Jump to content


How exactly does a 144hz LCD work out?


  • Please log in to reply
78 replies to this topic

#1 Frigidman™

Frigidman™

    Eye Sea Yew

  • Admin
  • 4265 posts
  • Steam ID:frigidman
  • Location:East mahn, East!
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 05 May 2014 - 09:57 AM

For those who actually have a stand alone monitor from their Mac (or PC), do you have one of these higher refresh rate monitors?

My main question is ... if a game is set to 'vsync' or not, and runs slower than 144fps ... does it tear like the dickens? I ask, because with the good ole 60hz monitors, you just lock vsync on and most games run well above 60fps so there is never a tear, and things seem to play smooth. But... what about these super hz monitors (http://www.newegg.co...N82E16824236313)?

Scenario 1:

Game A can handle 200fps, so set vsync on and it plays smooth - OK, no problem or issue here, as its just like running a game that goes over 60hz/fps easy.

Scenario 2:

Game B cant really do 144, but maintains a decent 75-100 fps... would turning vsync on or off have any difference, and would either cause serious tearing?

-Fm [1oM7]
"I'm not incorruptible, I am so corrupt nothing you can offer me is tempting." - Alfred Bester


#2 Sneaky Snake

Sneaky Snake

    Official Mascot of the 1988 Winter Olympics

  • IMG Writers
  • 3298 posts
  • Steam Name:SneakySnake
  • Steam ID:sneaky_snake
  • Location:Waterloo, Canada

Posted 05 May 2014 - 11:20 AM

I pretty much never see any tearing when playing games at 40-100 fps on my 120Hz monitor. I think I'm fairly noticeable of what the pixels look like on my screen (I see you dead pixel in the top left corner :glare: ), but I haven't actually tried to look for tearing.

If you are thinking about getting a 120+ Hz monitor, I feel it's only really worth it if you are into first person games. 120 Hz is extremely nice when I play Counter Strike, COD, or a similar 'twitch' fps. When I'm playing Diablo or League of Legends, I don't really notice the difference between 60 and 120 hz, unless I'm going nuts with the camera (which is never done in actual gameplay).

Moving around the mouse and windows at a butter smooth 120 fps on the desktop is nice on the eyes.
2015 13" rMBP: i5 5257U @ 2.7 GHz || Intel Iris 6100 || 8 GB LPDDR3 1866 || 256 GB SSD || macOS Sierra
Gaming Build: R5 1600 @ 3.9 GHz || Asus GTX 1070 8 GB || 16 GB DDR4 3000 || 960 Evo NVMe, 1 TB FireCuda || Win10 Pro
Other: Dell OptiPlex 3040 as VMware host || QNAP TS-228 NAS || iPhone 6S 64GB

#3 Frigidman™

Frigidman™

    Eye Sea Yew

  • Admin
  • 4265 posts
  • Steam ID:frigidman
  • Location:East mahn, East!
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 05 May 2014 - 11:28 AM

Tearing usually only bothers me when its the kind that gets into the mood of being in the same spot no matter what I do or turn/look. Like it slowly moves down the screen, or just always in the same band. Gets mighty annoying. I normally just turn on vsync and dont care since no games I have (worth playing) drop below 60fps. Which 60hz is what my current LCD does

I'm wanting to replace because that deep color reverse brightness bug I mentioned a while in another thread is finally just rubbing me in all the wrong spots.

I can easily buy a <$200 decent ASUS... but this 144hz one is making me go "HMMMMMMMMMMMM".

I loved the days of my CRT which I ran at 75hz and it was creamy (my eyes cant really tell much difference above 75 fps... but it CAN see the diff between 60 and 75).

-Fm [1oM7]
"I'm not incorruptible, I am so corrupt nothing you can offer me is tempting." - Alfred Bester


#4 Tetsuya

Tetsuya

    Master Blaster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2172 posts
  • Location:MI

Posted 05 May 2014 - 12:16 PM

if you engage Vsync on a 144hz monitor, it *should*, when running below 144fps, lock it down to 72 FPS if you can get that, or the nearest even multiple of 144.  That's how Vsync usually works, at least.  If a game cant run a solid 60 on my machine (Metro is the only one ive played lately that didnt) it runs at 30.

