Should I upgrade or not to 24" for gaming?

I

ihira

Gawd
Joined
Sep 30, 2007
Messages
904
Hello folks. I'm in a little dillima right now if I should upgrade to a 24in LCD. I'm thinking Samsung 245B

First of all I'm most likely going to upgrade to the new G92 8800GTS 512MB as a Christmas gift (assuming it comes out) but I have some concerns with 24" monitors.

-I currently have a VIewsonic VX922 2ms which is GREAT for fast-paced gaming. FPSs and fighting games which require lightning reflexes work very well with this LCD. I do not want to compromise with input delay or slow responsiveness.
-I want to play games as smooth as possible with high settings. The new 8800GTS on 1280x1024 will do no problem for sure but what about 1920 x 1200? I would probably enjoy 60fps on 1280 than 30-40 on 1920.

If the above two concerns, especially the responce time can't be resolved with current 24"s I think I'll stick with my vx922 until better 24"ers come out (a 24" version of Samsung 226BW would be nice :)). If you have any input you can give me, or an alternate 24" thats suited for gaming, please!
Thank you
 
24" is awesome for gaming. Higher res and widescreen gives a field advantage on most of the game. If the 8800GTS performs close to the Ultra, then it would have no problem running most of the games out there on 1920 x 1200 (AA and AF settings might vary with each game)

I believe 5ms should be more than good enough for your needs. You can look at the Dell 2407fp which range from $550 or the Benq 24"(check the official thread).

I personally use a westinghouse 24". I like it a lot. Colors are nice and vivid. Comes with HDMI, Composite , d sub connections so you could use it as a HDTV if you want. I believe this lcd has a 8ms response time.
 
I, too, have the Westy L2410NM.

Since you don't want to compromise on input delay, I can't recommend this monitor. While it is very nearly perfect for me, I'm not all _that_ sensitive to input delay. Gaming, while certainly an activity I enjoy and take fairly seriously, comprises a minority of my computer time, so I'm taking MVA's viewing angles and color reproduction in exchange for losing TN's very low input delay.

The 8ms responsiveness is fine, as I can't see ghosting while gaming. If I really look for it, I can find it while moving the mouse over certain grays, but I have never noticed it in typical usage (text/web/media/gaming).

Unfortunately, the current choices fall into three categories, really:
1. TN: Low input delay, fast response time, crappy color/viewing angles.
2. MVA/PVA: Some input delay, slightly slower response time, decent color/viewing angles. A little pricier than TNs, but really only because they don't come in 22" typically.
3. IPS: Low input delay, newer ones have decent response time, excellent color/viewing angles. Brutal cost.

I couldn't afford the IPS, and I can't stand the colors/viewing angles of TN panels, so I got an MVA. Others will make different choices generally based upon the above.
 
Neuffy said:
I, too, have the Westy L2410NM.

Since you don't want to compromise on input delay, I can't recommend this monitor. While it is very nearly perfect for me, I'm not all _that_ sensitive to input delay. Gaming, while certainly an activity I enjoy and take fairly seriously, comprises a minority of my computer time, so I'm taking MVA's viewing angles and color reproduction in exchange for losing TN's very low input delay.

The 8ms responsiveness is fine, as I can't see ghosting while gaming. If I really look for it, I can find it while moving the mouse over certain grays, but I have never noticed it in typical usage (text/web/media/gaming).

Unfortunately, the current choices fall into three categories, really:
1. TN: Low input delay, fast response time, crappy color/viewing angles.
2. MVA/PVA: Some input delay, slightly slower response time, decent color/viewing angles. A little pricier than TNs, but really only because they don't come in 22" typically.
3. IPS: Low input delay, newer ones have decent response time, excellent color/viewing angles. Brutal cost.

I couldn't afford the IPS, and I can't stand the colors/viewing angles of TN panels, so I got an MVA. Others will make different choices generally based upon the above.
Click to expand...
I was under the impression that input lag was not related to the display technology....it is only related to what electronics are powering the display (ie. I have seen some monitors with a 1-2 frame buffer that increases input delay).
 
take a look at the 245BW, its basically a 24" 226BW. don't let the response time fool you, thats just RTA anyways (software). you won't notice the difference. i got one and love it after hating the 226BW's
 
Im in same spot right now but I think im gonna get a 22"
Dont think im ready to run games at 1600x1200.. what ever native is on 24"
Once you set at that resolution theres no turning back so I dont wanna effect my self and have problems running future games.

Enjoy what ever you get but I rather have top of line LG 22 inch then spending extra 100 (cheapest 24") Acer 24" which is not that bad at all but LG is so much better.
 
loker said:
I was under the impression that input lag was not related to the display technology....it is only related to what electronics are powering the display (ie. I have seen some monitors with a 1-2 frame buffer that increases input delay).
Click to expand...
You're right: response time has essentially no impact on your 'lightning fast reflexes'. The 'response time' I'm pretty sure is just an indication of how long it takes to change a pixel's color, so obviously faster response times mean less ghosting. With a 60Hz refresh rate, there's 16.7ms between the frame changes so as long as the response time is below that there shouldn't be a huge issue.

