IPS or TN 4k?

[aaronb1874]

Im very torn between these two monitors. Both are 4k, both seem amazing for the price, but I just dont know which one would be better for gaming. Some are saying IPS is better because its prettier but others say it doesnt look any different than TN. Anyways, heres the two

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824236399

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824025374


Dont worry about the price. Im just curious if the panel type really even matters at 4k, and if I should be worried about it.

 

[TMTOWTSAC]

TN panels have faster response times so twitch gamers are devoted to them. The two you're looking at claim a 1ms for the TN, and 5ms for the IPS. But...if you're a competitive first person shooter gamer, you're probably more concerned with getting 300fps and wouldn't touch 4k anyway.

IPS have (generally) better color reproduction, wider viewing angles, and better off-angle viewing. That last really matters if more than one person will be watching it at the same time. People at different angles to a TN don't see exactly the same picture, color and brightness varies a lot with angle.

 

[dexxterlab97]

If going for TN at least it should have a high refresh rate for fast paced games like COD, CS GO and BF. Since both have 60hz going for IPS is a good choice. LG also has FreeSync (if you have an AMD)

 

[JWoody]

IPS, hands down.

 

[aaronb1874]

TN panels have faster response times so twitch gamers are devoted to them. The two you're looking at claim a 1ms for the TN, and 5ms for the IPS. But...if you're a competitive first person shooter gamer, you're probably more concerned with getting 300fps and wouldn't touch 4k anyway.

IPS have (generally) better color reproduction, wider viewing angles, and better off-angle viewing. That last really matters if more than one person will be watching it at the same time. People at different angles to a TN don't see exactly the same picture, color and brightness varies a lot with angle.

Does 5ms compared to 1 make all that much of a difference in slower games, such as Battlefield, Doom, Project Cars, etc? Is it even noticeable?
Im so weary of all of these issues because Ive run a 3 ms 1080 TN forever and I wanna get the absolute best I can for this upgrade

 

[aaronb1874]

And how about that contrast ratio? Ive read alot that its just a marketing scheme. Would it really matter to me if Im playing the games I listed? Or would it be more important to lets say someone using photoshop

 

[dexxterlab97]

5 and 1ms won't make a difference. At least it won't be noticeable at all
For contrast ratio
http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/id-2342450/contrast-ratio-matter-gaming-monitor.html

 

[TMTOWTSAC]

Most people won't notice much if any difference. 4 ms = 1/250th of a second. At 60fps and 60hz, one frame is about 17ms. If you were getting 250fps in a game on a 250hz monitor, it would be the equivalent of lagging a single frame. Pro gamers who make their living in milliseconds sure, though it's more a matter of feel than precise measurements. And they'd never run a 4k rig anyway since even dual Titans won't push 300fps at that res.

The marketing fluff over contrast is between dynamic and static. Both measure the difference in brightness between the brightest and darkest color the panel can display. However, a monitor can't be at both its brightest and darkest at different points of the screen at the same time. The backlight has to turn all the way up or down to achieve the extremes. Static contrast measures the maximum difference between two pixels that can be displayed at the same time. Dynamic measures the difference between two pixels displayed at different times.

So dynamic ranges stretch all the way into the millions because they can compare say, two pictures taken at different times. Static barely reaches into the thousands but you'll notice it far more. Ie, anytime you're looking at the screen it's displaying its static range. You only see the dynamic range when the image on screen changes, like trying to compare two pictures from a slideshow by flipping back and forth between them, and never seeing them at the same time.

For games, a really crappy contrast ratio makes everything either too dark or too light. That shouldn't be a problem with either of these, or most modern panels for that matter. Graphics pros would care more about color accuracy than contrast. Personally, I went from a a TN panel to PLS (plane-line switching, practically the same as in-plane switching) and haven't looked back.

 

[aaronb1874]

Most people won't notice much if any difference. 4 ms = 1/250th of a second. At 60fps and 60hz, one frame is about 17ms. If you were getting 250fps in a game on a 250hz monitor, it would be the equivalent of lagging a single frame. Pro gamers who make their living in milliseconds sure, though it's more a matter of feel than precise measurements. And they'd never run a 4k rig anyway since even dual Titans won't push 300fps at that res.

The marketing fluff over contrast is between dynamic and static. Both measure the difference in brightness between the brightest and darkest color the panel can display. However, a monitor can't be at both its brightest and darkest at different points of the screen at the same time. The backlight has to turn all the way up or down to achieve the extremes. Static contrast measures the maximum difference between two pixels that can be displayed at the same time. Dynamic measures the difference between two pixels displayed at different times.

So dynamic ranges stretch all the way into the millions because they can compare say, two pictures taken at different times. Static barely reaches into the thousands but you'll notice it far more. Ie, anytime you're looking at the screen it's displaying its static range. You only see the dynamic range when the image on screen changes, like trying to compare two pictures from a slideshow by flipping back and forth between them, and never seeing them at the same time.

For games, a really crappy contrast ratio makes everything either too dark or too light. That shouldn't be a problem with either of these, or most modern panels for that matter. Graphics pros would care more about color accuracy than contrast. Personally, I went from a a TN panel to PLS (plane-line switching, practically the same as in-plane switching) and haven't looked back.

Sweet, thank you, Ill definitely be looking into that LG then. I've been thinking about switching over from my triple monitor setup to one 4k and the two 1080p on each side (just as side productivity sake).