120hz Monitor Recommendation
Hi everyone..I've been doing some research to buy a new monitor but i have a bunch of questions and would like some recommendations..
Ok first of all I'm trying to get a new monitor that is specially good for quake but i need to be able to connect a ps3 to it too if i need to..colors and picture quality is also somewhat important to me because i do some digital painting and 3ding for fun..so i want the monitor to be specially good for quake but also decent enough for other things..I also don't want to spend too much on it...i want a 22-24" monitor around $200 or $300 the most..
This is the monitor i have right now (Samsung T240HD) and after years struggling with annoying lag i realized maybe it's not my connection and it's probably my dam monitor..
I started doing some research to figure out what's causing the lag and it seems like the monitor i have right now has a lot to do with it because i started using an old 85hz crt monitor few days ago and there was defiantly a BIG difference...it's much smoother and it's much easier to aim and shot on reaction...my 60hz 5ms monitor seemed to have this delay and "choppiness" that made it very frustrating playing QL..there were times when it's alright but it's very rare now..i'm guessing that have to do with my connection and ping too but right now I'm already shooting much better on an old crt so my lcd monitor was obviously adding to the lag to the point of frustration..(I have Fios btw which should be good enough)
Anyways, so i'm planning to buy a new monitor now and like i said i need to be able to use it for things other than quake so i don't want to use a crt monitor...i want to get a new lcd monitor but i'm still confused about few things..so here are my questions:
1) I want to know what really makes a difference in a monitor for online gaming specially quake..is it the response time, the input lag or the refresh rate..which one really matters the most..is the 120hz really worth it because it will make things much smoother or is it the response time and input lag that really matters?...i found some really good monitors for good prices that have low response time AND low input lag (which from i understand are 2 different things)..
This Dell S2330MX is supposed to have a low response time and really low input lag that was recommended by someone online:
The ASUS VH236H..another good monitor with low response time and low input lag:
2) So my other question is are those monitors good enough for Quake or the 120hz really makes a BIG difference as well
Here are the 120hz monitors i found that i'm also considering:
This Acer GD235HZbid seems like the perfect monitor..it's small, 120hz, 2ms and cheap:
But the problem is that i read some reviews on it and some people were saying it has bad input lag and isn't really that good for games like quake
This Samsung S23A700D is the one i like the most but it's a bit expensive for me:
The Samsung S23A750D..a little cheaper and could be the best option for me:
The only problem is that the 120hz is only available when using DislayPort (which i have no clue what that is..lol)
Will Displayport work with my card or i need a new video card..this is the one i have right now:
Alright..thanks for reading and please let me know what you think and if you have any recommendations or know any other good monitors on sale for black friday..
Last edited by Scorpwolf; 11-17-2012 at 03:59 PM.
The input lag is higher at 120hz than at 60hz on lcd monitor. Just something that should be kept in mind before spending loads of money on lcd monitor with good marketing.
This is really not true, except some useless old TN based "gamer grade" gimmick.
Originally Posted by Cur5e
Originally Posted by Scorpwolf
- low (2ms) response time only matters with TN panels, because it's a horrible technology which breaks up the moving picture with dark or light artifacts. A good 6-8ms IPS panel produces similar amount of ghosting what you can find on 2-3ms TN panels.
- Displayport was born as a cost reduction to avoid HDMI which requires a license. AMD cards have it on the last few generations, but it's very rare on NVIDIA cards since Nvidia doesn't put displayport on the reference PCBs like how AMD does, so only a few custom built NVIDA card maker put displayport on their products. Most 120Hz gamer monitor can use dual/2 DVI just fine.
- >120-144Hz makes a great difference in Quake, but that's pretty much it in my opinion. Other fps games are so slow, you gonna be perfectly fine with 60-75HZ, and 120Hz won't make you a better player, it just feels better.