These response times do not take into account how long it takes for the signal to get to that particular pixel in the first place, which can vary from model to model, in some cases significantly. I've seen tests where they'd compare a CRT and a LCD connected to the same computer showing an analogue clock tick and it was easy to tell the LCD was slow. It's these situations that would hurt your gaming performance. So personally I'd be more concerned with finding out if there's input lag than what the response time is.
 
Kaldskryke said:
You're right: response time has essentially no impact on your 'lightning fast reflexes'. The 'response time' I'm pretty sure is just an indication of how long it takes to change a pixel's color, so obviously faster response times mean less ghosting. With a 60Hz refresh rate, there's 16.7ms between the frame changes so as long as the response time is below that there shouldn't be a huge issue.

These response times do not take into account how long it takes for the signal to get to that particular pixel in the first place, which can vary from model to model, in some cases significantly. I've seen tests where they'd compare a CRT and a LCD connected to the same computer showing an analogue clock tick and it was easy to tell the LCD was slow. It's these situations that would hurt your gaming performance. So personally I'd be more concerned with finding out if there's input lag than what the response time is.
Click to expand...
Sorry I am actually talking about input lag/delay not response time...
 
Saw the input lag on LG Ben and Dell heard that Sammy was S L O W and the OLD acer 24 was the best (lowest input lag) but have no idea about it, anyone see any testing on westinghouse lag?
If someone would just make a TN with little lag and good colors for gaming at a decent price.
 
if your getting a 24", be ready to upgrade your rig on a yearly basis when new games come out. you can get by holding off for 2yrs then upgrade but it'll be hard ;).

i love my 24" its just annoying sometimes knowing i have to upgrade more frequently than i would if i had a smaller screen. i plan on getting a 720p 26" HDTV soon and maybe replace my 24" with it.... maybe :)
 
Yes, I meant to say input delay is my biggest concern upon choosing a 24"er. Damn FPS and fighting games, especially fighting games (hey stop laughing:mad:) I can actually feel the difference between 1 frame(16.66ms) input lag and its bothersome.
So check these out
input_lag_comparison_2.jpg

input_lag.jpg

It looks like VX922 and 226BW are the King and Queen for gaming and now I know why everyone says so.
For 24" monitors, the Samsung 245B is quite the performer in that aspect compared to others. I'm slowly leaning towards this panel, though I'm aware its a TN panel which = not the best colors and crappy viewing angle...hard decision!

And yeah 24"ers come with the cost of needing a very nice Video Card:(. Hopefully the G92 8800GTS is a strong performer
 
ihira, where are you getting those graphed results? I did a bit of testing of input latency on some different screens in the past. It absolutely drove me nuts and I ended up returning a lot of monitors for this reason... it looks as if the Samsung 245B has finally brought closure to my long search... I'm going to a computer warehouse tomorrow to ask if they have one I can play with for a bit... I might buy two!
 
The graphs are from http://www.tftcentral.co.uk
testing method is what Kaldstryke said: they'd compare a CRT and a LCD connected to the same computer showing an analogue clock tick and it was easy to tell the LCDs input lag compared to CRTs.

Nice site to inform yourself about TFT technology and they have nice reviews too.
 
Yeah, that's exactly what I was doing last year-- I just didn't think there was a cult following. :p
 
Today I JUST got an NEC 2490WUXi LCD. After rearranging my desk I sat down to play some TF2 and CS:S. As a hardcore CRT snob and hater of most LCDs, I LOVE this thing. Yes, it is very expensive, but damn, it is responsive as hell, no input lag as far as I can tell, and it looks absolutely gorgeous. Colors are accurate, no dithering, no narrow viewing angles, and even illumination. Just awesome, A++.

If you can afford it, get one.
 
SM226BW and not just the 226BW?

Is it a different one that's available in the UK?

Even if you get rid of input lag, gaming performance still can't match that of a high refresh rate CRT, like 120hz or 150hz. Because even though LCD monitors have nothing to do with refreshrate, everything was designed for CRT and it'll still have an effect. It sucks but with even the 2ms LCD monitors I just can't stand it, especially with first person shooter games. Which is why I'm looking for a widescreen CRT now.

+1 LG monitors are awesome.
 
