120hz vs 144hz monitors

(dommafia) #1

Has anyone upgraded from a 120hz monitor to 144hz and felt an improvement? I’m also wondering if the lightboost Trick works at 144hz.

(Dragonji) #2

I haven’t used any of those so all I can say is that I’ve read some Polish article comparing 120Hz to 144Hz and the authors wrote there is a noticeable difference between both monitors (some BENQes) but in their opinion 144Hz is not worth additional money so they suggest to just buy 120Hz in case money matters for you. They did not use lightboost, however.

(Ecano) #3

I have the same question to decide between ASUS VG248QE and BENQ XL2420TX.

(Ruben0s) #4

I got the asus VG248QE for about a week. I went from 60hz to 144hz. I can notice a giant difference between 60 and 144Hz but not between 120Hz and 144Hz.

Anyway lightboost doesn’t work at 144Hz, so I’m running at 120Hz most of the time.

That being said. The asus VG248QE has crap colors at 144Hz with out of the box settings. Seriously my eyes bleed at stock settings. I don’t know about other 144Hz monitors, but you will need icc profiles to fix the colors of the monitor, and icc profiles happen to be a problem with some games/programs.

At 60hz the asus VG248QE has good colors for a tn panel.

(Ecano) #5

I’ve already listen about VG248QE crap out of the box color settings, but didn’t know that lightboost doesn’t work at 144Hz. :frowning:

TN panels weakness are color and angles but are the best for gaming…

If there is not noticeable difference 120hz vs 144hz I would go for a BenQ, they have the same panel, almost the same price but BenQ is coming with more color presetting features and black equalizer.

What I don’t like in the new TFTs is the 1920x1080 trend. I play 4:3 therefore is a wasting of side areas and a vertical definition loss.

(.N.E.R.D.) #6

I got the benq, and I guess my pew pew is ok. I never really seen the difference of lightboost though, so I don’t use it.

(dommafia) #7

It is very noticeable to me using this test www.testufo.com/#test=photo and in games.

I will try playing with 144hz without lightboost vs 120hz with lightboost and see what feels better and report back.

(Ruben0s) #8

[QUOTE=dommafia;479961]It is very noticeable to me using this test www.testufo.com/#test=photo and in games.

I will try playing with 144hz without lightboost vs 120hz with lightboost and see what feels better and report back.[/QUOTE]

Yea I can clearly see the difference between strobelight@120hz vs 144hz. Strobelight is much clearer.

(.N.E.R.D.) #9

thx for the test, maybe I will give it another go

(Ecano) #10

Just tested my current TFT, an Eizo Flexcan S2410W vs a viewsonic CRT, thanks Dom for the test link.

TFT has been awesomely powned muahahaha. I must go for one of these 120 or 140hz ASAP.:stroggtapir:

(dommafia) #11

[QUOTE=Ecano;480045]Just tested my current TFT, an Eizo Flexcan S2410W vs a viewsonic CRT, thanks Dom for the test link.

TFT has been awesomely powned muahahaha. I must go for one of these 120 or 140hz ASAP.:stroggtapir:[/QUOTE]

Just doing God’s work.

(MoonOnAStick) #12

Any thoughts on Nvidia’s G-Sync? I could do with a new panel but I’m not really up to speed with monitor tech. I see they’re releasing a DIY kit for the Asus VG248QE (not a mod I’d be comfortable doing) otherwise it’s next year.

(dommafia) #13

While it looks awesome I don’t think I’m ready to invest in it this early on. I want to let others be the guinea pigs, so yeah you should totally go for it moon!

(Mustang) #14

John Carmack’s thought on this from his Quakecon 2013 keynote 59:12-1:00:37

Translation/Elaboration
Non-isochronous (G-Sync) fixes tearing, stuttering, vastly improves lag, doesn’t do anything for motion blur, but every single FPS increase will be an improved experience. Low persistence (LightBoost) fixes motion blur, but doesn’t do anything for tearing, stuttering and lag because isochronous screens are required and only works on specific FPS boundaries, fall short of these and it gets fugly.

The ultimate would be to get low persistence to work on non-isochronous (LightBoost+G-Sync), but nothing like this has been announced yet. Some have suggested this would cause annoying flicker at lower FPS’s, but a potential way to solve this would be dynamically scaling the low persistence duration, again nothing like this has been announced either.

It’s worth noting that nVidia have said something about a secondary mode on G-Sync that is low persistence, like LightBoost, but outperformances it. It can’t be true LightBoost+G-Sync otherwise they’d be marketing it much harder as it would be uber-awesome, so it’s probably some sort of adaptive low persistence g-sync, v-sync hydrid mess, I have no idea to be honest, just guessing, would love for more details on this.

Overall though it’s probably worth the upgrade because even if the no tearing, stuttering and improved lag doesn’t make up for the additional blur, just switch it into mode2 and you remove the blur again and have still got a solution better than vanilla LightBoost and it’s officially supported this time around.

(dommafia) #15

[QUOTE=Mustang;480711]John Carmack’s thought on this from his Quakecon 2013 keynote 59:12-1:00:37

Translation/Elaboration
Non-isochronous (G-Sync) fixes tearing, stuttering, vastly improves lag, doesn’t do anything for motion blur, but every single FPS increase will be an improved experience. Low persistence (LightBoost) fixes motion blur, but doesn’t do anything for tearing, stuttering and lag because isochronous screens are required and only works on specific FPS boundaries, fall short of these and it gets fugly.

The ultimate would be to get low persistence to work on non-isochronous (LightBoost+G-Sync), but nothing like this has been announced yet. Some have suggested this would cause annoying flicker at lower FPS’s, but a potential way to solve this would be dynamically scaling the low persistence duration, again nothing like this has been announced either.

It’s worth noting that nVidia have said something about a secondary mode on G-Sync that is low persistence, like LightBoost, but outperformances it. It can’t be true LightBoost+G-Sync otherwise they’d be marketing it much harder as it would be uber-awesome, so it’s probably some sort of adaptive low persistence g-sync, v-sync hydrid mess, I have no idea to be honest, just guessing, would love for more details on this.

Overall though it’s probably worth the upgrade because even if the no tearing, stuttering and improved lag doesn’t make up for the additional blur, just switch it into mode2 and you remove the blur again and have still got a solution better than vanilla LightBoost and it’s officially supported this time around.[/QUOTE]

Awesome info.

(INF3RN0) #16

All fluff! Learn to conquer the potato like real men!

(Mustang) #17

Or whip the CRT out of the loft.

(Ecano) #18

Good info Mustang.

Heads-up, new LightBoost-style strobe backligh in a VA-based LCD panel, Turbo-240.

EIZO announces Foris FG2421, a 240Hz VA gaming monitor

(Humate) #19

Recently upgraded from a 7 year old 60hz monitor to a 144hz. The potato looks… crispier :slight_smile: