120hz has spoiled me completely.

Even though the NEC is technically superior in color reproduction the games just look so sluggish in comparison that I go back to the Benq screen very quickly whenever I experiment with using the NEC.
 

DarkUltra

Weaksauce
Joined
Jun 8, 2006
Messages
116
... But 75hz... Major difference. It's like night and day.

72hz (vs 60) is also a major difference. Can't see or feel (as in detect) any difference between 75 and 72, but 75 is what I've always used.

Currently I'm on a CRT capable of going up to 120hz (in HD-esque resolutions), and to me there's not much difference between 75hz and 120hz. Yes, in FPS games it's a notable difference, and it makes sensitivity in games faster and the arrow and some behavior in Windows also faster (how random...), but other than that there's not much difference.

The difference between 60hz and 75 (or 72) is extreme, though.
Strange.. I can see a huge difference in Windows going from 85hz to 120hz, and I can cleaerly see a difference in games going from 100hz+fps to 120hz+fps. But I guess some people are more susceptible to screen update rates. I have a 19.7" viewable CRT.

theres also the issue of mouse input rate. Do you have a new mouse that do 500hz? If my mouse runs at the default windows usb update rate of 125hz, moving around windows in Windows is kinda jerky and judders in 85hz, but smooth in 60hz and 120hz. I believe that is due to 125hz/60 and 120 is closer to 1 than 125/85 (so each mouse update hits closer to a frame and screen update)
 
Last edited:

DarkUltra

Weaksauce
Joined
Jun 8, 2006
Messages
116
Evidently, those of you who weren't around when LCDs started to replace CRTs didn't get this lecture a few dozen times.

CRTs and LCDs render an image very differently. On a CRT the pixel is painted and immediately begins to fade, until it is painted again at the next level of brightness. On an LCD the pixel is set to a certain level and gradually shifts to the next level over 1-15ms.

LCDs have no flicker at any frequency. CRTs can and should be set to as high as they can safely go, and all flicker should be gone at 85hz or so. The primary reason people liked LCDs at first (other than the depth) is that so many people ignorantly left their CRTs set to 60hz - which they assumed was implicit to the technology.

No such improvement is apparent when switching an LCD to a higher frequency, because it's not a problem the LCDs suffered from in the first place.

At best, you'll get a barely-perceptible smoothening of motion with > 60hz.

NOTE: don't be an idiot and use motion-interpolation "120hz scam" LCD TVs to game. That's a vastly inferior image, and it's not what we're talking about.
Actually, LCDs backlight do flicker. But it is at a very high refresh rate, so not many people notice it as far as I've read (from forums). LED backlight should solve this if you are affected (either by real or placebo :p)

Backlights flicker, but normally at 200Hz which is too fast for the human eye to detect.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refresh_rate

Most 120hz reviews I've read the author claims Windows experience is much smoother at 120hz. And 3d games feel more solid.

120hz lcd Smoother motion and the lack of RTC artifacts leave a highly positive impression, making you unwilling to return to 60Hz.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/monitors/display/samsung-sm2233rz_5.html#sect0

The ASUS VG236H was my first exposure to 120Hz refresh displays that aren’t CRTs, and the difference is about as subtle as a dump truck driving through your living room. I spent the first half hour seriously just dragging windows back and forth across the desktop - from a 120Hz display to a 60Hz, stunned at how smooth and different 120Hz was. Yeah, it’s that different.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/3842/asus-vg236h-review-our-first-look-at-120hz

I ran Fraps and found using the display's 120hz mode that once the framerates were up above 80 there is an amazing solidity and 3d-like quality to the gameplay .(I have no interest in getting 3d glasses at present.) Once the framerate hits 100+ - well, the effect has to be experienced to understand it.
http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1486357&page=4

I saw a 120hz monitor at my local MicroCenter and was totally amazed by how smooth the mouse moved on the desktop, makes my 60hz monitor looks absolutely dated.
http://hardforum.com:80/showthread.php?t=1466381&page=3


and then we have the sample-and-hold smearing due to LCDs characteristics.
http://jooh.no/web/120Hz_LCD_vs_CRT_comparison.jpg
 

evilsofa

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jan 1, 2007
Messages
10,078
Actually, LCDs backlight do flicker. But it is at a very high refresh rate, so not many people notice it as far as I've read (from forums). LED backlight should solve this if you are affected (either by real or placebo :p)

Backlights flicker, but normally at 200Hz which is too fast for the human eye to detect.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refresh_rate

The brightness of an LCD is controlled by reducing the flicker rate of the backlight by using a PWM switch. At 100% brightness, LCD backlights flicker at many thousands of Hz, which is impossible for any human eye to detect. When adjusted to low levels of brightness, LCD backlights can dip below 200Hz, but monitor manufacturers do not supply information about what minimum flicker rates are on any monitor; it appears that different monitors have different minimum flicker rates, because those who are apparently sensitive to it are bothered by some LCD monitors and not others on a seemingly random basis.