Epiik, the 226BW and SM226BW are th same monitor, it's just more prominent to see the SM in front of the model number in the UK. So we are all on the same page. :)

These two low latency monitors 226BW and 245B were built specifically without any extra image processing features on-board. This is something I have been waiting for for some time now-- an ugly, but fast LCD. Ghosting is not my concern and I am not talking about that-- nor do I care, I can easily deal with that. However, the source of any input lag detected from either of these is difficult to pinpoint as the overcharger circuitry is removes, but there is still some digital circuitry in all LCDs. As soon as you string out any task into a digital form, a time sensitive processes is ruined with the advent of the innevitable digital processing time.

Now this is just a general assessment-- I have not done much research, but I don't think 2.2ms should be very noticable as it should blend in with the latency compensation natural to all of us. Our senses take time to report a stimuli and generally this time is reduced to a perceivably null period thanks to the way our brain remembers short term memory. Regardless of that, in combination with the latency involved between movements of your hands, interpretted by keyboard and mouse, passed to the memory of your computer and interpretted by a thread in processing, updated to the graphics engine, passed to the gpu, and posed into a frame and sent to the monitor-- 2.2ms is probably going to glaze over as insignificant. You might want to assess other devices for latency first. :p

7.5ms, however may pose a problem and I certainly hope it does not. I could not stand the 44ms latency from the last 24inch Acer monitor I had and returned it. If I get the same sense of frustration from this 7.5ms screen today, then I will return it as well.
 
Neuffy said:
Unfortunately, the current choices fall into three categories, really:
1. TN: Low input delay, fast response time, crappy color/viewing angles.
2. MVA/PVA: Some input delay, slightly slower response time, decent color/viewing angles. A little pricier than TNs, but really only because they don't come in 22" typically.
3. IPS: Low input delay, newer ones have decent response time, excellent color/viewing angles. Brutal cost.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately that is NOT the case across the board. As you can see in this article: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/other/display/22inch.html Most of the 22" TNs suck. Either they don't have RFT, which means they DON'T have the fast response time (but still have all the cons of a TN), or if they do, it's implemented very poorly, so you have the fast response time but a lot of artifacts.


I would recommend either 20"/20.1" OR 24".... NOT 22...


I just ordered the DoubleSight DS-245W (24" based off the original 2407WFP A0 panel), so I'll let ya'll know how that is here in a few days. I currently own the 19" VX922. It's ridiculously fast, but I would like a bigger resolution.
 
thanks for the graphs ihira, makes me feel good about buying the 245b when i did
 
Phrozt said:
Unfortunately that is NOT the case across the board. As you can see in this article: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/other/display/22inch.html Most of the 22" TNs suck. Either they don't have RFT, which means they DON'T have the fast response time (but still have all the cons of a TN), or if they do, it's implemented very poorly, so you have the fast response time but a lot of artifacts.


I would recommend either 20"/20.1" OR 24".... NOT 22...


I just ordered the DoubleSight DS-245W (24" based off the original 2407WFP A0 panel), so I'll let ya'll know how that is here in a few days. I currently own the 19" VX922. It's ridiculously fast, but I would like a bigger resolution.
Click to expand...

Phrozt, I was reading up on that DoubleSight, I look forward to hearing yoru thoughts about it. I was going to get one in a couple weeks (but haven't been able to find a TON of reviews on it yet)
 
loker said:
I was under the impression that input lag was not related to the display technology....it is only related to what electronics are powering the display (ie. I have seen some monitors with a 1-2 frame buffer that increases input delay).
Click to expand...

that is true for the most part however VA based panels lag mostly because of the VA technology. The biggest advantage is the black level however you pay a hefty price for that both in input lag and contrast shift.
 
OP: you mentioned two monitors that I've owned, so i will give you my experiences. I had a VX922 Viewsonic when it first came out. Moving from 25ms delay on an old 19" dell panel to the 2ms delay of the 922 was like night and day. Last xmas, I receieved a 22" no name Costco monitor (x2gen to be exact). It had a 5ms response time and I didn't notice ANY difference in gaming compared to the 922.

Of course, any time you buy a no-name product like the one I did, it's going to break down on you. Luckily for me, it was at the 11month mark for a 1 year warranty. The company never answered my calls or answered my emails, but Costco refunded my girlfriend (the giftor) the cost of the monitor entirely. I felt indepted to them for helping me out, so I made my girlfriend buy me the only 24" monitor they had for sale there, the 245BW.

With its 5ms response time, gaming is just as good as it was on the other monitors. I only have a 8800gts 320mb card, so I've read plenty of articles on its' weakness in high res, high AA situations. This may apply to newer games, but I can say that a number of older/newer games will still run incredibly fast at that 1920x1200 resolution. Games I've tried at this resolution: UT3 with no AA and BF2, HL2 & Counterstrike Source with full quality, 4xAA. Each of these games ran at well over 60fps in most situations.

I already beat Bioshock, so I don't have the discs anymore, but I probably would not choose to run that at the native resolution. Lets not even mention Crysis, where I couldn't run 16x10 on high. Your current video card is a bit weaker than mine, so you'll have to live with lower resolutions. But hopefully that new 8800gts 512mb comes through for you to xmas!
 
