Which PC monitor - best overall gaming experience

J

jwimsett

Gawd
Joined
Jul 16, 2012
Messages
638
I'm no competitive gamer, but I do enjoy playing first person shooters.

Currently I'm around 1 on k/d ratio.


Anyway I'm playing on an Asus 120hz 27" monitor and debating on making the switch to a Korean 1440p.

I'm not sure what to do.

Any insight?

60hz vs 120hz
1080p vs 1440p
 
I have tried both, including 1080p 120hz with lightboost. Currently I believe this is the gold standard for fps gaming.

I also have a Dell 27" 1440p IPS overclocked to 90hz.

I do not notice any advantage in 1440p resolution vs 1080p (for FPS). I do notice an advantage when I run my 1440p monitor at 1080p resolution and then game at 1080p 90hz/90fps on that monitor, obviously because I can bump up the graphical settings and turn on more eye candy and add fps.

So, I don't think that upgrading your monitor to 1440p will be better for gaming. In fact, it will be worse. But you can run that monitor at a lower 1080p resolution and if you can overclock than also get upto possibly 120hz (depending on the model). The main advantage being 1440p as a standard use PC monitor is excellent, and IPS has better colors. But the ultimate for FPS gaming is still lightboost IMHO.
 
roman797 said:
I have tried both, including 1080p 120hz with lightboost. Currently I believe this is the gold standard for fps gaming.

I also have a Dell 27" 1440p IPS overclocked to 90hz.

I do not notice any advantage in 1440p resolution vs 1080p (for FPS). I do notice an advantage when I run my 1440p monitor at 1080p resolution and then game at 1080p 90hz/90fps on that monitor, obviously because I can bump up the graphical settings and turn on more eye candy and add fps.

So, I don't think that upgrading your monitor to 1440p will be better for gaming. In fact, it will be worse. But you can run that monitor at a lower 1080p resolution and if you can overclock than also get upto possibly 120hz (depending on the model). The main advantage being 1440p as a standard use PC monitor is excellent, and IPS has better colors. But the ultimate for FPS gaming is still lightboost IMHO.
Click to expand...

Listen to this man! 120hz and lightboost are seriously amazing for gaming. You won't ever look back.
 
jwimsett said:
Anyway I'm playing on an Asus 120hz 27" monitor and debating on making the switch to a Korean 1440p.
Click to expand...

Pros/cons

Overclockable 1440p non-LightBoost
-- better color, IPS color
-- good if you're not always moving around in games, e.g. you stand still and admire scenery, etc.
-- more motion blur during 120Hz

LightBoost 1080p (the one you already have)
-- worse color (though 27" models have good color)
-- less motion blur during 120Hz. Everything stays CRT sharp, zero motion blur.
-- Feels faster for FPS if you've got a fast card, competitive experience can be better (see testimonials)

If you haven't tried out LightBoost on your existing ASUS 120Hz monitor (if it's one of the supported 120Hz monitors), then it's worth giving a try.
For more information about LightBoost, see the LightBoost HOWTO (now updated to use ToastyX Strobelight -- easy to turn on and off via a keypress)
 
Last edited:
I wouldn't say that 1440p/1600p aren't useful for gaming- but the benefit is limited primarily to greater resolution for distant objects. Still, there's a huge difference between playing BF3 at 1080p and at 1600p (twice the resolution). 1080p feels like I'm playing in a closet.
 
IdiotInCharge said:
I wouldn't say that 1440p/1600p aren't useful for gaming- but the benefit is limited primarily to greater resolution for distant objects.
Click to expand...
If you're standing still, yes.
Unless you're trying to identify small objects while in motion.

For example, can you read the map labels on TestUFO: Map Panning Test at 960 pixels per second?
NONE of the overclockable displays pass this test...
Only CRT displays and LightBoost displays manage to pass this test...

Same problem occurs when trying to identify faraway objects without stopping moving (e.g. trying to identify stuff WHILE turning very fast, such as during circle strafing).
In this event, "1080p strobed" has far more motion resolution than "1440p non-strobed".

Not to say 1440p isn't useful; does your game styles involve mainly static imagery? Mainly involve motion imagery? Do you play FPS in stop motion style or sniper style, or do you continuously move around in FPS (like you would on a CRT?). Games such as Battlefield 3 forces you to do a lot of strafing, turning, and otherwise fast movements, so the ability to eliminate motion blur, allows you to quickly identify small objects while turning/strafing without needing to stop turning/strafing first. Sometimes your game play style determines whether you benefit from LightBoost or not.