#5 Frigidman™

Frigidman™

    Eye Sea Yew

  • Admin
  • 4265 posts
  • Steam ID:frigidman
  • Location:East mahn, East!
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 05 May 2014 - 12:50 PM

Makes sense. I noticed this monitor does allow running in 100 / 120 / 144hz modes too. I'd probably stick it at 100. Which then seems a bit overkill to buy a monitor that does 144, just to downgrade it.... especially since I have no interest in "3D" (since my eyes dont really see 3d, long story).

So I started looking at the FITYBILLIONOTHERMODELS that ASUS sells. Ridiculous amounts of models they have.

Found a trio of them that all sport 75/76 hz, which would be ideal. Plus they are very low lag/ms (according to gamers who bought em).

-Fm [1oM7]
"I'm not incorruptible, I am so corrupt nothing you can offer me is tempting." - Alfred Bester


#6 Tetsuya

Tetsuya

    Master Blaster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2172 posts
  • Location:MI

Posted 05 May 2014 - 01:33 PM

What you need to be looking at is the actual specs - i deal with "gamers" all the time and they are full of BS.  (We set up tournaments for fighting games where the gamers SWEAR they can see the difference between 1ms and 2ms and that 2ms is 'unacceptable' and that 'we miss frames' and use it as an excuse as to why they got beat).  

Make sure the response time is in Black-to-Black, not Grey-to-Grey.  Anything below ~5ms BtoB will be not-noticable to the human eye unless you're a mutant of some kind.  (And a general rule of thumb is that the BtoB is double the GtoG)

I have an older ASUS 22" that is 4ms BtoB and is amazing.  I only paid 149 for it new.  

The current model that is closest is the VE247H - that's the one we deploy to the fighting game stations that the FGC guys.  Low latency, sharp picture.

#7 Frigidman™

Frigidman™

    Eye Sea Yew

  • Admin
  • 4265 posts
  • Steam ID:frigidman
  • Location:East mahn, East!
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 05 May 2014 - 02:46 PM

Well, we can cancel this topic. I went and pulled the trigger on a 24" (23.5") ASUS 4ms (btb) and can do 75hz. It was super highly reviewed and rated and was on sale and a $20 rebate card (which I usually throw at Steam Wallet lol).

And yeah, 5ms+ is nasty. My current viewsonic is 5-6ms btb, and if I drag windows with text in them, I cant read the text for popsnizzle.

I also consider dot pitch, which is why I cannot stand monitors bigger than 24" (even that is too big to me).

This will be interesting. I've been using this 17" Viewsonic LCD for about 7 years I think (?)... I'm sure the new huge monitor is going to make me feel sick for a couple months. Maybe I shoulda added dramamine to the order.

Oh, and since I saved $110 over the VG ... I threw in a new logitech g710+ since my old old glass G4 Mac keyboard is just pissen off for the past year with sticky keys, ghosting, and overall age.

-Fm [1oM7]
"I'm not incorruptible, I am so corrupt nothing you can offer me is tempting." - Alfred Bester


#8 Frost

Frost

    Secretary of Offense

  • Forum Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6075 posts
  • Steam ID:CaptFrost
  • Location:Republic of Texas
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 05 May 2014 - 10:21 PM

Just a side note regarding tearing. I've had issues with a handful of older games tearing like crazy on my CRT (I run at 1920x1200@96Hz), and the built-in Vsync did help, but not much. Gears of War PC was the worst culprit; the game was literally a non-stop screen tear, and the built-in Vsync just made it go from terrible to bad. I finally decided to play with the nVidia control panel and force Vsync from that while leaving the in-game Vsync off... fixed it perfectly, as well as fixing other games that had the same issue. Seems like using Vsync from the GPU makers' control panels  is way the hell more effective when working with oddball refresh rates.

