LCD 22-25in gaming monitor with 120hz refresh

Discussion in 'General Hardware' started by maxrep12, Mar 9, 2009.

  1. gamerk2

    gamerk2 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,108
    Likes Received:
    1
    GPU:
    NVIDIA 570 GTX 1.2 GB
    People, a few things:

    A 60Hz moniter can only display up to 60 frames per second.
    A 120Hz moniter can only display up to 120 frames per second.

    As such, don't talk about how L4D gets you over 100 FPS unless you have a moniter that can physically show that many frames. I play competitivly, and I use my old CRT, thanks to a much higher Refresh Rate, and thus, more frames, giving me a slight edge in competition (not to mention smoothness).
     
  2. reno_skychaser

    reno_skychaser Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    1,714
    Likes Received:
    4
    GPU:
    XFX R9 290 4GB
    Most CRT users, like myself, will talk about how the low refresh rates are troublesome. I can't play at 60hz on one without getting a headache, 1280x960 70hz for me.
    Since LCD's don't work the same way, many users of them don't feel the need to have higher refresh rates.

    But I play plenty of games that get up to 120fps, and I'd really like to see how that's supposed to look. And the 120hz Syncmaster? I think the monitor itself goes for about $400. 120hz monitors have some mainstreaming ahead of them...
     
  3. ElementalDragon

    ElementalDragon Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,313
    Likes Received:
    8
    GPU:
    eVGA RTX 2070
    falkeri: how exactly does my saying that back up your arguement? the ability for them to determine what model aircraft was flashed on the screen doesn't really say anything remotely close to the idea that the eye can detect up to 200hz. The eye detects the image flashing on the screen for .02 seconds.... yes.... but again, it's going back to the whole afterimage thing, where the image in a sense is still retained in the eye in the form of the light that was taken in by the eye. Am i the only one who see's the idea of that not meaning anything about being able to detect up to 100-200hz, and more about basically having the same effect as a camera flash making you see a nice bright spot for quite a while?

    And no.... i don't play COMPETITIVELY. I don't even bother with the idea of competing in tournaments or any of that ridiculous crap..... mostly because i don't care about the idea. And i don't play to have fun because i suck, as you seem to believe is the case. I play to have fun because if i play just to try to get the highest kill count or some stupid crap like that, i get bored. I'd much rather be good at beating people to death with the melee weapon in a game than join the rest of the sheep who can kill you from the other side of the map with a single shot from a 357. the whole idea of quite literal "Point and click" gaming is boring as hell.
     
  4. Jonp382

    Jonp382 Master Guru

    Messages:
    582
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Sapphire HD 5770 Vapor-X
    1920x1080, 23-24", 120 hz, 30 bit color, 180 degree viewing angles, 1000000:1 contrast ratio, uniform lighting, and 0.001 ms response times. Probably overkill, but perfect? YES!

    Anyways, I usually play with higher graphics in single player games, so 60-75 hz is fine for me while playing those. But in online games, I turn down stuff so that I can get more fps and get every little bit of latency reduced as possible. Hence my longing for a 120 hz display again. I'm pretty happy with my current LCD though. They're going to have to release a damn good display at a mind blowing price for me to change it.
     

  5. falkeri

    falkeri New Member

    Messages:
    7
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    8800gts 320mb
    Lol....I don't know how you can't connect the dots. If the pilots eye registered the image of the plane, regardless of how much detail they can see, that means that the eye is sensitive on that order of time.

    In the study, you have a steady white background then a .02 flash of an image, then more white background. In a game, you have one image for .02 seconds, then another for .02 seconds, then another for .02 seconds. The point is that the eye can tell that the middle frame is there, just as it can register the image of the plane.

    Without that middle image, the video being played will appear slightly more jagged and choppy. Of course you won't notice this if you aren't moving your mouse quickly enough that the image is actually changing from one frame to the next. Or if you simply don't pay enough attention. (i.e. are slow/bad or just don't care).

    Good and bad are very relative terms, I am never going to know if you are what I consider "good" or "horrible", it doesn't really matter, I was just venturing a guess as to why you say you can't tell the difference. It's also possible that when you switched from CRT to LCD you weren't as good or aware as you are now. In my case I switched only a few years ago, while I was playing competitively and paid close attention to my game. Perhaps if I had switched 6 years prior I wouldn't even have noticed and would have turned into one of these kids that claim that it's utterly impossible to tell the difference between 60hz and 200.
     
