Just got my ViewSonic VX2268wm

C

coll83

n00b
Joined
Sep 3, 2009
Messages
4
Hi,
I posted this thread on another forum but would like to try here as well to see what response I can get. I recieved this monitor today from ocuk and have been testing it this afternoon.

It is my first step into the world of the LCD, having used CRTs forever, my only experience with an LCD is the one I use in work for general internet browsing, etc. I had always been a bit dubious to 'upgrade' to an LCD when I hear alot of gamers say that CRTs are better for fast paced FPS games. However, when I heard about the new 120hz LCDs I decided to bite the bullet and give one a whirl as the prospect of a larger, better monitor than my dusty old 19" CRT sounded very appealing.

I haven't had it long, only a few hours, long enough to ensure it's set at 120hz in games and that the brightness is good and working. However upon loading my favourite game Unreal Tournament ('99) I have to admit I'm pretty disappointed. As soon as I move the mouse quickly the screen definetely becomes slightly blurry, everything loses it's sharpness until you stop doing it. I tried in 60hz mode and I honestly can't believe people put up with that? It's a MASSIVE step back in technology, like swapping your brand new quad core for a pentium 1

My main reason for writing this is to ask if there is something setup wise I haven't done which needs doing? Being a complete LCD novice I don't want to put the monitor down because it looks great, it's just the blur issue I have in UT, and like I said, seeing it in 60hz has led me to believe maybe something is up, because I would never ever ever play any games if I had to play in that mode, and I have no idea how anyone does

Can any1 with this monitor shed any light? Or is it something you just get used to?
Cheers
 
You need an FW900 CRT :p

I'm sure maybe you'll get used to it. I'm looking at a new Viewsonic VX2433wm I got from the egg to use at work, and it's good for work, but I wouldn't use it for gaming. ;) Maybe an IPS panel would help you? I haven't seen one but word on the [H] street is they are better PQ.
 
You're too hardcore for LCDs. The blurriness is a technology limitation. You'll either need to get used to it or use a display with lower response time, like CRT or plasma.

It's worth noting that unless your display is defective, it's something like twice as fast as the fastest non-120Hz display which is what pretty much all the rest of us use.
 
Even in slower FPS games like CoD4 I find that using a CRT instead of an LCD improves my performance considerably. I haven't yet tried a 120Hz LCD so I can't comment. However, you should make sure that your framerate in UT is actually 120 otherwise the extra refresh rate is wasted.
 
you get used to the blurr, personally I think the much larger screen size over a crt is worth it.
 
It tends to be a limitation of older games to some degree I find. In Quake 3 in particular it is a little bit more evident than in, say, TF2. I finally made the change from my P1230 to a 2265wm and I find it satisfactory. It's not perfect, but it's much better than 60 Hz. And yes, anybody who thinks 60 Hz is fine for gaming should have their brain taken away by social services.
 
Hi again,
I've been playing some more with it and it has grown on me, I think i've just adjusted to the blur somewhat.
I also find it isn't as noticable in games besides UT, I haven't got quake 3 here but I know it's ultra fast much like UT can be, so these are the games that test it. They are also not as detailed, and i find the higher the detail in the game, the less you notice any ghosting.

Btw, do most people use dynamic contrast? does that add any lag?
cheers
 
Now you got me a bit worrying being a 19" CRT user and UT3 gamer and used to 1280x960@100Hz and waiting for upgrading to this monitor. I think 60Hz/FPS gaming is a pain for some games, especially UT I would rather not play them at all if I would have to stick to 60Hz. I've tried in the past getting used to 60Hz LCDs without luck as it was too much of a downgrade for me to swallow so hunted down some used trinitron CRTs instead.

Now I see lots of comments from users switching from CRT -> 120Hz ViewSonic VX2265wm or 2233rz that says they feel pretty much the same as their CRT in gaming so I wonder if it's only you that are extra picky or the VX2268wm got more blur (ghosting) than VX2265wm or 2233rz? Sounds very unlikely but who knows? Would be nice if digitalversus or xbitlabs could do a review like they did for 2233rz... According to digitalversus 2233rz had like twice as little ghosting/blur as the fastest 60Hz LCD they have tested.

Now personally I don't mind the blur that much tho to be honest, it's the extra smoothness the higher FPS/Hz provides that is what really matters to me. I own a PSP that has severe ghosting especially for red color you can notice a red "trail" behind red moving objects but it doesn't bug me too much, just as long as the movements on screen appear smooth. If the 120Hz LCD really feels as smooth as a CRT at corresponding 120Hz or in my case 100Hz is enough, then I don't think I'll have a problem with it.

Now I don't know what's the case for Dynamic contrast for the ViewSonic but yea it shouldn't really add any extra lag or so but 2233rz owners for example (which also has a DC ratio of 20000:1) often complains about it making the colors too intense (especially red so it bleeds). Another thing to concider is that it makes the colors seem rather dynamic as it modifies them on the fly and could become annoying in some cases. What I'd personally do is keep it disabled and add a tiny bit of Digital Vibrance if you happen to own an NVIDIA card as TN panels usually have slightly dull colors by default (without Dynamic contrast). A digital vibration setting of ~7% with older nvidia drivers and ~54% with the newer drivers (where 50% DV is default) is usually quite suitable for TN panels that adds a slight lively touch to the colors without making them seem cartoonish.
 
