1ms vs 2ms vs 5ms Asus Monitor

[xbox360svr7]

Hi, I'm buying a monitor for my computer and want to know which monitor would be the best one to buy. I'll be using it mostly for gaming. These are the three monitors I'm looking at:

Asus 1ms: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824236358&cm_re=vx228h-_-24-236-358-_-Product

Asus 2ms: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824236117&cm_re=vh238h-_-24-236-117-_-Product

Asus 5ms: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824236176&cm_re=vs228h-p-_-24-236-176-_-Product

 

[Darkbreeze]

I wouldn't go with any of those models. I'd look at this. Much better reviews, much higher quality than any of those particular ASUS monitors. ASUS has some good monitors, but none of those are them.


PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

Monitor: BenQ GL2460HM 60Hz 24.0" Monitor ($139.00 @ Amazon)
Total: $139.00
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2016-04-02 17:57 EDT-0400

 

[Suzuki@1473780084@1473780163]

I disagree.

Never ever buy TN at that pricepoint. You can get a close to 100% sRGB IPS and VA monitor at that price, at the same refresh rate. The advertised response times actually don't mean anything to anyone, it's purely ment to market their products. There's no standard when measuring.

The pixel persistance is next to equal across all 3 panel types at 60 Hz. That's exactly why a higher refresh rate was required, 75 Hz, 120 Hz, 144 Hz (down to 6,9 ms refreshes).

However, not even that was enough. They needed something even better, so they invented Lightboost, BFI, ULMB. So, what remains are the people misleading people, not to mention that the majority of consumers think that response times are related to input lag.

As far as input lag is concerned, majority of modern monitors are close to 10 ms, which is really non existent. I've seen "MLG" monitors that are absolute garbage, yet look at the reviews, the monitor market is a joke...


IPS: http://www.amazon.com/HP-Pavilion-23xw-Backlit-Monitor/dp/B00TQQN2GI

VA: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B013GERDME/?tag=pcpapi-20


IPS: Excellent viewing angles (some models are horrible), low contrast, high defect ratio due to manufacturers cutting corners to lower cost, easily the most popular choice for anything related to color editing.

VA: Decent viewing angles (some models are horrible), high contrast, low defect ratio, not that popular due to a lot of misinformation floating around. I've seen many articles who have no clue what they're even saying. It's sad to see, but VA also isn't prioritised when it comes to "gaming" features as well, such as GSync, FreeSync, but that's a different matter.

My opinion based on experience.





All the best!

 

[xbox360svr7]

I wouldn't go with any of those models. I'd look at this. Much better reviews, much higher quality than any of those particular ASUS monitors. ASUS has some good monitors, but none of those are them.


PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

Monitor: BenQ GL2460HM 60Hz 24.0" Monitor ($139.00 @ Amazon)
Total: $139.00
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2016-04-02 17:57 EDT-0400

Ok, thanks. I didn't know these monitors are not good quality, I'll probably buy the one you suggested.

 

[Darkbreeze]

I disagree.

Never ever buy TN at that pricepoint. You can get a close to 100% sRGB IPS and VA monitor at that price, at the same refresh rate. The advertised response times actually don't mean anything to anyone, it's purely ment to market their products. There's no standard when measuring.

The pixel persistance is next to equal across all 3 panel types at 60 Hz. That's exactly why a higher refresh rate was required, 75 Hz, 120 Hz, 144 Hz (down to 6,9 ms refreshes).

However, not even that was enough. They needed something even better, so they invented Lightboost, BFI, ULMB. So, what remains are the people misleading people, not to mention that the majority of consumers think that response times are related to input lag.

As far as input lag is concerned, majority of modern monitors are close to 10 ms, which is really non existent. I've seen "MLG" monitors that are absolute garbage, yet look at the reviews, the monitor market is a joke...


IPS: http://www.amazon.com/HP-Pavilion-23xw-Backlit-Monitor/dp/B00TQQN2GI

VA: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B013GERDME/?tag=pcpapi-20


IPS: Excellent viewing angles (some models are horrible), low contrast, high defect ratio due to manufacturers cutting corners to lower cost, easily the most popular choice for anything related to color editing.