View PostTetsuya, on 05 May 2014 - 01:33 PM, said:

What you need to be looking at is the actual specs - i deal with "gamers" all the time and they are full of BS.  (We set up tournaments for fighting games where the gamers SWEAR they can see the difference between 1ms and 2ms and that 2ms is 'unacceptable' and that 'we miss frames' and use it as an excuse as to why they got beat).  
You can't see the difference between 1ms response time and 2ms response time, but you certainly can feel the difference between a monitor that has a 1ms response time and 7ms of input lag versus 2ms response time and 40ms of input lag. Response time = whatever. It's input lag that's the problem.

Case in point, I was staying with my fellow gamer cousins this weekend and we were playing Wayne Gretzky's 3D Hockey 98 on the N64 (that game is completely arcadey and completely awesome) for a few hours on their LG plasma which has around 60ms of input lag in their family room like always. We were trying to win a game on Very Hard but it just wasn't happening. We decided to move the game to the other room where they've got one of the new Sony 65-inchers that has about 6 ms of input lag on game mode, and the players became so much more responsive that our first game we WRECKED the other team.

I can vouch for that plenty myself, too. Back in the old days, my game always suffered very noticeably playing Halo PC/Mac and Unreal Tournament online on the old Apple LCDs versus a CRT. Same with playing Titanfall on a friend's three year-old ASUS LCD (1ms GTG but the input lag is not good) versus my Sony FW9011 CRT monitor (instant) or W900A LCD TV (higher response time than the ASUS, but significantly lower input lag).

As I've said in other monitor topics, response time doesn't really matter too much as long as it's not high; it's the input lag you've gotta look for (and unfortunately TV and monitor makers don't publish those numbers even though they test for them themselves so they can sync up any internal speakers with the image, so you have to Google for independent testing).
Kestrel (Falcon NW Tiki) – 4.0 GHz i7 4790K / 16GB RAM / 512GB Samsung 950 Pro M.2, 2x480GB Intel 730 (RAID0), 10TB STX BarraCuda Pro / GeForce GTX TITAN X 12GB
Iridium (MacBook Pro Mid-2012) – 2.7 GHz i7 3820QM / 16GB RAM / 2TB Samsung 850 Pro / GeForce GT 650M 1GB

Eric5h5:
When there's a multiplayer version, I'm going to be on Frost's team. Well, except he doesn't seem to actually need a team...I mean, what's the point? "Hey look, it's Frost and His Merry Gang of Useless Hangers-On!" Or something.

#9 Frigidman™

Frigidman™

    Eye Sea Yew

  • Admin
  • 4265 posts
  • Steam ID:frigidman
  • Location:East mahn, East!
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 06 May 2014 - 08:24 AM

View PostFrost, on 05 May 2014 - 10:21 PM, said:

As I've said in other monitor topics, response time doesn't really matter too much as long as it's not high; it's the input lag you've gotta look for (and unfortunately TV and monitor makers don't publish those numbers even though they test for them themselves so they can sync up any internal speakers with the image, so you have to Google for independent testing).

Right. Which is why I read about 300 of the 2500 user reviews before I got a good enough feeling that the monitor I was choosing was fairly decent for gaming. So many great things people said, and really the only negatives were edge case things like they got a bum monitor that had a screen defect, or they complain about the internal speakers not sounding like a THX Surround Sound Theater (heh).

I have no idea what the input lag is on my old viewsonic lcd. Never noticed any real issue with it other than A) that odd dark level reversal issue, and B) the visual smearing of text due to a fairly high btb speed.

Now, it has some OSD options to turn on digital vibrance, and HDR, and this, and that... but everytime I used them, they made the image look horrible. So I turned them all off. I hear that all those glitzy features create input lag since the monitor is pre-processing the image on the fly which will always add some sort of delay no matter how powerful the chips inside.

-Fm [1oM7]
"I'm not incorruptible, I am so corrupt nothing you can offer me is tempting." - Alfred Bester


#10 Frigidman™

Frigidman™

    Eye Sea Yew

  • Admin
  • 4265 posts
  • Steam ID:frigidman
  • Location:East mahn, East!
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 07 May 2014 - 11:55 AM

Well I got the new monitor and I was lied (or misled) by their specs.

It claims to go to 75hz... but there is absolutely no way to get 75hz at 1080p. It seems I have to drop down to 720p to get 75hz. What the frack is that kind of bullpopsnizzle.