Yes, we need 1440p strobed. Eventually. Just can't get best of both worlds yet.
 
Last edited:
Moving? Well, I have twice the resolution, so while it's not as fluid, there's still more definition. I get what you're saying, though. Just pointing out that there is a serious advantage to more resolution.

And in BF3, well, it depends on the maps you play and your play style. If you do the more CoD like stuff, then the Lightboost tech would probably be extremely useful, but if you play out in the open where you have time to stop and look, that extra resolution turns out to be extremely useful.
 
Thanks for all of your replies.

As for the light boost, I'm not sure if I had it enabled or not. I did have stereoscopic 3d enabled and I would disable the 3d while in game, but I never really saw any difference. I did some of those test pages you provided (the map and some big red tower) and it was very blurry at first, my 3d light was also off, then I updated my Firefox browser to 24 and I could see the difference. I'm not sure if that will carry over to games or not.

My playing style is mostly COD type. I like to run and gun, mostly because I don't have anyone to really play with, so communication is really non existent. Lately, I've been playing more in vehicles, jets, heli and tanks in BF3
 
An aside note on BF3- find a server with a low ping and an active community, and join in. Most have Ventrilo or Teamspeak set up, and you can quickly get incorporated into groups to accomplish objectives. It adds a whole new element to the game :).
 
jwimsett said:
As for the light boost, I'm not sure if I had it enabled or not. I did have stereoscopic 3d enabled and I would disable the 3d while in game, but I never really saw any difference. I did some of those test pages you provided (the map and some big red tower) and it was very blurry at first, my 3d light was also off, then I updated my Firefox browser to 24 and I could see the difference. I'm not sure if that will carry over to games or not.
Click to expand...
That's simply FireFox 60fps being upgraded to FireFox 120fps capability (FireFox 24 is the first FireFox browser to be 120Hz compatible with the TestUFO motion tests)

If your 3D light is off, then LightBoost is off, and you won't see the further motion fluidity improvements. See the newly updated LightBoost HOWTO and install ToastyX Strobelight (a utility to easily turn ON/OFF LightBoost via a hotkey)
 
Hello,
Which of the 120Hz monitors is the best for lightboost? Looking to spend under $500.
I play one game only. Air Warrior. WW2 flight sim. The rest of the time is surfing, reading forums, and of course porn for scientific purposes:)
Vid card. Nvidia 480.
 
Last edited:
Ive looked at the BenQ's from afar. Never seen on in person.
How about the 27 inch version? And is there any reason to go with an IPS panel that can be overclocked? How bad are the colors on the BenQ?
The choices are complicated and it seems there is no 1 monitor right now that will give good colors and no lag, correct?
 
any panel has advantages and disadvantages atm. U gotta pick 1 that suits u best for your purposes, think motion vs picture quality (and after that size,design,prize etc) and then narrow it down with the models wich has the least disadvantages.

U may look into these 27" 60 hz 1440p, wich are a great choices imo.
Viewsonic vp2770
Benq bl2710pt

or as mentioned above a korean 1440p wich are overclockable to 90/120 hz. but those have other disadvantages.. more backlightbleeding etc.

Imo , a good start to pick a monitor is to first determine how u personally rate the importance of motion vs picture quality.. After that u can narrow it down.
Above choices are a great trade off imo, but if u really need the motion a 24" 120/144 hz lightboost may be best for you. I am no expert at all, but this is something i took after the research i did.
 
Speaking just for myself: It seems almost pointless to buy anything now with G-sync coming around the corner, at least for gaming priorities.

Good tips in this thread since I'm looking over things myself.
 
Last edited:
Q-BZ said:
Speaking just for myself: It seems almost pointless to buy anything now with G-sync coming around the corner, at least for gaming priorities.

Good tips in this thread since I'm looking over things myself.
Click to expand...

I'm waiting too, both for better G-Sync monitors and for compatibility beyond Kepler/Kepler-lite, like AMD and Intel.

It's only a protocol thing over DP, after all, so I imagine maybe 6-9 months before we start seeing availability of monitors we'd actually want to buy.

Getting it in LG's upcoming 4k ~30" panel will be what I'm looking for, if they can keep it under $2,000- which is about what I consider reasonable given that 4k at any particular panel size costs less than 2x the price of the same panel at 1080p, and good high-res 30" panel monitors hit for about $1300 now.
 
Pfft, people're so whiny about their lightboost and crap. I've been playing Wolfenstein ET on an LP2465.


Granted I suck at close range confrontations on that for some reason...

Ha...ha..ha... cough.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top