Why isn't there a great gaming monitor for us?

A

AGN

n00b
Joined
Sep 12, 2013
Messages
24
I am getting very frustrated.. I used to have a Dell U3014 but I had to return it because of its severe IPS glow. But my god I do miss it. I was fantastic to have such a huge screen and the color on it.. WOW!

Now I am sitting here with a Eizo 27" LED FlexScan EV2736W-BK and I am not happy!
My eyes are bleeding blood.. Nearly. It hurts really bad. The colors in games are very dull, nowhere near the U3014. The good thing about this monitor is the minimal IPS glow. Like 1% (1cm in the middle bottom on the screen)

Now... Which monitor to get?! I can't order monitors like Tempest or Qnix (and those from Korea) because:
1) They don't ship at my location
2) IF I regret and I am not happy with the monitor it would cost me money to ship it back + it would take a lot of time before I got my money.

So guys.. For the love of god and all that is good in this world:

Which monitor to try out next?

It has to be a gaming monitor keep that in mind.
I would absolute LOVE to get back to my U3014 but I cannot.. Severe IPS glow :(
Is 1080p really that bad on a 27 inch?

I would like a 27 or 30 inch monitor.

Games I will be playing a DARK games, so remember .. Little IPS glow please!
Battlefield 4, SC2 and Diablo are also games I play.

I feel like Neo searching for Morpheus his whole life, regarding this damn monitor :(

Thanks for reading my post.
 
I personally think 27" is too big for most games at 1080P because I just got one yesterday and all of my steam games on it. It doesn't look any better then a 21.5" display.

If anything use a 27" for console games at x2 x3 distance of your regular desktop monitor.

You might want to place the monitor a lot lower too for gaming on console then up high so you look down at it with your eyes.

I won't go any other brand then ASUS either just because of bad experiences with CRT monitors from like guy from viewsonic =)

If you play dark games don't go IPS....

My Ah-IPS blacks are not as black as my regular IPS which is good for dark games...... TN is much better for really dark games because alot of games were designed on TN panels.
 
Last edited:
I also came from a 24 inch before going 30 and now 27. I absolute love the 27 and 30.
It has to be one of those 2 :)

Are there really no IPS gaming monitors to play dark games in? What about regular gaming then? Minus the dark games in mind, just regular BF4 gaming.
 
There is nothing that is perfect in the world of LCDs.

27 - 30 inch mainstream you are stuck. The Eizo 27 is the best of the best allegedly. If you drop to 23 - 24 inches you have much more choice and speaking for myself I prefer a smaller screen for FPS gaming. Its much more comfortable for me.

If you want a 27" gaming IPS then your going to have to go down the Korean route its a simple as that.
 
Comixbooks said:
I personally think 27" is too big for most games at 1080P because I just got one yesterday and all of my steam games on it. It doesn't look any better then a 21.5" display.

If anything use a 27" for console games at x2 x3 distance of your regular desktop monitor.

You might want to place the monitor a lot lower too for gaming on console then up high so you look down at it with your eyes.

I won't go any other brand then ASUS either just because of bad experiences with CRT monitors from like guy from viewsonic =)

If you play dark games don't go IPS....

My Ah-IPS blacks are not as black as my regular IPS which is good for dark games...... TN is much better for really dark games because alot of games were designed on TN panels.
Click to expand...

Funny you say that, as TN panels tend to have very gray not at all blackish blacks.
 
The constantly lit (from a normal sitting position) bottom right corner on the IPS monitor that I tried was the most annoying thing I faced on a display. Even during broad daylight, on a black screen, you could see that corner being brighter than the other parts of the screen! How ridiculous. I didn't think IPS glow would be much of a problem if it was only visible in a pitch black room on a dark screen, but when I saw this, it was just ridiculous.

Far more intrusive and annoying than anything my old TN ever cooked up. The fact that the backlight could not be turned down enough didn't really help the IPS either.