Last edited:
I think I am going to return the monitor.
For those that are used to LCD i expect this is a big upgrade, but for me, and with UT being the main game I play, it doesn't come close to a CRT imo. The entire game feels blurred. I only wish I could source one of those FW900 CRTs :( ... now that would be a good upgrade!
I shall now wait for a time where technology decides to move forward before going down this road again. At first I figured the trade off was worth it for the huge desktop and aesthetics, however, now that I have put some time into UT with this monitor, i'm afraid I have to concede that forking out £270 for what is essentially a headache inducing blur fest just isn't in my interests :(
It's a pity.
 
wow you must have very good eyes to see blur at 3ms. On my 5ms panel it's nonexistent.
 
I have noticed blur on every fixed panel display I've seen, plasma or lcd. I was excited to hear about these new 120hz lcd's, thinking it would help reduce or remove it but I guess it is just a limitation of these flat screen monitors.

I still plan on investigating them more and even possibly buying one as my CRT probably has only a year or two left.
 
hardc0re said:
wow you must have very good eyes to see blur at 3ms. On my 5ms panel it's nonexistent.
Click to expand...

It's not the response time, it's the refresh rate. Referesh rate is more important than input lag and response time put together as a figure of merit describing the gaming performance of an LCD. My 2265wm sometimes drops into 60 Hz in new games by accident and it makes me want to puke in my soup.
 
hardc0re said:
wow you must have very good eyes to see blur at 3ms. On my 5ms panel it's nonexistent.
Click to expand...

It's likely the LCD sample and hold effect. Google it. For example:

"The visual effect of motion blur is self-explanatory and it is fairly intuitive to realise that a slow pixel response-time will cause this problem. What is less obvious, but at least as important in causing motion-blur, is the 'sample-and-hold' effect: an image held on the screen for the duration of a frame-time blurs on the retina as the eye tracks the (average) motion from one frame to the next. By comparison, as the electron beam sweeps the surface of a cathode ray tube, it lights any given part of the screen only for a miniscule fraction of the frame time. It's a bit like comparing film or video footage shot with low- and high-shutter speeds. Motion-blur originating from sample-and-hold in the display can become less of an issue as the frame (refresh) rate is increased... provided that the source material (film, video, or game) contains that many unique frames. For LCD TV there is significant interest in the industry in strobing (flickering!) the backlight deliberately so as to reduce sample-and-hold motion-blur! "
 
+1

Good article about this a few years ago.

Your eyes have 10-20ms of lag where the previous image stays burned on the retina. 7/8ths or so of a CRT is black at any time, only the area of the image currently being scanned being visible. This works with the eye which due to burn sees the whole image, however it also works to reduce retina burn lag meaning it'll always be 10ms or so faster then even a 1ms response LCD which always shows the whole image.
 
wow you must have very good eyes to see blur at 3ms. On my 5ms panel it's nonexistent.
Click to expand...

I think you would change your mind if you compared it to a faster LCD back to back. A 5ms (without RTC) is MUCH slower then a 2MS with one. The "5ms" is only for ONE transition - gray to gray. In the bulk of those so called 5ms monitors the other transitions can take a LONG time.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/monitors/display/dell-2408wfp_5.html

For example the real 'average' time of the change of this pretty fast monitor is 15ms or so. That's noticeable. What happens is that images that used to be clear in action look unclear. If you haven't used a very fast LCD or an CRT in a while you won't notice though. Its the same with a Plasma vs. an LCD tv. Its very easy to spot if you know what to look for .

You don't need great eyes.

Pete
 
Does the VX2268wm use RTC though I wonder? I know Samsung 2233rz does for sure as mentioned in the xbitlabs review.
 
This monitor pwnz. I got mine today and it's been a pleasure using it. Switching to 120Hz makes such a night and day difference, mouse pointer moves so much smoother, when scrolling forums the text in the topics remain clear and doesn't smear just like on the CRT. In games the movements are just as smooth as the CRT, I did notice slight ghosting when turning very quickly in UT3 for example but it very minor and not distracting me at all as otherwise the game ran so much smoother. Also I tested removing the FPS limit and even at 200 - 350 FPS there was very little tearing, just like the CRT but of course it's a lot smoother running at 120 fps constant. There's also absolutely no input lag, I would easily notice this after 2000hrs of UT3 gaming but I notice none, maybe even a slight reduction cuz of the higher fps possible now 120Hz instead of 100Hz.

The colors are fine for a TN panel I think, they have a very natural tint as opposed to 2233rz that tends to be bluish. I do however notice a little bit backlight bleeding at bottom edge of the screen against black background but I can live with it.

The stand is quite a bit wobbly but even on my cheap rather unstable desk it doesn't wobble at all, only if I touch the monitor. I played l UT3 for like 3 hrs and it already felt like I had been playing on a monitor like this for years! Finally I can retire my old CRTs and move on.
 
Last edited:
That is interesting, both still have very low response tho compared to majority of LCDs. I wasn't able to notice any input lag on my ViewSonic VX2268wm at all compared to my CRT at least and I've seen several people saying the same for both monitors so it could simply be a pseudo effect if some1 is actually noticing it.

But this test however made me even more compelled to try out the 2233rz. The only thing it seems to lose at is the default color settings which is horribly blue dominated but when both were calibrated they seem to have about as good colors.
 
Well I ordered a Samsung 2233rz today so gonna compare the two.

Here's 2 backlight bleeding shots of my VX2268wm with brightness at 24 and 100. Maybe slightly more clearly visible in reality, at least the at brightness 24 as that's when I measured a bluish tint up to 6~7cm from bottom edge. Would gladly use brightness 35~45 if it wasn't for the backlight bleeding issue.


 
I just got my 2233rz, it's got the same problem with the backlight at 50 contrast and 100 brightness, very annoying in dark scenes imo, i wish someone releases a quality IPS panel that accepts 120hz singal, everything about those 2 monitors is average-bad imo, colours viewing angles color unifomity backlight bleeding you name it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top