Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

24" gaming monitor

Last response: in Computer Peripherals
Share
February 22, 2012 7:27:08 PM

Hello, I have been looking for a 24" monitor for my futurer gaming pc.
I was looking at the ASUS VE248H because of the low ms and the 76hz instead of 60hz.
Is this monitor a good one for me, or is there a better choice? I don't need 3D.

Thanks in advance.

More about : gaming monitor

a b 4 Gaming
a b C Monitor
February 22, 2012 11:07:05 PM

I would not waste my $ on 76Hz. If it was 120Hz, that would be a different story, but since it isn't, get a 60Hz ASUS Monitor. What is your budget?
February 23, 2012 7:07:34 PM

Hmm. Haven't really got budget. But I want a screen with a good picture quality. Got any recommendations? Low ms is needed.
Related resources
a b 4 Gaming
a b C Monitor
February 23, 2012 7:53:30 PM

If you want picture quality, you will inevitably have to get an IPS Panel Monitor, which have high response times (6-8ms usually). Response time is usually exaggerated, as you can see here: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/acer-s231hl-bid-del...

Also, a post from a fellow TH member: Most people will not be able to see the difference between 2ms and 5ms response times. Response times are not an exact science, it's more of a marketing ploy. Basically the manufacturer tests the panels by displaying colors on the screen, the short amount of time recorded to change from one color to another is the response time.

In the past response times were measured in BWB which is going from black to white and then back to black again. Fairly simple and straight forward, but it have high response time results. As a marketing ploy response times switched to GTG or grey to grey. GTG measures the smallest amount of time it takes the pixels to change from one shade of grey to another. As a result you can report lower response times. So... if company ABC makes single monitor and then markets it as two different monitors like... Model A (20ms BWB Response Time) and Model B (2ms GTG Response Time), guess which one would be flying off the shelves.

Okay, so the lowest recorded times are used to advertise response times. So what about the other recorded times? They are thrown out the window. It is quite possible there could be the following situation:

Monitor ABC: Lowest time recorded = 2ms, highest time recorded 300ms
Monitor XYZ: Lowest time recorded = 5ms, highest time recorded 250ms

Monitor ABC seems to be faster because of the 2ms response time measured. But it also peaked at 300ms which is a lot worse than Monitor XYZ. Since those high numbers are tossed out with the trash consumers don't know any better.
February 23, 2012 9:24:54 PM

azeem40 said:
If you want picture quality, you will inevitably have to get an IPS Panel Monitor, which have high response times (6-8ms usually). Response time is usually exaggerated, as you can see here: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/acer-s231hl-bid-del...

Also, a post from a fellow TH member: Most people will not be able to see the difference between 2ms and 5ms response times. Response times are not an exact science, it's more of a marketing ploy. Basically the manufacturer tests the panels by displaying colors on the screen, the short amount of time recorded to change from one color to another is the response time.

In the past response times were measured in BWB which is going from black to white and then back to black again. Fairly simple and straight forward, but it have high response time results. As a marketing ploy response times switched to GTG or grey to grey. GTG measures the smallest amount of time it takes the pixels to change from one shade of grey to another. As a result you can report lower response times. So... if company ABC makes single monitor and then markets it as two different monitors like... Model A (20ms BWB Response Time) and Model B (2ms GTG Response Time), guess which one would be flying off the shelves.

Okay, so the lowest recorded times are used to advertise response times. So what about the other recorded times? They are thrown out the window. It is quite possible there could be the following situation:

Monitor ABC: Lowest time recorded = 2ms, highest time recorded 300ms
Monitor XYZ: Lowest time recorded = 5ms, highest time recorded 250ms

Monitor ABC seems to be faster because of the 2ms response time measured. But it also peaked at 300ms which is a lot worse than Monitor XYZ. Since those high numbers are tossed out with the trash consumers don't know any better.

I want good light and colors, but also a screen that is capable of showing high performance graphics in a decent way.
a b 4 Gaming
a b C Monitor
February 23, 2012 10:05:26 PM

Any IPS Panel will do just that, but you will have to choose between response time, and light and colors.
!