The viewing angles on IPS are only really stable on the brighter shades of colors. At the dark range, it's still all over the place. If only the black level was uniform at least head on, I'd live with it, but having one corner of the monitor constantly glowing is just a pain in the ass.
 
I've had 2 30 inch Dell monitors, 1 30 inch HP and have now settled with a 120-hz X-star (27inch).
It has the lowest amount of IPS glow. Infact I don't even always notice it, stark contrast to what was happening with the 30 inchers (where I could always notice it in darker areas).

Comixbooks said:
TN is much better for really dark games because alot of games were designed on TN panels.
Click to expand...
Citation needed.

I know for sure Valve uses the big Dells (such as the 30 incher) and I've seen others devs use them as well on tour videos.

It also seems wrong to use TNs while designing game art/models/levels. The resolutions on them are also lower making it harder to fit a full sized image. And what about all the toolbars needed to adjust things?
 
Why do everyone keep talking about viewing angels all the time? I don't know about you but I tend to sit at a normal position towards my screen and not ½ way to one side?

With that said.. Any recommendation for a monitor that suits my purpose? As I said above the Eizo 27" LED FlexScan EV2736W-BK, hurts my eyes like hell and the color doesn't seem right.
 
Because "viewing angles" are the reason you get IPS glow even when sitting dead center of the screen. It's because these viewing angles come into play even when viewing the monitor from a normal sitting position, not because everyone is hanging from the ceiling upside down :D
 
Ohh.. lol Thanks 4ort and great answer btw lol! So the higher / lesser viewing angel equals higher/less IPS glow or? :p
 
Comixbooks said:
I personally think 27" is too big for most games at 1080P because I just got one yesterday and all of my steam games on it. It doesn't look any better then a 21.5" display.
Click to expand...
That doesnt make it too big, it may mean you have buyers remorse because you expected more.

The larger the display, the further away you can sit from it and still have a decent image size in your view.
This relieves eye strain and can increase immersion.
 
AGN said:
Ohh.. lol Thanks 4ort and great answer btw lol! So the higher / lesser viewing angel equals higher/less IPS glow or? :p
Click to expand...

I don't know the exact technical answer but it has something to do with the way the crystals of an IPS panel work. When viewed from odd angles the crystals can not shut out all the light that they can shut out when viewed head on. This seems to predominantly affect dark scenes, so you don't see IPS glow on bright colors. But when the screen is black or just in a fairly dark scene you can see the corners glow because you are not looking at them straight on. If you align your sight with the glowing corner, the glow goes away.

Some monitors glow more than others, although from what I know all IPS monitors have this to a degree. Those with the A-TW polarizer are reported to have a lot less glow than those without (most of IPS panels nowadays do not use that polarizer).
 
OP is using 80-100% brightness (230-275cd/2) in the dark and wonders why his eyes hurt :rolleyes:

The EV2736W's colors are not dull. The 3014 is a wide gamut monitor which greatly over-saturates colors unless the sRGB mode is used in games.
 
NCX: Any other monitor you would recommend? When I turn down the brightness to 80% etc the image because a lot darker (dooh) but like REALLY dark and noway I can accept this in gaming. Even in Windows it looks dull with 80% :(
 
I already told you, turn down the brightness and go do something else for fifteen minutes, when you come back the monitor won't seem dull.

80% brightness (230cdm/2) is way to high for a dark room, try 20-40%. Most people use 80-140cdm/2 for dark room use since high brightness in dark rooms often causes eyestrain. The EV2736W is the only affordable (sub 2,000$) glow free monitor.

If you want wide gamut (over-saturated and inaccurate colors) buy a Viewsonic VP2772 and deal with far more pronounced glow.
 
NCX have you ever tried the monitor? I tell you I have tried what you suggested by leaving the room for 20min after turning down the brightness and such and I promise you that the colors ARE dull. The screen display looks very grey outed and well.. just boring and dead :/
 
I hope you realize that "dull colours" is totally subjective and we can't help you much with that. Your monitor may very well have accurate and realistic colours (in fact I believe it does, most Eizo panels tend to be somewhat decently calibrated) but if you don't like that, feel free to adjust different settings such as the gamma.
 
Plenty of IPS/PLS are just fine for gaming. My X-Star DP2710 is just fine. TN is not necessary and not worth it. You suck at the game because you suck at the game, not because your monitor has a response time over half a nanosecond. Some monitors do have ridiculous latency but not all.
 
Last edited:
I've had the exact same issue you do with IPS glow and I had to turn to AMVA panels. Try to get a hold of the ASUS VN279Q. If you can't, try BenQ 2760HS, Samsung S27C750P and finally, a Dell S2440L if you can't bear an extremely glossy 24'' screen.
 
If he is used to U3014 then he is used to wide gamut then the Eizo will look dull in comparison.
U3014 is wide gamut and the EV2736W-BK is not. Not much to do about this afaik. When picking monitor one have to compromise somewhere. The FG2421 will have less glow but even duller colors, probably. On the other hand it will be faster.
Maybe a smaller wide gamut monitor would make the glow less intrusive? There are 24" 1920x1200 panel monitors of recent make. Like U2413.
 
I was on a 24inch for several years before I made the climb up to heavens and tried out a 30 inch. No way in hell I am going back to a 24 inch after have tasted the sweet nectar of the gods :p 27 is absolute minimum for me now.

And thank you CrabJuice for agreeing with me regarding the dull colors :)
 
I ordered a EV2736W a few days ago and I happen to have i1 Display pro, once I finished building my pc (I haven't used a pc in 7 years) I will see if I can post some calibration result.
 
AGN said:
NCX have you ever tried the monitor? I tell you I have tried what you suggested by leaving the room for 20min after turning down the brightness and such and I promise you that the colors ARE dull. The screen display looks very grey outed and well.. just boring and dead :/
Click to expand...

Dude how are you connecting your monitor to your PC?

Do you have an nVidia card and are you using displayport?

I noticed my EV2336 looked a little bit washed out and the blacks were not really black, more like dark grey. The OSD menu blacks were darker than the blacks on my desktop/games so I noticed something was up. I connected via DVI and the colours are much richer now and blacks are actually black.

Try connecting via dual link DVI cable.
 
Most people don't buy monitors with oversaturated, inaccurate colours and then complain that accurate ones look bad...so I guess that would be why there isn't a great gaming monitor for you.
 
Sancus said:
Most people don't buy monitors with oversaturated, inaccurate colours and then complain that accurate ones look bad...so I guess that would be why there isn't a great gaming monitor for you.
Click to expand...

That's a good point.
 
It may have not been a bad idea to have the monitor color calibrated. I did this on my Dell 30" 3008wfp and it made a pretty big difference.
 
Dcode said:
Dude how are you connecting your monitor to your PC?

Do you have an nVidia card and are you using displayport?

I noticed my EV2336 looked a little bit washed out and the blacks were not really black, more like dark grey. The OSD menu blacks were darker than the blacks on my desktop/games so I noticed something was up. I connected via DVI and the colours are much richer now and blacks are actually black.

Try connecting via dual link DVI cable.
Click to expand...

I used DVI cable that came with the monitor. No HDMI :)
AMD guy here.

Think I am going to buy another U3014 and hope I get more lucky. However, don't got the money as of now since I just bought a new TV lol.
 
I will elaborate why i would recommend the eizo foris for anyone on the market for a true gaming monitor:
- it is true 120hz with lightboost
- it is VA, which means best blacks and contrast available for gaming.
-being VA means it doubles as an excellent productivity monitor for reading and typing- you game well and work well
 
geok1ng said:
I will elaborate why i would recommend the eizo foris for anyone on the market for a true gaming monitor:
- it is true 120hz with lightboost
- it is VA, which means best blacks and contrast available for gaming.
-being VA means it doubles as an excellent productivity monitor for reading and typing- you game well and work well
Click to expand...