A little follow up before I go all out with the testing tomorrow... I did buy the 254B and am very pleased with it thus far. Going to do a bit more testing and such tomorrow for latency, but for now it's not actually driving me nuts like the other 24 inch Acer I had! So far so good...

Honestly, it isn't as absolutely brilliant as the other one I had, but the speed is all that matters until SED hits mainstream. :p
 
kleox64 said:
that is true for the most part however VA based panels lag mostly because of the VA technology. The biggest advantage is the black level however you pay a hefty price for that both in input lag and contrast shift.
Click to expand...
I thought VA's were only beaten out by IPS in contrast?

and I am still not buying this on the input lag...I think it all lies in the processing hardware...look at the L246WP it is extremely fast in relation to input lag...
 
loker said:
I thought VA's were only beaten out by IPS in contrast?
Click to expand...

I think the S-PVA manages the best contrast ratio due to the lower black level

loker said:
and I am still not buying this on the input lag...I think it all lies in the processing hardware...look at the L246WP it is extremely fast in relation to input lag...
Click to expand...

S-PVA (Samsung's VA technology) is the worst offender and does seem to have an inherent lag that affects all displays based on the panel type

The LG is P-MVA which is a different variation of VA, by AU Optronics (that's the panel type for L246WP listed over at flatpanels.dk)
 
IanM said:
I think the S-PVA manages the best contrast ratio due to the lower black level
Click to expand...

this is true however for an increase of 200-300:1 in contrast ratio you get worse viewing angle, a 5-6 fold increase in input lag, contrast shift which affects 20-40% of the screen plus crushed blacks. Sorry but that is a rediculus trade-off IMO.
 
ijozic said:
How about the billion times mentioned LG 246WP which is VA and has less lag than that?
Click to expand...

VA is the base technology, it splits into various others PVA, MVA, etc... updated versions also exist i.e. S-PVA, A-MVA etc... PVA is the worst when it comes to input lag, where as TN is the best however IPS is the best all rounder IMO and the only one which comes close to CRT levels.
 
defsquad said:
Phrozt, I was reading up on that DoubleSight, I look forward to hearing yoru thoughts about it. I was going to get one in a couple weeks (but haven't been able to find a TON of reviews on it yet)
Click to expand...

If you are interested in it, please revisit the thread because someone found a way to get it for about $375!!!

A (hopefully) great 24" S-PVA for $375?? That's just awesome.

And yes, I will be aggressively testing this monitor. I currently have a VX922, so I am very used to "fast" and will be expecting the same w/the new monitor. I play a host of FPSs, WoW, and several other gaming staples, and will be testing them all out. Because provantage has a warehouse by me, I'm actually able to get the monitor TODAY!!

I've been chomping at the bit to give it a run :).
 
Bleh.. not getting it today... Wasn't there to sign for it because I'm working.

I guess it will have to be tomorrow.
 
any tests done for the input lag of the LG 246WP?
Somehow I don't think it'll beat the 245B's 7.5ms.

I've been spoiled by VX922s extreme quick responsiveness.

Maybe gaming on 24" is still premature as even the highend 8800s can struggle at that resolution and the input lag thing with most 24"ers.
 
ihira said:
any tests done for the input lag of the LG 246WP?
Somehow I don't think it'll beat the 245B's 7.5ms.

I've been spoiled by VX922s extreme quick responsiveness.

Maybe gaming on 24" is still premature as even the highend 8800s can struggle at that resolution and the input lag thing with most 24"ers.
Click to expand...

Ihira - I can vouch for myself that gaming on the NEC 2490WUXi is great. No input lag and it looks amazing. With my current card (still waiting on my two 8800GT to run in SLI) I run games like Team Fortress 2 and Half Life 2: Episode 2 at 1400x900 and they both look superb; no blur from not running at 1920x1200 or anything. Hell, I may continue running at 1440 when I do get my 8800GT cards if it gets me a few more FPS, as it still looks great.

The $1200 pricetag is a serious negative, I know, but for me it is worth it.
 
sparks said:
ihira where did you get the input lag numbers on the 245B ?
Click to expand...

There's a graph on the first page. My question is what are the #s for the LG246? They aren't on the graph :( The only LG's on that graph are the 226's (both are which are >10ms, so no deal)
 
Serpico said:
I can vouch for myself that gaming on the NEC 2490WUXi is great. No input lag and it looks amazing.
Click to expand...
That's not true. It has around 30-35 ms lag.
 
ToastyX said:
That's not true. It has around 30-35 ms lag.
Click to expand...

On paper and in person are two different things. Playing fast paced first person shooters like TF2 has shown no disadvantage compared to playing on my CRT. Just my experience.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top