  6. ElementalDragon

    ElementalDragon Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,313
    Likes Received:
    8
    GPU:
    eVGA RTX 2070
    Ok.... now you've just proven to me that you HAVEN'T read that study performed by the military. The image WASN'T flashed during a pure white background. the screen was black, and the image flashed for .02 seconds. Hence why i mentioned the idea of it being like a camera flash.

    Also..... i find it funny that you.... saying that being able to determine that much detail in two hundredths of a second, is such an amazing feat, and is basically backing your idea that the human eye can detect up to 200hz. Correct me if i'm wrong.... but doesn't .02s = 50hz/50fps?
     
  7. quaker3

    quaker3 Master Guru

    Messages:
    652
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    MSI 6850HD
    so its just debate if a person can notice difference between 60hz or 120hz ? :)
    and really no lcd is made that shows 120hz at those beast resolutions?

    my experience - if i sit in front of 60hz monitor i notice that.. if i sit near 85hz monitor i notice that monitor seems nice to look at it... and the more hz the better... certainly the difference can be felt
     
  8. falkeri

    falkeri New Member

    Messages:
    7
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    8800gts 320mb
    Basically yes, the original question has mostly been answered, now it's sidetracked into whether or not such a piece of equipment is any better than a run of the mill 60hz. :)


    Sorry I didn't double check the math, thought I read 2 hundredths of a second not 1/200th. But yes it's actually .005 seconds.

    And why does it matter if the background was black or white? The whole point is that the eye registers changes that small a fast. What are you trying to prove with the camera flash you keep spitting out?
     
  9. live4life

    live4life Banned

    Messages:
    1,499
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Asus EnGTX295
    the 120hz its true manny companies will release those babes...like viewsonic samsung eizo....
     
  10. ElementalDragon

    ElementalDragon Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,313
    Likes Received:
    8
    GPU:
    eVGA RTX 2070
    ..... why the hell am i even talking to you anymore, falkeri? I feel like i have to explain one thing several dozen times before you finally understand what i'm getting at.... and you forget it again 5 minutes later.

    "Why does it matter if the background was black or white?"

    Are you freakin serious? The test was done in a dark room. if the screen was white before the image was flashed, the eye would have already been adjusted to the brightness of the screen, and there's a very high chance that the pilots wouldn't have been able to determine what type of plane it was.

    And if you used at least half of your brain to think about it for more than half a second, you'd realise why i keep bringing up the idea of it being like a camera flash. You shine anything bright into your eye, especially when your eyes are adjusted to the darkness, that light will still be there in the form of a "spot" that you see for quite a while, similar to when you're looking at a camera when the flash goes off, or if you look at the sun a little too long on a nice bright sunny day, or if you're changing a light bulb that has died and you kept the switch on so that you'd have light when you finished screwing in the bulb. Seriously.... it's not that hard to figure out.
     

  11. falkeri

    falkeri New Member

    Messages:
    7
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    8800gts 320mb
    Stating obvious and unrelevant facts doesn't explain why it matters.

    You're trying to propose that every frame on a computer screen changes from light to dark? A common gaming screen isn't just solid white or black, its a mix of dark and light spots that change from one to the other that make up the image. Every time the image changes the new light is going to be added to the previous image, the whole goddamn point is that the new image can be recognized on a scale of .005 seconds each time, if not more.
     
  12. ElementalDragon

    ElementalDragon Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,313
    Likes Received:
    8
    GPU:
    eVGA RTX 2070
    ....... you're seriously giving me a headache...... and i don't know why i'm even bothering to try to explain it again.

    i'm NOT trying to propose that every frame changes from light to dark. if it did, we'd be back to the flicker-friendly days of old-as-hell CRT's.

    Also...... last time i checked, i don't remember a "common gaming screen" being a mix of dark and light spots either..... seeing as backlighting keeps the entire screen lit, and the only thing that determines black (or as close to black as possible) is when the pixel changes color/shuts off.

    and AGAIN....... HOW THE HELL IS IT "UNRELEVANT"?!!? you are human, aren't you? I mean.... if you were, you'd see EXACTLY why the difference between being in a dark room with a dark screen would matter a LOT when compared to a light screen whether it's in a dark or light room. Eyes take ti......... you know what.... f*ck it. Not going to explain it for the 5th time only to have you completely ignore your own damn human side, and try to counter anything i say with your >>> IRRELEVANT <<< comments.