But it's really hard to go down to 1920 1080 from say 2560 1440, even if the eizo is that good. If eizo made a 27" 2560 1440 gaming monitor, using the new gsync tech with catleap-like pcb, that would be something not possible to pass by. But a 1080p - no matter how fluid it is or how great the contrast is - the 1080p will suck anyway since it is what it is.
 
As long as the quantity is not sub-standard (less than 1080p), I will take quality over quantity any day. Unfortunately, it seems it is hard to get a high quality sub-1440p monitor (and the good 1440p ones are obviously very expensive and require a very expensive computer for gaming at that resolution).
 
GearChoices said:
As long as the quantity is not sub-standard (less than 1080p), I will take quality over quantity any day. Unfortunately, it seems it is hard to get a high quality sub-1440p monitor (and the good 1440p ones are obviously very expensive and require a very expensive computer for gaming at that resolution).
Click to expand...

Huh?

The dvi-only korean 27" 2560x1440s are very good, and most of them are by definition superior gaming monitors to anything else at that res simply because they allow >60hz refresh rates and have no input lag... which most other 27" monitors do not. Not to mention they are ~$300 which does not seem expensive to me at all. It seems hard to call these low quality, when they're the best solution on the market, price aside.

And the Eizo FG2421 definitely qualifies as a high quality 1080p gaming monitor, better, in fact, than anything available at any higher resolution(I-got-a-bad-panel whining aside). It isn't cheap, but it's not any more expensive than a major mfg brand 27" 2560x1440, either.

Of course, gaming at 100+ fps does require relatively expensive graphics hardware, yes.
 
I want to try out the Eizo 2421 but I do understand the OP feeling like 27" is bare minimum. I like to watch content on my gaming monitor from a long way off pretty often, and if I could get a bigger 120Hz lightboost monitor at 1920x1080 than the one I have, I would. I feel like 32" at 1920x1080 is still fine even, and I would have gone the HDTV route if there were any good choices at that size (there aren't, imo--120Hz overclock over HDMI just doesn't compare to Lightboost native 120Hz).

First day I had my ASUS 27" my eyes were watering and sore, but I got over it and keep Lightboost on 24/7 now and no eye strain. I thought the monitor was too dark with LightBoost, too. Now I keep going lower and lower and seeing more detail in dark games. The only major downside to the VG278HE, imo, is terrible light bleeding around the edges. That issue doesn't bother me at all (weirdly, since I'm normally really picky).

At nearly twice the price of the monitor I currently have, the Foris 24" seems unreasonably expensive to me but I don't hate TN panels as much as a lot of the folks around here do. 240Hz capability is pretty much useless but I haven't looked into it much. Aint no way I could put together a system capable of 240fps in any detail on any game I wanted to play.

Edit: Looking closer at the Eizo now... especially with people on the 2421 thread saying they are getting good panels from Newegg. Was guessing the 240Hz was upscaling or converted or whatever, makes sense. Kinda dumb to say it's useless if I haven't seen it. I'm tempted but I don't want to pay $250 more for a monitor that I won't be able to see as well from my bed, even if the picture is a lot better than what I have with the VG278HE... and I'm sure it is.
 
Last edited:
My glossy Overlord Tempest X270OC shipped today, I'll let you guys know how it compares to the Samsung S27A750D I have been gaming on the past year and a half. The Samsung has been the best gaming monitor I have ever used but I want to move up from 1080p. Hopefully given equal framerates the Tempest will take the crown... although I realize it probably won't be quite as "fast" due to the slower pixel response and slightly higher input lag. Still, I won't miss the "shimmer" effect and the low PPI of the 27" 1080p.
 
