People that say 120hz isn't noticeable either havn't actually experienced it, or are just generalising. I have experienced it and its well worth it. Back when I used to play Counter strike 1.6, for years i'd used the standard 60hz, then i found out how to push my CRT monitor to 120hz and the results were instantly noticeable and very nice, the game was very smooth and fluid and maybe it was a placebo effect - but i believe I was a marginally better player too. When my monitor dies eventually (Samsung 2232bw) ill certainly be aiming to get a 120hz monitor. It's another one of those things that once you've experienced it - you wont go back. Most users however, will not notice, or need the difference however - but those that do it really appreciate it i believe.
But then you get tearing everywhere, and that breaks completely the experience. Leave V-Sync ON. The only you want to disable V-Sync, is if you don't have the GPU power to run the game at a steady 60fps. As having the game dip to ~50fps at certain time,s and a have a bit of tearing when it happens, its better than having the game jump from 60fps down to 30fps, which will cause the game to be jumpy (especially if it continuous to go up to 60, and down to 30), and make the game unplayable.
Yes you are correct, my mistake, The picture I look at was for the wrong model. No. It has nothing to do with resolution. A 800x600 IPS panel will still be better than a 800x600 TN panel. When you have V-Sync on (which you want to, else you get tearing a lot if you move the camera quickly.... which you do in FPS games), the game will go at 15, 30, 60 or 120fps. It's up to you. -> Do you really want 120fps game play, or 3D support or are a hard core FPS player, where you are picky with your keyboard and mouse, ad you can detect somehow the few ms input lag of something and it frustrate you -> TN -> Do you want the best looking visuals in the game -> IPS You can't have both, sadly. Or at least, not today. Maybe in the near future where IPS panel will get fast enough to support 120Hz feature. But not now. If you want the best visuals and not speed, I believe, that the U2711 will best fit your needs, where you set the monitor to use AdobeRGB or sRGB (pick what you prefer best). Or The U2713 is if your are on a budget (where you use sRGB color mode on the monitor (there is no AdobeRGB). However, running 3 of them, where you game run at 60fps at max or near settings will be challenging. 2 of them, is possible for most games. The reason for this is due to the high screen resolution. Actually... you said you have 4GB of memory on the GPU. So it might be possible. I don't know, you'll sure the be the first on this forum. Why not the U2410? Well you clearly want big screen. Also as most PC games are console ports, the games are designed for 16:9 aspect ratio (as this is what the TV's are set at). So the POV of the game will be designed to 16:9. If you have a 16:10 monitor, you'll lose a bit of the sides. Not much difference, most people just simply don't care at all. But if you are some hardcore gamer, and use your computer for gaming only... it might be an issue. The ASUS PB278Q is a good monitor. But the U2711 is a better one. The U2711 and U2713 comes with pre-color calibrated profile done at the factory, and as it doesn't use white LED like the PB278Q which results in a blue tint on all colors, so you'll have better whites. HOWEVER, the PB278Q will provide you with the best contrasts as the back light is at the bottom of the screen, and not right behind the panel. Rea life response time is very close to the same between the 2. Input lag is comparable: PB278Q has 17ms at worst, the U2713 has 22ms at worst, and the U2711 has its input lag to 30ms. 30ms is considered OK for a hardcore FPS gamer.
Never get tearing. And three other people I know don't experience it with 120hz. Thought you only get tearing if your producing more fps than the screen can handle.
Think i might be settled on ASUS PB278Q. The Dell U2711 does look nice however its a tad more than my budget as I'm getting 3 of them and that would cost me an extra £300 on top as my current monitors are only £450 each.
Sound good. Once you have it, tell me about it. Few people got ASUS monitors here. And the few that did, had problems and returned them asap. That was a while back before the ASUS PB278Q was released. It was issues with the CCFL backlight transformer that was emitting a high pitch sound.
Do radio waves travel at the speed of light? Pretty much! http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=151920
I will always go better picture over faster refresh rate (use a U2711) as I find it much better to be able to see a shadow in a shadow then to have a faster refresh rate in some games. Oh and see different levels of black in dark rooms areas of games/movies.
Fair enough -- but this thread is not about CRTs. The pixels on a CRT start fading as soon as the electron beam passes by, so a higher refresh rate will result in less blinking of the picture. This is what makes high refresh rates on CRTs look exceptionally good. Personally I can't use 60Hz CRTs at all. None of this does applies to LCD monitors though, as the picture stays on the screen even without any refreshing.
I umm and arrr'd abouth this for weeks beofre I made a purchase. I went 120hz and have never looked back, I went for the Samsung Sa750D. NEVER have Vsync turned on to limit your fps in games like BF3 ect. You will NOT get ANY tearing. If you are serious about FPS type games and what every little advantage the 120Mhz is by far better - fact. If you use your PC for other stuff which is important to you then go IPS, if you want to be the best you can possiblly be in FPS type games then go 120hz. No brainer
Like czm i too ditherd on what to buy 1400p or 120hz, i also went for the samsung s27a750d, cant say i noticed much difference but my counter strike improved for sure and 3d is a nice option also
Well, can you at least please elaborate how the monitor can "improve your counter strike" if you don't notice a difference?
sorry but my first reply was useing my phone and not very indepth, what i ment was i have read lots of people stating that going to 120hz made everything so much smoother, from gameplay to mouse movement at desktop but for me i did not really notice any of this apart from one game which was doom 3 bfg edition, with 120hz this game was silky smooth indeed. as for counter strike ive never been the best player in the world to say the least but after switching to a 120hz monitor my scores have improved quite a bit, cant say if this is down to 120hz 1ms response times or just some sort of 120hz placebo
why do ppl want 120hz over being able to see into shadows and dark places? The advantage of having different levels of black/gray must out way any supposed smother image. 42" "120hz IPS LOLz perfect for gaming guys that want 120Hz cause it make you more skillful.......
Because id rather prefer the smoothness over colour anyday. Ps im as colour blind as you can get. After playing fps games on 120hz I can't go back to 60fps, it kills my eyes
Depends what kinda games you play, if it's lots of murky games then I guess IPS would help. I'm only with IPS because of the other benefits, rather than just picture quality. Still tempted to give up my U2711 for a 120hz screen.