On top of it, this monitor has two dead pixels (they are black though, not bright green). AND trying to read text on it is straining. Its like it tries to be smart with the image and apply some sort of sharpening. It just doesnt display pixels as they are given from the OS where they should go. Instead its like its some TV signal or some crap. Bleah, this monitor is turning out to be crap. The only thing it does better than my 8 year old LCD, is that 0,0,0 black signal actually shows up darker than 1,1,1.

Bought it from amazon, so I think I'm going to return it. Still fussing with the OSD settings to see if I can get it to be visually non-ass. (sRGB setting it makes everything purple! WTF?).

-Fm [1oM7]
"I'm not incorruptible, I am so corrupt nothing you can offer me is tempting." - Alfred Bester


#11 Tetsuya

Tetsuya

    Master Blaster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2172 posts
  • Location:MI

Posted 07 May 2014 - 01:07 PM

To be somewhat fair, from your earlier posts it seems clear that your eyes have a lot of trouble adjusting to things most other people's don't, which is probably why it reviews well for the average user.  I've -never-, for instance, had a problem reading text on all but the crappiest (sub 50$) LCD monitors... and my eyesight is terrible.  

Try the VE247H if you've a mind - it's the one that we use for "tournament" gamers - it's also the official monitor of EVO (the big 10,000+ person fighting game championships that take place in Vegas every year), because (supposedly) it is the best one out there for gaming.  The ones we have are (to me, at least) also crystal clear for text and look great.

#12 Frigidman™

Frigidman™

    Eye Sea Yew

  • Admin
  • 4265 posts
  • Steam ID:frigidman
  • Location:East mahn, East!
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 07 May 2014 - 02:09 PM

Whats odd is the "specs" are the same between the VE and VS. Go figure.

I know my eyes can be a bit more touchy, its the artist in me... I can see pixels! Even retina is blurry ;) It helps if I sit back, this new monitor is so darn big I need to rearrange the desk to be able to move it further from me.

After 2 hours of fussing with the OSD, I managed to get colors and brightness to a level that doesn't make me feel like I am being baked. Although I knew this by all the reviews complaining how bright it is stock. When I run this monitor with my old viewsonic side by side, I can see the difference in color/bright. The viewsonic is clearly more visually clean (not rich, because rich is just burning the saturation up making colors unrealistic). I don't get too fussy with pantone calibration and all that nonsense, I try to adjust things so my eyes feel 'comfy' looking at it, and I can discern all colors of the rainbow from each other.

I've some people's monitors where they set "Saturation" to 100% because they think it was more vibrant and lifelike. Maybe if you are on LSD?

:)

Right now I'm trying to see if the dead/stuck pixels are stuck or dead. Doing the various home remedies that dont void warranty. If they remain black, thats better than bright. Since most games its harder to notice a small black dot, vs a bright light dot.

I am though very bummed about the hz thing. I was really looking forward to at least running games in a higher native res/fps with the 75hz ability. Only to find out they were pretty much doing misleading advertising. Rubs me the wrong way.

PS: the VE has the ugliest ass monitor casing I've ever seen since the Twentieth Anniversary Macintosh ;-)

-Fm [1oM7]
"I'm not incorruptible, I am so corrupt nothing you can offer me is tempting." - Alfred Bester


#13 Frigidman™

Frigidman™

    Eye Sea Yew

  • Admin
  • 4265 posts
  • Steam ID:frigidman
  • Location:East mahn, East!
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 07 May 2014 - 03:37 PM

Cant get the pixels fixed with any method I've tried.

I did manage to get the colors subdued enough so I'm not baking from the rays lol. I'll have to get used to its vibrant greens though. All other colors are nice and rich without looking neon.

-Fm [1oM7]
"I'm not incorruptible, I am so corrupt nothing you can offer me is tempting." - Alfred Bester


#14 Tetsuya

Tetsuya

    Master Blaster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2172 posts
  • Location:MI

Posted 07 May 2014 - 07:33 PM

for me, i'd ship it back because of the dead pixels if nothing else.  

I cant stand that.  Even one sticks out to me like a sore thumb.