VA: Decent viewing angles (some models are horrible), high contrast, low defect ratio, not that popular due to a lot of misinformation floating around. I've seen many articles who have no clue what they're even saying. It's sad to see, but VA also isn't prioritised when it comes to "gaming" features as well, such as GSync, FreeSync, but that's a different matter.

My opinion based on experience.





All the best!

None of which has anything to do with those three ASUS models, which are mostly poor quality. If you know of a high quality IPS panel at 24" that doesn't have back bleed problems and has a low enough response time to be of use for gaming at 138.00 or less, I'd like to know the model.

 

[Suzuki@1473780084@1473780163]

He did link an online site, and you linked Amazon, so I thought it made sense. Definitely not restricted to just those 3 monitors.

Are you saying IPS and VA aren't suited for gaming? You too have been mislead then.

 

[Darkbreeze]

I said nothing at ALL regarding IPS being suitable or not suitable for gaming. Not sure where you got that idea. What I said was, those three monitors were not good investments. The BenQ is better than any of those three, including the IPS model.

Plus, I was serious about knowing the model, if you know of one. I haven't looked at IPS panels for a while and maybe there is a good model out there for less than 150.00. Mostly, I haven't seen one under that price that was worth the money. At less than 150.00, most IPS panels either have terrible bleeding problems, are B grade glass with dead pixel issues or are just generally low quality units.

 

[Suzuki@1473780084@1473780163]

HP don't make displays so who knows how many monitors use the same panel. I wasn't meaning to offend you in any way, so hopefully it didn't come out that way.

the only difference going up in price from the IPS monitor I listed above, are features and paying premium for the brand itself. The older Xi which it's based on is also an excellent monitor. I think you hit diminishing returns after 150 if you only want the basic features and good panel. The defects are very hard to ignore though.

This is why I keep telling people to reconsider their IPS choice for a VA instead, because majority of the information is just spread over and over again, but it's so outdated. The color accuracy is equal, but the contrast is so much higher. Here's an example of a VA monitor's viewing angles 2 years ago that I looked up in a review: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JGrYVy1z1UI

Remember on older screens where everything turned blue? No longer the case. On TV's though, that still holds true. But the distance from TV to couch is bigger so they don't have to be that precise either.

That's not bad, but it's enough for people to choose IPS glow, and in my opinion lower quality panels due to the bigger market, probably a supply/demand issue-- over a higher contrast, which any display expert knows for a fact that a higher contrast means sharper image. So that never really made any sense to me. Based on what I've seen, VA monitors don't have the same obvious defects TN and IPS does.

I think that the monitor market is upside down. If someone mentions IPS, they translate it to perfect viewing angles, perfect colors. But so many people complain about IPS defects, and because it's basically a lottery when buying a monitor. That's why I recommend a VA and IPS, I think that's fair. Does the consumer need extreme viewing angles, to the point no human being would ever view the monitor from that angle, or do you want less defects and higher contrast?

That's my reasoning recommending the monitors above. I wish I could just give you a list of all the best monitors, but I don't remember all that I've used. I do think that there's no value spending more money than that on an IPS though. If you need pivot/height adjustment, GSync/FreeSync, higher resolution, higher refresh rate, then yeah it makes sense to spend more money.


I always recommend a VA monitor though, the EW2440L or the GW2470H are my go to monitors. I don't know of any other better value monitors out there. And unless I look at all of them, I won't find out either, so reviews help a lot.

 

[Darkbreeze]

My experience with VA panels is that ghosting is terribly obvious. Great for other stuff, not so great for gaming due to this fact based on much higher pixel response.

That IPS panel and the VA panel look like very good monitors but for a gaming only machine, I think I'd choose TN in most cases unless I could budget a much higher end IPS or VA panel with good response and minimal ghosting. I haven't used either of those models, but the reviews seem to indicate that those issues are present.