Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by brumgrunt, 27 Jul 2012.
ummmm no thx. i do not want to be the guinea pig only for them to release the proper version they have already as "next gen" monitor 2.0 blah blah blah.
To pricey for me.
Would rather pay that money for something that won't give me a headache every time I want to use it.
do not want
72 hz per eye is supposed to be flicker free? CRT monitors generally required at least 85 hz to be flicker free, and shutter glasses are reputed to be worse. I'm not surprised it's a TN panel, though. To avoid crosstalk between eyes, the 144 hz means it has to have a worst-case response time of less than 6.9 ms, and IPS panels can only get that low when looking at average response time and possibly ignoring the extra time it takes to stabilize after rtc overshoot.
Agreed, and don't forget - isn't this going to cause even worse headaches, for those who do get them from 3D displays?
if it isn't at least 2560x1440 who cares.
By the time they release a successor though you wont want that because they will have a "next gen" 3.0 model in the works already. At some point you just jump in, if you wait for a perfect component, you wouldnt have a computer now, or ever.
hmmm.... yes and no. Some hardware today is really as good as it can get, such as audio, keyboards, and generic gamepads. Some hardware as of right now is more than enough for home/office users, such as CPUs and RAM. Some hardware are only a few steps behind being as good as it can get, such as monitors (true 32 bit color depth ought to be the last). I would say that at this moment, the only hardware that has a lot of room for improvement is networking (both wired and wireless), data storage, GPUs, and mobile CPUs.
In terms of new technologies, such as 3D monitors vs generic monitors, I see what you mean about never being able to jump in if you keep waiting for improvements. However, I think Grifter is just waiting for the technology to mature and become more popular. I personally feel there must be a better way to do 3D than what is available now, but I'm not sure what that is yet.
Glad I bought my 30" Dell. It's not 3d, but it is 2560x1600.
I don't get why a 27" 2d monitor is a big deal when the res is only 1920x1080. Let's have some boundary pushing tech.... you know, like retina, but for the PC...(not that I fully understand what retina is apart from 2880x1800 on a macbook pro http://www.wired.com/reviews/2012/06/macbook-pro/all/)
How about this then: http://120hz.net
120hz is the future.
- Wonder in amazement as the 120Hz display produces an easily observable higher fluidity in the animation.
- The ASUS VG236H was my first exposure to 120Hz refresh displays that aren’t CRTs, and the difference is about as subtle as a dump truck driving through your living room.
- Doing precise image editing, as another example, is an area where faster display processing times are desirable.
- Sorry been playing some Quakelive. Its so nice to be at high refresh in Q3 again. Quakelive is goddamn amazing at 120hz. I’m just going through some games now…Dragon Age looks good too. Even the windows desktop is instantly smoother, even my fiancee could tell the difference in the mouse moving around.
Subjective appearances. 1080p and Twisted Numeric means that, while 120 hz might be nicer for the "Speed" of image editing; it won't have the colour range and depth of a similar-price IPS screen, which means anything produced on this monitor may be off in terms of colour.
3D might also be nice, but remember what you're trading off for that; better colours and better viewing angles.
I'm amazed Asus hasn't made a 120hz IPS screen already. With all the times they come up with completely insane ideas (MARS series, i'm looking at you); you'd think something as "simple" as doubling the refresh rate on an IPS screen wouldn't be that complicated.
120hz adds in percieved smoothness, but I've been through the change the other way, when I was limited to 30hz on a 37" TV at one point. Going back to 60 felt awesome. What's to stop you, six years down the line, repeating your words, only going "120hz is ****. 240hz is were Deez Bizinezzez should be ats."?
We've all been at 120hz before, with CRT screens. Who really needed that? 85 was generally comfortable, and the moment i'm at 72hz on a TFT panel. From 1999. The extra 12hz isn't really a gamechanger for me. Give me 60hz, and better colours, kthxbai.
There is also the ironic fact that despite most monitors claiming 2ms GtG times; most reasonable IPS panels actually have pixels response times that are the same, if not faster, than TN panels, even 120hz TN panels with overdrive.
I'm thinking that, at this point in time, looking at all the other evidence; Most IPS panels out there are probably capable of far more than just 60hz, it's just limited to that to prevent screen burnouts, like the shortened lifespan you will see with 120hz screens with Overdrive enabled.
Retina displays are basically displays that have a larger PPI. In other words it's just a high density panel. Is it done by apple? No, the first "retina" (god I hate that term) display was the awesome T200 series by IBM. 20" with a resolution of more than a few megapixels.
The reason you want a high PPI display is because firstly you can't see the pixels. And secondly, the picture quality is much butter.
As for 120Hz IPS panels. The reason they haven't really introduced it yet is mainly down to the fact that overdrive screws with color accuracy and also reduces panel lifespan. But they will soon. I have no doubt about it.
is there actully a connection that could cope with super high res at 120hz+ ?
Displayport I think. The problem isn't the connection but the output on the GPU.
Displayport 1.2 goes up to 4096x2160 at 60hz only though:
I just want a new monitor that's:
no dead pixels
no backlight bleed
no noticable buzzing noises
no noticable input lag
And preferably under £600
I'll probably try my luck with a Hazro HZ27WC but I'm probably going to wait for Arma3.
that uses a res of 2560 x 1440 though. But besides that it is probably one of the best affordable" 27" screens still.
Oops yeah that's ok, still bloody big I hear very mixed reviews about the Hazro unfortunately. But then... you get mixed reviews about everything if you research it well enough. For example I saw some people talking about crappy build quality and if you get a bad one like that, then the backlight is terrible etc.. So I thought ok screw it, I'll look at the more expensive Dell instead. But then as I read about that I saw the same things, and that has the added issue of (apparently) a very over the top and ugly None Glare Coating which gives a kind of grainy tint to everything.
So in other words, my hope for the future is just to get a screen like we can already get - but more reliable and better built. And seeing one using a crappy old TN panel and a low resolution seems like a big backwards step to me, one that the 144hz doesn't compensate for. That's just imo though. If I used it as a TV or something I would have completely different requirements, but for playing games and browsing the web and stuff, I really want it to be sharp and clean and nice lookin.
Separate names with a comma.