#15 Frigidman™

Frigidman™

    Eye Sea Yew

  • Admin
  • 4265 posts
  • Steam ID:frigidman
  • Location:East mahn, East!
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 07 May 2014 - 09:11 PM

They are dark and faint, almost impossible to see in games since most games are dark or colored mid-range to low than most. The two are on the lowr half of the screen fairly center. They almost look like dust on the monitor when something bright floats down that way. Oddly REAL dust on the monitor makes a much darker 'spot' than the two dead pixels. However, while on desktop and in windows, I see them and catch myself swiping at the monitor with a cloth forgetting they are not dust.

Thing is, if I return it, I don't know what to get instead. That "VN" series is no better/worse. It just comes with speakers in a case that is a throwback from the 70s. Which leaves me with just hitting up another brand. I did look at Dell's, but they all seem to be riding their name now more than making anything of quality.

I did love my Viewsonic (except for that odd calibration bug, which hindsight I should had exchanged that sucker 7 years ago lol).

I have managed to get the ASUS calibrated down. Its amazing that I have to set the brightness at "16" out of 100, and saturation to "25". The thing is honestly like a halogen work lamp at stock settings!

-Fm [1oM7]
"I'm not incorruptible, I am so corrupt nothing you can offer me is tempting." - Alfred Bester


#16 Frost

Frost

    Secretary of Offense

  • Forum Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6075 posts
  • Steam ID:CaptFrost
  • Location:Republic of Texas
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 08 May 2014 - 12:34 AM

PG278Q. :D
Kestrel (Falcon NW Tiki) – 4.0 GHz i7 4790K / 16GB RAM / 512GB Samsung 950 Pro M.2, 2x480GB Intel 730 (RAID0), 10TB STX BarraCuda Pro / GeForce GTX TITAN X 12GB
Iridium (MacBook Pro Mid-2012) – 2.7 GHz i7 3820QM / 16GB RAM / 2TB Samsung 850 Pro / GeForce GT 650M 1GB

Eric5h5:
When there's a multiplayer version, I'm going to be on Frost's team. Well, except he doesn't seem to actually need a team...I mean, what's the point? "Hey look, it's Frost and His Merry Gang of Useless Hangers-On!" Or something.

#17 Frigidman™

Frigidman™

    Eye Sea Yew

  • Admin
  • 4265 posts
  • Steam ID:frigidman
  • Location:East mahn, East!
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 08 May 2014 - 07:55 AM

View PostFrost, on 08 May 2014 - 12:34 AM, said:

PG278Q. :D

...

Maybe when the price drops on that ;)

-Fm [1oM7]
"I'm not incorruptible, I am so corrupt nothing you can offer me is tempting." - Alfred Bester


#18 Tetsuya

Tetsuya

    Master Blaster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2172 posts
  • Location:MI

Posted 08 May 2014 - 09:40 AM

I wasn't necessarily suggesting you get something else - merely that you get one without dead pixels.

#19 Frigidman™

Frigidman™

    Eye Sea Yew

  • Admin
  • 4265 posts
  • Steam ID:frigidman
  • Location:East mahn, East!
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 08 May 2014 - 11:46 AM

Oh. Right.

Seems like a gamble, but if Amazon doesn't care I'm exchanging for the same thing and its not costly... then maybe. I'll give it a week just in case the pixels flip on their own (doubtful).

I WILL be returning that new keyboard I added to the order though. Thats a whole nother topic so I wont derail ;-)

-Fm [1oM7]
"I'm not incorruptible, I am so corrupt nothing you can offer me is tempting." - Alfred Bester


#20 Tetsuya

Tetsuya

    Master Blaster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2172 posts
  • Location:MI

Posted 08 May 2014 - 01:19 PM

Looks like EVO has moved on to the VX238H as the official monitor of choice as of this year.  My boss just ordered a dozen of them.  (We're replacing some old 26" Vizio TV's we had with these instead).  

Personally, i like the bulkier platform (the VN series) - my ASUS is sorta bulky but it is also rock steady.  Bumping the desk doesn't even move it.  The VX238H's are really skinny and unstable, IMO.  I mean, at home that's probably not a concern for most people, but since we have them deployed in a room with 500+ people in it... i worry about these things.