- Low input lag is important but 10-15ms in not the end of the world, it doesn't really matter if you ping 30 or 45ms on the server. (but your monitor has a high input lag, so you might feel it indeed)
I highly recommend to visit a nearby shop and test 120Hz first hand, so you can decide if it's worth it for you or not.
If you have more question, I will try to help.
Last edited by Ikaruga; 11-17-2012 at 07:21 PM.
ati uses displayports for multi monitor setups (I highly recommend to visit a nearby shop and test 120Hz first hand, so you can decide if it's worth it for you or not.) + 1
Thanks for the reply..well i'm mainly interested in a 120hz monitor for quake...but i can't test that at a store so i need people opinions on it..
Originally Posted by Ikaruga
But anyways I've basically narrowed it down to 2 monitors and would like some advice..
The Samsung S23A700D is on sale now and it's $100 cheaper than few days ago so i'm def. considering this monitor as far as 120hz goes...so i need to know how does it compare to the Dell S2330MX as far as online gaming goes specially quake..
1) The Samsung S23A700D is LED, 2ms response time, 120hz, 12-13ms input lag and it's $280
2) The Dell S2330MX is LED, 2ms response time, 60hz, 3.8ms input lag and it's $140
So basically the main difference is in the refresh rates, the input lag and the price of course...the 120hz is obviously better but does the difference in input lag between the 2 monitors that significant or it's not really noticeable? would 13ms input lag still be excellent for quake or having the 3.8ms is better and more important than having the 120hz?
Do you think the Samsung would be the better choice overall for quake considering the price difference?
Also is there anything else i should be concerned about that would effect gaming other than the response time, input lag and refresh rate?
Last edited by Ikaruga; 11-20-2012 at 11:44 AM.
QL Forums have MANY other threads regarding 120's and so on.
Maybe seek out those threads for loads more information (and opinions) to help you.
Also, if you cannot find a local shop to test out, maybe look at youtube clips to see comparisons.
And - as another poster mentioned, be wary of over-hype marketing on any product - especially electronics as you well know.
But these might help you:
etc etc etc
Thanks again...but what about the difference in input lag between the 2 monitors i listed?..that's what i'm really concerned about right now...
Originally Posted by Ikaruga
I checked the input lag on the BenQ XL2420T and it's 13ms..that's pretty much the same as the Samsung..so i guess this is good enough for gaming?...but would the 3.8ms input lag on the Dell be worth it even though it's not 120hz?
Also i don't have enough desk space for 2 monitors..otherwise i would have just got a good cheap CRT for quake
DrunkenFool: thanks, I've already researched the forum, the net and youtube for video comparisons and i'm narrowing things down with specific questions..
ATM i really don't see any other 120hz, 22-24" monitor better than the Samsung S23A700D...it's usually compared to the BenQ XL2420T but it's $100 cheaper now so yea..
I don't know if you played Quake3 or not, but the best analogy to input-lag would be to add it to your ping in Q3A: so - for example - if you play on a server with a CRT monitor in Q3, and you have 50ms ping, playing on a monitor with 13ms inputlag would be like having 63ms ping, so you would have to aim a little bit ahead more compared to the CRT. I used Q3 for my analogy, because it would be more apparent than with the antilag in QL, but the bottom line is that you would see things "that" later.
Originally Posted by Scorpwolf
Please note that 13ms is the average value, so if you play @ 120hz (8.33ms each frame) it's probably lagging 1-2 frames most of the time, but 3 frames (25ms) delay could also happen.
It's a low value, and not the end of the world. If you would have a match with a pro player who would be forced to play on a Pentium3 with a black and white monitor which has 60ms inputlag, and you would have the very best machine in the world with a 200Hz professional CRT, the pro player would still own you zillion to zero
I have some ISP monitors with 10-ish inputlag and I play a lot on them without problems. I even used to play on the TV a nights, which has 40-60ms inputlag depending on the resolution (the scaler is horribly slow), and I can still play with my mates.
Yes nothing compares to my CRT, but again, a little inputlag like 10-15ms is not the end of the world.