Displays IPS or 120 hz

no, you do not understand how game works:

see that red bar, that's what you are missing.




of course Horizontal+ is ideal. but most FPS games are locked to 75deg FoV due to being a bad console port. it will make more sense to play on 4:3 screen. i played Medal of Honour at 1920x1440 due to horrible Vertical- system they used.

games like BFBC2 where you can change your FoV, a 16:9 makes good sense because it allows you to do make FoV to 95deg, and enjoy a slight advantage. unfortunately those games are a rare and dying breed, the best middle ground is 16:10, works great in both gaming and productivity.

 

@wuyanxu

Your pic is irrelevant unless we talk about games produced many many years ago. Most people dont play games from 2001.

Newer games are HOR+ or anamorphic so you dont lose any Field of View using 16:9 instead of 16:10.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Field_of_view_in_video_games

If you use 16:10 instead of 16:9 you will lose width in the Field of view.

Good site
http://widescreengamingforum.com/forums/gaming/detailed-widescreen-reports

 

try Medal of Honour 2010, Bioshock 1 and 2 in 2007 and 2009, UT3 2009, Halo 2 2006. Deus Ex Human Revolution 2011 although H+, also slight V- on 16:9.

don't use FoV as argument when 60+% of the games are console ports that have locked FoV.

 

Well being the OP I feel I have to chip in here.

I have come from a Dell 2407 WFP PVA panel and had a choice to make on a suitable upgrade hence my thread.

I was going for an IPS panel at first but then decided to look into 120Hz and after lots of backwards and forwards I opted for this new Samsung as I wanted the best/smoothest gaming option.

A big gamble and I really did not know what to expect frm a LED TN and whether or not I would regret it.

All I can do is compare my old Dell 2407 with my new 120hz Samsung and I was up till very late lastnight comparing.

Is the new Samsung more vibrant than the Dell - Absolutley.
Is the colour accuracy as good on the new monitor as the old Dell - I would say yes
Do things feel more responsive in a desk top enviroment - mildly
Is it as clear/crisper than my old Dell - unbelievably so.

Is gaming smoother -- Now this is the big deal for me as my decesion was based largely on this.......
.
.
.
.
I have NEVER noticed such a massive difference with ANY upgrade I have made in the past (and I have made a lot I can assure you!!)

It is hard to describe how much of an improvement the 120hz is over 60Hz... it is truley astounding.
The smoothness and speed is breathtaking and I found myself laughing to myself over the improvement while playing Battlefield BC2 lastnight.

The only very slight negative I have is the gloss finish, on blacks is can be very reflective but I can learn to live with that.

My comments are based purely on my own finding/opinions when comparing the two monitors I have in front of me. I do not pretend to know the technologies inside out of these different panels but I do know what I can see in front of me.

Am I glad I went for the new Samsung????... Hell yeah and I have not even tried the 3D capabilities (although tbh I am not sure I will even bother)

 

That most games have locked FOV is one of the reasons why you should have a 16:9 display because in 16:9 you get larger Field Of View.


There are a few later games that are vert- but they just become more and more rarely seen. If you look at the games released in 2011.

80 percent are HOR+
19 percent are anamorphic
1 percent is Vert-

Something like that.

 

i thought you provide facts, not made up stats.

locked FoV mean locked to suit console: about 75deg. it makes the player want to puke and gives a headache when trying to play those games on 16:9 monitors.

on a 16:9 monitor, you'll want 85deg up to 100deg. on a 4:3, 75deg is just about enough.

 

Console means TV which means 16:9 display.

Also PC games are made for 16:9 these days. Whitcher 2 was maybe the biggest PC exclusive title in 2011 and they didnt even include 16:10 support when released.

 

I think you'll find it did, I'm guessing it detects the aspect ratio and gives you the relevant resolutions. I've been playing at 1680x1050 since it came out, but I don't see an option for 1080p.

 

yes, consoles mean TV with 16:9 display, it also means viewing from around 10 feet away. PC 16:9 monitor means viewing 2 feet away.

unchangeable FoV in bad ports mean your vision will be wrong. your brain is expecting around 90deg FoV from the amount of space PC monitor fills, but console port only provides 75deg. playing at 4:3 avoids this issue by forcing those ports to fill less of your vision.



end of the day, it's all cos of bad console port. i am using a 16:9 myself, would love to be able to play any game without feeling sick. the sad thing is that is not true, bad console ports are to blame. i feel 16:10 is the best middle ground. offers higher resolution than 16:9, more productivity while allows less wasted screen space when playing those bad console ports.

 

It is tiresome with people that have no clue what they talk about. At least they should be smart enough to stay quiet.

"Note: The release version of the game will have an advanced graphical settings menu. It will also support the 16:9 aspect ratio and be playable in 16:10 (non-native) as well as 4:3 (letterbox)."
http://ve3d.ign.com/articles/news/59895/The-Witcher-2-Updated-FAQ


In patch 1.3 Witcher 2 included 16:10 support.
"* Game now supports 4:3, 5:4, and 16:10 aspect ratios."
http://en.thewitcher.com/patch1-3/


If you honestly believe that someone release a game without 1080p support in 2011 then you are really stupid!

 

Sorry but my TV is a 4:3 CRT one and my computer screen is a 4:3 LCD ... and I CAN play games at it in 4:3 format.

Neither console nor PC MEANS 16:9. Games that cannot adapt the display are just poorly coded ones (like website with the "1280x1024 optimized" mention).

I did developped several PC games and all of them had fully settable display and fully bindable controls (including gamepad, keybord, mouse or whatever you want, even mixing several inputs). You really cannot make something FIX if you care a little about gamin experience of ALL gamers.

EDIT : and about the FOV, it is settable with a single instruction ... that should be at least, a parameters you can give when launching the game.

 

That many big titles dont include 16:10 and 4:3 support any more says it all.
This development will continue as fewer and fewer will use 4:3 and 16:10 monitors.

You may call them poorly coded but it doesnt change this.

 

I didn't say it doesn't support it, I was saying it didn't show up for me.

 

Ooo my new Samsung 120Hz is soo smooth.

Glad I didnt go for IPS in the end

 

And all the IPS owners are sighing / laughing on your behalf.

Enjoy your downgrade!

 

Crap over quality

 

lmfao...

Lovin the IPS whoring here..

I have the thing infront of me and have compared it to my work Mac using an IPS...

you enjoy your crystal clear photos of your boyfriends and spank over your nice viewing angles and I will enjoy my nice smooth gaming over the cruddy 60hz losers

 

Apple screen are craps. Get a real IPS screen like eizo, NEC, etc. Your eyes won't really see the difference in smoothness ... but mines see the color accuracy ... same goes with dr dre headphone ... poor inflated bass over real sound, but good tastes is something that some people doesn't have

 

I think that's more than enough on this now.

OP has picked 120Hz for smoothness in games over IPS colour accuracy. That isn't the choice I (or many Bit-Tech members) would have made, but he's happy.

Steve.E: You are one of the finest trollers I've seen in a long time. Like a 9/11 conspiracy theorist you simply won't shift from a groundless assertion, even in the face of continuing evidence. You made some good points, but they were drowned out in a sea of false ideas.

Let's move along and live our lives.