    The image was flashed on the screen for .005 seconds..... the pilots may or may not have known that it was a plane that they were going to have as the image.... but they more than likely had no idea what image it was...... quite possibly having never seen the picture before. It would be extremely difficult to pick up details of an image flashed for that short of a period of time if you had no idea where to look to find said details when the image was flashed on the screen. It was more than likely only possible because of the whole afterimage effect i've mentioned dozens of times now.... so much so that now i'm even getting tired of repeating it.

    ........... i await your response saying that light and darkness don't matter when it comes to the human eye, oh great alien one.
     
  13. falkeri

    falkeri New Member

    Messages:
    7
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    8800gts 320mb
    Ugh. This is probably going to be my last post because I can see ignorance is bliss and you just don't want to let go.

    My previous statements about pixels going from light to dark etc were trying to point out that your entire argument with the camera flashes is assuming that all of the pixels on the screen go from a darkened state (not black, just darker than the next frame) to a lightened state, in order to create a "camera flash" effect as you call it so the eye can see it. My point was that this is OBVIOUSLY not the case, as both the screen and your eye is constantly moving so the position of each pixel is not going to be a fixed position on your retina.

    EVEN IF I concede to your argument that your so-called "camera flash" effect is the only way to see the changes, your eye would still be able to create the image only being able to detect the pixels that move from a dark state to a light state.

    Just think about it before you spout the same **** over again, because I'm probably not going to be here to read it anyway.

    Another way to think about it, if the above paragraph is too confusing: As little as 10 photons will activate a rod in the human eye to send a signal to the brain. Every time the screen refreshes its going to change the pattern of photons being sent to the brain. This pattern of photons will over-write the pattern of rods in the eye in an extremely short period of time. Sure, remnants of the previous image will be there like your "camera flash" but just because you see a camera flash doesn't mean you can't see anything, can't detect movement, it just means the new image is a bit biased (maybe if there was a ridiculously strong flash it would impair your actual vision, but that is not happening on a computer screen). Obviously the more frames your computer sends, the more often this image will be updated on your retina. If the image is moving very fast, more updates creates a smoother image.

    :bang:
     
  14. Neo Cyrus

    Neo Cyrus Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,850
    Likes Received:
    669
    GPU:
    Asus TUF 3080 OC
    The whole 24 frame thing is a misconception people have because movies are shot at 24fps to be cheap mofos.

    How many frames a human eye can "see" depends completely on the conditions such as lighting. Movies are shot 24fps but each frame is interrupted/repeated 3 times in a cheap attempt to make it less choppy and then throw in lighting conditions which often leave a split second after-image and BAM, no longer so choppy.

    With a monitor it's easy enough to tell the difference between 50 and 60 frames. If you were to lock two at 50 and 60 and have them side by side most people will be able to tell which one is smoother.

    As for TV shows, interlaced TVs repeat each frame twice don't they? (I'm asking, I don't know about this/don't remember.)
     
  15. Iarwain

    Iarwain Banned

    Messages:
    3,048
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    4890 990//1120
    SO BASICALLY BACK TO THE QUESTION...

    Because I'm interested too...

    Does anyone know of a decent 120hz monitor at a decent price? About the size in the title?
     

  16. momomo67890

    momomo67890 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,665
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    285gtx/4750
    view sonic makes one for 325 i think 22 inch
     
  17. Corrupt^

    Corrupt^ Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    7,051
    Likes Received:
    355
    GPU:
    Geforce RTX 3090 FE
    Samsung 2233RZ, just released about a month ago.
    http://www.samsung.com/us/consumer/...e=monitors&subtype=lcd&model_cd=LS22CMFKFV/ZA

    Price is a little higher then the average LCD though.

    Btw in terms of differences: humans can't see the difference, but they can feel it. And 60Hz is fine unless you're going to start playing competitively. Playing a match in CS Source on 60Hz makes me sick, it almost litteraly does (in the way you can get carsick).

    I'm currently using a 75Hz lcd and I'm planning on getting that 2233RZ.
     
  18. momomo67890

    momomo67890 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,665
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    285gtx/4750
    viewsonic has better color btw
     
  19. Iarwain

    Iarwain Banned

    Messages:
    3,048
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    4890 990//1120
    How about 75hz? Or are there any in-between? Like 90hz? LCD's only.
     
  20. Corrupt^

    Corrupt^ Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    7,051
    Likes Received:
    355
    GPU:
    Geforce RTX 3090 FE
    Nope, most are 60Hz, some are 75Hz and then you've got 2 120Hz monitors from Samsung or Viewsonic.

    Knew about the viewsonic but I'm also getting the Samsung for other reasons. For instance, you can do aspect ratio scaling without having to use the nvidia drivers or w/e.
     

Share This Page