XL24iiZ 144hz 1ms gtg at 1080p. I have two of them and they're great, make sure you have multi sli to reach over 144fps in most modern games though or go with something at 60hz. :) I have 4 GTX 980's that barley let me hit 200fps in most games.
>>45637127 dat autism cause it's not like lag adds up right? no, if one link in the chain introduces lag you're free to choose any piece of shit you want because the battle is already lost. listen to him. pcs cause lag, windows causes lag, get a ps4 dude. and a crt. this board man i swear.
i had the one on the right (u2414h), would've kept it as it's suited for gaming (quick) and has nice colors. but the display is very unevenly lit and it doesn't have dvi. dell quality isn't what it used to be.
>>45637127 >The input latency of your PC is much higher than that of your monitor, so response time is irrelevant. That's bullshit. I immediately noticed the difference in lag when i got my 1440p IPS. Compared to my old TN it makes games unplayable. You can check it yourself http://forums.blurbusters.com/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=1134&sid=5629080deb222a6da628ac431b5e35a7
>>45637127 I commend you for being skeptical on something /g/ is always hyping (refresh) rate.
How ever in this case it is not the usual case. Mechanical keyboard, expensive headphones, DACs and Amps. Shit like that /g/ is mostly wrong about, you don't need those and its generally a waste of money.
SSD's and >60hz monitors are where /g/ is right, they'll make the single biggest difference in quality.
>>45637250 i don't. i'm not interested in owning one right now either. i have a 144hz 1080p as my daily. i'm sort of ALL the way on the other end of the spectrum. enjoy them pixels. that's a lot of pixels.
>>45637273 I got a U2913WM for $300 a few months ago. Its pretty good. Nice for gaming, nice for movies (21:9 and it overclocks to 72hz easy and has 24hz mode as well), and it's also nice for programming IDE's.
>>45637276 sure, if you only care about (certain) games and don't give a shit about visual quality then that's a good solution. I have a 1080p 120hz I used to use for gaming/3D, but I don't even game on it anymore. refresh rate and low lag can't make up for low resolution and poor visual quality. I would probably think differently if I played competitive FPS games or something, but I don't.
>>45637236 >60hz monitors are where /g/ is right, they'll make the single biggest difference in quality. >refresh speeds are more important than colour uniformity You're right in that they make the biggest difference in quality, though. IPS > TN Always.
>>45640167 IPS isn't perfect, but it's way, way better than TN for everything except a few genres of video games where responsiveness is more important than quality. I have both a 120hz monitor and an IPS, and I use the IPS for everything except the rare cases when I want 3D.
IPS is good for portable electronics, situations where you're going to need a variable viewing angle. I don't know about you, but I don't flop around my desk all that much, tend to just look at the monitor from a single,comfortable angle. TN being shit is overblown, the variance in quality is just much higher, since more can be made more cheaply and shilled out to idiots. Good quality TN monitors aren't really worse than IPS in much aside from viewing angle, at least not in my experience, and really the technology behind a monitor matters less than the end-user experience. TL;DR, if you have somewhere you can go look, a computer shop or something, go look at some monitors of various kinds and pick what looks best to you. Or do what I did and waste money on a lot of them over time.
>>45640360 I agree that TN is nearly as shit as it used to be, and probably has an unfairly bad reputation at this point. It still cannot be denied that a good IPS panel has noticeably better image quality than a good TN, and once you've gotten used to an IPS panel it's really hard to go back to TN. People who've never used a high quality monitor don't know what they're missing, though. I recently threw away a 17" TN viewsonic from the first generation of LCDs. I tried turning it on and the colors on that thing were absolutely digusting, but back then I thought it was perfectly acceptable.
>>45640482 I've only owned... two IPS panels. Aside from phone, but maybe my eyes are just awful, I can't see the major difference from a modern TN head on, and nothing a bit of calibration couldn't solve. My older TN panels, yes, good god those things are awful... No wonder people stuck with CRTs for so long. I certainly think IPS is the future for LCD panels, however... I actually wonder how some of the more expensive ones stack up, probably better, aside from refresh rate that is.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org with the post's information.