The point at which a human eye is bothered by flicker varies greatly. Some users were not even bothered by CRTs at 60Hz, while others are highly sensitive even to the backlight flicker on some LCDs (but not all). In the case of CRT flicker, most people were unhappy with 60Hz (oh god that was terrible) but merely moving up to 72Hz solved the problem for most people (but not all!). That being said, CRT flicker and LCD backlight flicker are two very different things and should not be directly compared.

To bust a myth which I admittedly helped spread until I learned differently, LED LCD backlights use the same PWM switches to adjust brightness as CCFL LCD backlights do, so LED monitors do not automatically solve the backlight flicker problem.
 

TechonNapkins

Weaksauce
Joined
Oct 20, 2010
Messages
94
3D TVs are starting to come out, which means they'll have to support a true 120Hz input (from HDMI at least) rather than just the frame doubling they've done in the past. The smallest I've seen thus far is 40", which is a bit big for a desk, but 32" and 26" would do. Anyone tried this yet?
 

rhiridflaidd

Weaksauce
Joined
Aug 30, 2006
Messages
72
It's about gaming. Working with photography, it's valid that there's no difference between 60 and 75 on an LCD, when there would be on a CRT.

When gaming, the higher the framerate the better your ability to correctly track fast moving things. It therefore also depends on the game and if you have fat moving things to worry about.
 

TechonNapkins

Weaksauce
Joined
Oct 20, 2010
Messages
94
I read this the other day:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/monitors/display/acer-gd245hq-lg-flatron-w2363d.html

It looks like they are largely correct. As of this post, those two, along with the Asus, are the only 1920x1080 120Hz models you can buy right now. I couldn't find any of the other "HD" models for sale. Planar's model is supposed to be available soon though... please, oh please, be IPS (unlikely, because of the pixel response times needed for 3d... but one can hope)
 
Last edited:

serpretetsky

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Dec 24, 2008
Messages
1,912
I read this the other day:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/monitors/display/acer-gd245hq-lg-flatron-w2363d_12.html

It looks like they are largely correct. As of this post, those two, along with the Asus, are the only 1920x1080 120Hz models you can buy right now. I couldn't find any of the other "HD" models for sale. Planar's model is supposed to be available soon though... please, oh please, be IPS (unlikely, because of the pixel response times needed for 3d... but one can hope)
link gives me a 404 error
 

TechonNapkins

Weaksauce
Joined
Oct 20, 2010
Messages
94
I guess the BenQ X2410 has become the XL2410T... updated.

Also, the announced LG 23" 240Hz IPS screen just may support 120Hz input... although the hold time on IPS may not make it ideal for 3D. We'll see... I'll keep my hopes at "moderate".
 

TechonNapkins

Weaksauce
Joined
Oct 20, 2010
Messages
94
Updated with the Asus VH242H... the most popular monitor on Newegg.

It did 75Hz on HDMI no problem, but over DVI it went funky. I confirmed it wasn't skipping frames, but the rendering of the cursor at speed was handled much better on my Dell 2209WA. which I still think is the best overall monitor for gaming plus high quality general use.
 
Joined
Jun 9, 2010
Messages
632
the acer al1715 can do 72/75 hz without skipping in its native resolution
it also only has 0-1 frames input lag
using it as my second monitor

Acer AL1715 - TN - 17" - 1280x1024 - 75Hz
 

linuxdude9

Gawd
Joined
Dec 25, 2004
Messages
663
Can someone outline the procedure for trying a monitor at a higher than spec refresh rate? Do I need to create a custom inf file, or use PowerStrip?

Thanks!
 

meximan

n00b
Joined
Jan 20, 2011
Messages
21
do you think its work getting a 120mhz monitor for FPS gaming but will only be used for 2D?

or do you reckon 60mhz is fine ? do you notice a big differnt? i wouldnt be using the 3D at all really so is it woth paying that extra just for the 120mhz?
 
Top