Nvidia’s new G-Sync monitors let you switch between 1440p and 1080p

chameleoneel said:
Another thing to consider with these high refresh monitors-----is if the response times of the panel can even give you the marketed experience.

For 60fps, each frame is about 16ms. So, to get a true 60fps experience, the panel needs to refresh at least about that quickly. Nowadays, its not difficult to find IPS panels which can refresh at least 17ms, across all of their transitions. So, a full 60fps experience without smearing, should be attainable. (However, there are still some VA panels with extra long dark transitions in the 20's, leading to smearing).

For 120hz, you would cut the response time in half. So, around 8-9ms. to get most of the refresh transitions to fit into 120fps. I think Hardware Unboxed is usually happy when a monitor delivers at least about 85% of its frames within the refresh window (typcially, when all of the transitions are measured across all of the colors, you get a spread of response times). Already, you would need a pretty great panel for 8ms in most transitions. An IPS which can do 10 or 11ms on most of its transitions, would feel pretty good here for 120hz. There are a fair amount of IPS monitors with 144hz/160hz/ and even 240hz, which don't actually achieve better response times than that. and therefore, don't really deliver a true experience at their full refresh rate.

For 240hz, you would need one of the very best IPS panels, to get around 4ms in most transitions, to be able to get most frames truly refreshed in time with 240hz. There aren't many panels which can actually do it.

for 360hz, you would need a nice TN panel. I don't think there are any IPS panels yet, which can really deliver that. (Theoretically, OLED should be great for 360hz. As they usually don't go higher than about 3ms on their longest transitions. and are fractions of milliseconds for many of their transitions).

So the point being--------the 240hz monitor which you used, may not have actually been fully capable of delivering most response transitions fast enough, to get most/all of the benefit of 240hz. And that would be a large factor in why it didn't look much better than 120hz. The panel may not have been fully capable of it.

All that said, there are also some diminishing returns, even with a fully capable panel. It could be that you have a fully capable panel and just don't feel the perceived benefit is worth it. Which is fine! I just wanted to clear this up.
Click to expand...
Would you know or have a list of which 240hz panels fast enough?
 
I actually liked Perfect Dark on the Xbox360 but it was objectively a bad game.
 
cybereality said:
I actually liked Perfect Dark on the Xbox360 but it was objectively a bad game.
Click to expand...
Perfect Dark is a classic and the remaster on Xbox is even better. Perfect Dark Zero, I can't even remember why I didn't like that game.
 
A bit more interested in seeing more about the non-Asus models. While limited to 300Hz compared to the Asus model, they are all supposed to be miniLED backlit. Depending on pricing and how well the backlighting works in real world scenarios, it peaks my interest to keep an eye on things. As long as the “esports” doesn’t much any or much onto the price of the current 240ish 1440p monitors prices.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top