Cant tell the refresh rate

S

SealingDrake

Registered User
Joined
May 15, 2013
Messages
51
So im looking to get a 120hz monitor under 200$ i was on amazon because newegg has ones way to expensive, so i was looking at this benQ on amazon and i cant tell of its 75 or 120hz. Can anyone give me a little insight? image.jpg
 
But at 24" and 1920x1080 with 60hz, it should still look waay better than my 1600x900 59hz monitor? I need a new one lol
 
SealingDrake said:
But at 24" and 1920x1080 with 60hz, it should still look waay better than my 1600x900 59hz monitor? I need a new one lol
Click to expand...

If your not getting near 120 fps out of your graphics card I argue nothing wrong with a GOOD 60hz display. I wanted to go 27 inch when I built my last rig but I ended up grabbing a 24 inch and no regrets there for sure.
 
No i have a 660 2gb around 50 to around 85 MAX in bf3 so im thinking real hard on this monitor but really wanted your opinions on whether its a good choice. I mean i know benQ are nice and a higher quality monitor, but i figured at true hd 1920x1080 it would look good enough to not want a 120hz+
 
Well remember your framerate is going to drop with the higher resolution. 1600x900 is not the worst thing in the world, it would be my minimum for a laptop this day in age.
 
Well its more because my current monitor is getting on in age some dead pixels here and there as well as lines going from side to side going from the top to bottom, its an old emachines monitor, so i figured next pay period id finally buy myself a nice monitor
 
Well I can't speak for the BenQ personally but if 60hz is your budget it sounds like its time to just pull the trigger. No fun in playing on a low res fucked up monitor. I paid 200 for my 24 inch led backlit Samsung at a retail store 2 years ago and no real regrets about it. So the price on that looks kinda nice.

Might want to read this review on it (linking page 4) - BenQ RL2455HM Professional Gaming Monitor Review | Display Lag
 
Thanks for that link, it really helped show some key points to this monitor, i was orginally just gonna go to walmart for a cheap hp but i think this will help out gaming as well as be overall nicer, id rather a 120hz+ but im not ok dropping 250$ on one, thats a bit steep. So i am 95% sure imma buy this i wanted to dial screen an old acer monitor thats like a 12". But im afraid this will be too big! :) sacrifices lol thanks rain for helping lookinging into it :)
 
SealingDrake said:
Damn sixer thats a nice find! But that 5ms is killing me lol
Click to expand...

Well if you pay attention to the BenQ review they call bullshit on the 1ms rating. Only under certain conditions with certain setting is the BenQ 1 ms Gray to Gray. The total lag from input to display to next frame is probably way worse on your current monitor than the Acer will be.

Remember that at 120 frames per second your only getting a frame every 8 millseconds. So while it might take 5 milliseconds for the display to change from one from to another there is an 8 millisecond wait before the next frame is even rendered by the graphics card. Even worse at 60 milliseconds it takes 16.5 millseconds before each frame becomes rendered and available to display. Mind you those are average figures they are worse or better on each frame.

If you figure the total time from when a players position is recieved from the server to the time it lands on your screen you have a HORRENDOUS figure. Its the reason why people idiotically say "I got one shotted" when they had 5 bullets hit them. There is no point in rendering hits after death has already been calculated. So the last shots fired occur around the time the first shots hit your screen, some shots are displayed and death is triggered as soon as detected. So users try everything obviously to reduce this lag. Lower latency internet, better graphics card, a monitor with less input lag, higher refresh rate and a better pixel response time. In the end you get to cut a few millseconds out of performance handicaps but I have a feeling on average the number is still very very high. Talking 1/4 second delay on a good day.
 
A little off topic now, but what Rain said before is so true. You will never notice a difference between 2ms and 5ms due to the time it takes a frame of video to be ready for display. Unless the manufacturer's specs are grossly wrong you'll never see the difference.

For the price of that Asus monitor-it actually has a $10.00 discount right now, that's a great buy. But, like everything it depends on your money situation versus your ultimate wants/needs.
 
Im sorry i forgot he posted that, was like 2am when i was in the conversation. But why is 1ms so hyped then i mean im prolly gonna get that acer now but everyone is saying 1ms is just better and while i believe it, it must just be such a small difference that it just doesnt matter!
 
SealingDrake said:
Im sorry i forgot he posted that, was like 2am when i was in the conversation. But why is 1ms so hyped then i mean im prolly gonna get that acer now but everyone is saying 1ms is just better and while i believe it, it must just be such a small difference that it just doesnt matter!
Click to expand...

Mostly it's just marketing hype. One of the first rules is to sell bigger better faster. How do they sell you a new car-this one is better, has more features like heated seats or self dimming mirrors, it's faster-has 20 more horsepower, etc.

It's long been established that the vast majority of display makers invent their own specs when it comes to monitors. It might say 1ms and be 7 or 8 in reality. I saw one a couple of years ago that said 2ms yet when tested was 16ms...not exactly truth in advertising.

There have also been calls for a consortium of some sort to standardize the specs but last I saw no such thing exists.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top