Yeah I still have a samsung A750D. I would consider going with the eizo 2421 for zero blur + high motion/animation/control definition gaming and a ~ $400 or less 60hz korean 1440p (or the usa vendor versions) with its high ppi + larger desktop real-estate for desktop/apps usage right next to it. There is no way you are going to get the better of both usage scenarios in one single monitor. I'd actually rather wait to see what g-sync backlight strobing mode is like on high hz monitors that come out next year though so that I could compare reviews and feedback between the two types. I'd also personally prefer both my high rez desktop monitor and my zero blur high hz/high motion definition gaming monitor to be 27" each.
.
elvn said:
people will still do this and that.. and most will be satisfied with low fps and 720p or 1600x900 on demanding console games, with unsophisticated controller capability on ghosting, blurring , and often input lag ridden tvs. That doesn't mean it is the better route to take.
.
1080p is the same exact scene in HOR+ at 16:9 , which is almost every 1st/3rd person perspective game and every virtual camera render. The difference is the amount of pixels in the scene obviously. This is a big difference but a much bigger difference for desktop/app real-estate than games vs gpu budgets/fps.
.
You are seeing multiple frames skipped and behind a 120hz+120fps user, watching "freeze-frames" for 25ms to 33.2 ms at 30fps and 40fps, and every time you move your FoV you are smearing the entire viewport into what can't even be defined as a solid grid resolution to your eyes/brain. So much for high rez.
I think people are sacrificing a lot motion, animation, and control wise aesthetically as well as sacrificing seeing action sooner and being given more and sooner opportunities to initiate actions - to reach for higher still-detail eye candy aesthetically.
You don't play a screen shot :b
.
Click to expand...

elvn said:
To review,
- every time you move your FoV greater than a snails pace on a sub 100hz, non backlight strobing monitor you drop to such a low rez that it isn't even definably a solid grid to your eyes and brain. So continual bursts/path-flow of the worst resolution possible more or less, the entire viewport dropping all high detail geometry and textures (including depth via bump mapping) into a blur.

-at low hz and low fps, you are at greatly reduced motion definition and control definition.
Greatly less the amount of new action/animation/world state slices shown, seeing longer "freeze frame" periods during which a high hz+high fps person is seeing up to several newer updates.
1/2 the motion+control definition and opportunities to initiate actions in response at 60hz-60fps
1/3 the motion+control definition and opportunities to initiate actions in response at 40.
1/4 the motion+control definition and opportunities to initiate actions in response at 30.

-you need at least 100hz to support backlight strobing for essentially zero blur (120hz better) <-- in regard to it being fast enough vs the strobe flashes being noticeable/annoying..
-you can upscale 1080p x4 fairly cleanly on higher rez 3840x2160 (aka "quad HD") monitors if you have to, its not optimal but it can work
(so you can game at higher fps/lower rez on demanding games yet still use a high rez monitor for desktop/apps for example)

-the eizo FG2421 is a high hz 1080p VA panel that uses backlight strobing, it isn't TN.
- we know that nvidia is still supposed to support backlight strobing function as part of g-sync monitors, just that it won't work with the dynamic hz function (at least not for now). So "the industry" is still addressing backlight strobing for zero blur in both the eizo and the g-sync strobe option (which again, requires higher hz to make the strobing viable).
-We know there are higher rez and likely ips g-sync monitors due out, but we do not know if they will have the max hz bumped up which is necessary to utilize the backlight strobe function adequately.

There is more to a game than a screen shot resolution/definition.
There is continual FoV movement blur (an undefinable"non"definition resolution, unless perhaps you were to equate it to an extremely bad visual acuity number /"out of focus")
There is otherwise essentially zero blur using high hz and backlight strobing,
and there is high or low action and motion definition, animation definition, and control definition.
Click to expand...

The "overclockable" 120hz-130hz Overlord 1440p monitors at very high fps, like other high hz monitors will show much greater motion+animation definition, show new action states sooner and allow more chances to initate actions. They also reduce blur, but they don't eliminate it like backlight strobing monitors do (e.g. the eizo fg2421). The 2560x1440 resolution is a lot more demanding to feed new frames of action/animation to each screen refresh too, which pushes you well out of even the enthusiast budget range and into more extreme gpu budgets in order to achieve the high framerates. 1080p is still the sweet spot for enthusiast budgets for high motion definition, high hz, high fps.

baseline - 60 Hz mode (16.7ms continuously-shining frame)
- the worst blur "outside of the lines"/shadow masks of everything in the viewport
- the lowest definition motion/animation, worse accuracy/timing/reaction time due to slower and less frequent action updates shown.
50% less motion blur (2x) - 120 Hz mode (8.33ms continuously-shining frame)
60% less motion blur (2.4x) - 144 Hz mode (6.94ms continuously-shining frame)
85% less motion blur (7x) - 120 Hz LightBoost, set to 100% (2.4ms frame strobe flashes)
92% less motion blur (12x) - 120 Hz LightBoost, set to 10% (1.4ms frame strobe flashes)
 
Last edited:
Bluesun311 said:
I want to try out the Eizo 2421 but I do understand the OP feeling like 27" is bare minimum. I like to watch content on my gaming monitor from a long way off pretty often, and if I could get a bigger 120Hz lightboost monitor at 1920x1080 than the one I have, I would. I feel like 32" at 1920x1080 is still fine even, and I would have gone the HDTV route if there were any good choices at that size (there aren't, imo--120Hz overclock over HDMI just doesn't compare to Lightboost native 120Hz).

First day I had my ASUS 27" my eyes were watering and sore, but I got over it and keep Lightboost on 24/7 now and no eye strain. I thought the monitor was too dark with LightBoost, too. Now I keep going lower and lower and seeing more detail in dark games. The only major downside to the VG278HE, imo, is terrible light bleeding around the edges. That issue doesn't bother me at all (weirdly, since I'm normally really picky).

At nearly twice the price of the monitor I currently have, the Foris 24" seems unreasonably expensive to me but I don't hate TN panels as much as a lot of the folks around here do. 240Hz capability is pretty much useless but I haven't looked into it much. Aint no way I could put together a system capable of 240fps in any detail on any game I wanted to play.

Edit: Looking closer at the Eizo now... especially with people on the 2421 thread saying they are getting good panels from Newegg. Was guessing the 240Hz was upscaling or converted or whatever, makes sense. Kinda dumb to say it's useless if I haven't seen it. I'm tempted but I don't want to pay $250 more for a monitor that I won't be able to see as well from my bed, even if the picture is a lot better than what I have with the VG278HE... and I'm sure it is.
Click to expand...

it's not actual 240 Hz, it 'converts' the 120 Hz signal to 240 Hz and the monitor backlight turns off then on 240 times per second. it's eizo's simple to use lightboost-esque solution. this information is available in the white paper on the fg2421's page on eizo's website.
 
Odellus said:
it's not actual 240 Hz, it 'converts' the 120 Hz signal to 240 Hz and the monitor backlight turns off then on 240 times per second. it's eizo's simple to use lightboost-esque solution. this information is available in the white paper on the fg2421's page on eizo's website.
Click to expand...

It actually strobes 120 times per second. They call it 240hz but it actually just drives each frame from the 120hz source twice in a row.

For each frame this happens:
part 1 = overdrives the pixels while the backlight is off
part 2 = drives the pixels normally and strobes the backlight once
 
sharknice said:
It actually strobes 120 times per second. They call it 240hz but it actually just drives each frame from the 120hz source twice in a row.

For each frame this happens:
part 1 = overdrives the pixels while the backlight is off
part 2 = drives the pixels normally and strobes the backlight once
Click to expand...

why does it say 240 times per second in the white paper?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top