ViewSonic XG2530 240Hz FreeSync Monitor Review

Viewing Angles, Uniformity, Response & Lag

Viewing Angles

Like any TN panel, the XG2530 doesn’t excel at off-axis image quality. The red color shift to the sides is easy to see, but there is an upside when comparing it to other TN panels. It manages to retain decent shadow detail. You can clearly see the difference between 0 and 10% steps in the photo. At the 25” size, it shouldn’t be an issue for users to find a comfortable position and avoid any problems. Just don’t sit above the screen; detail is nearly wiped out from vertical angles over 25°.

Screen Uniformity

To learn how we measure screen uniformity, please click here.

Monitors from just a few years ago had far less consistent uniformity than today’s panels. The XG2530 and its brethren show excellent quality except for our Alienware AW2518H sample, which had a few visible hotspots. And our XG2703-GS also showed a few issues. It’s still best not to assume a particular panel type will be better or worse in this test. TN can perform as well or better than VA and IPS.

Our color uniformity test was particularly impressive. .41dE is one of the lowest variations we’ve ever measured. It should also be noted that all recorded values were under .73dE in our 80% field pattern.

Pixel Response & Input Lag

Please click here to read up on our pixel response and input lag testing procedures.

For those of you who jumped straight to this section, there is nothing earth-shattering to report here. All our 240Hz review monitors have roughly the same response and input lag performance. The 165Hz XG2703-GS is only a tiny bit behind the rest, which is a good thing. Just remember, that monitor runs at 2560x1440 resolution and will therefore require more processing power to achieve the same framerates as the 25” screens. We can’t imagine there is any human that can differentiate between these displays' smoothness or input response.

Gaming With FreeSync

Our FreeSync system isn’t quite up to the task of providing 200 FPS rates in games like Tomb Raider or Far Cry 4, but its Radeon R9 285 card has no problem with 75 FPS at maximum detail settings. Lara Croft and her simpler textures make for super responsive gameplay with motion that almost anticipates hand movements. And once you’re playing at these speeds, FreeSync versus G-Sync is a non-issue. Both technologies deliver exactly the same experience. FHD resolution means you won’t be exploring the XG2530’s 24Hz lower limit either. We couldn’t bring the value below 60 FPS in fact.

After a bit of experimenting with the overdrive, we settled on Faster (level 3 of 5). The top two options created obvious black ghosting in Far Cry 4’s finely detailed tree and plant renderings. Less intricate games will show the issue to a lesser degree, but Faster still provides excellent blur reduction with no penalties. There is no advantage to the higher settings. And we never missed the backlight strobe common to G-Sync monitors. Even at a lowly 60 FPS, there is very little blur. And our experiences with other screens running over 200 FPS show that ULMB and its variations are simply not necessary, and are never better than adaptive-sync for improving motion processing.

MORE: Best Gaming Monitors

MORE: Best Professional Monitors

MORE: How We Test Monitors

MORE: How To Choose A Monitor

MORE: All Monitor Content

15 comments
    Your comment
  • cknobman
    I'm sorry but no matter how fast the response is I cannot go back to a 1080p resolution now.

    I'd rather have the extra resolution.
  • RCPG
    What about the ASUS ROG STRIX XG258Q and the Dell Alienware AW2518Hf? They are also 240Hz monitors with Freesync. Those two (Viewsonic and AOC) are not the only ones and I would like it very much if you could also review those to see which would be the 240Hz Freesync monitor king. I'm thinking about buying one 240Hz Freesync monitor and would like to buy the best. Currently have an AMD R9 390. Planning to upgrade to a Vega 56 or something like that, but only when that becomes affordable. The prices are just too high right now.
  • d--anderson
    Let me know when we have 4K, 32", 120hz+ on a true HDR 10bit colour with 1000nits.
    Oh wait, nothing of the sort is available until 2H2018. All we've got is garbage that 'supports' HDR signal input without actually displaying it.
  • ElMojoMikeo
    A 24.5in 1080p is not exciting. To some degree it is obsolete. With 2, 3 and 4K becoming wider spread. The 3 and 4K display would need to be around 32in for daily use. You might get away with 2K at 27in just. So higher resolutions will require larger displays. I think we are seeing this trend as we move forward. I am guessing that a 30ins 2K monitor with free sync could be the new base line.
  • ManamalGames
    Who the hell wants to buy a 1080p monitor at 240hz and 25". Please discontinue this monitor now. It is a waste of money.
  • therainbowchannelus
    Those in favor of higher resolutions... I agree that higher resolution with HDR and 1000 nits of brightness is great, but this monitor is geared towards a specific market of very competitive gamers. Those who play FPS games, etc. If you want to drive a monitor up to 240Hz @2K, you'd need a tech that might not even exist yet. 1080p resolution is there for a purpose. I am sure there will always be a market for this kind of hardware. Just read Amazon reviews on a 144Hz monitors.
    I have a 144 Hz monitor (on which colors and contrast look lile garbage) to play Rainbow 6 Siege on, and a separate 4K one so I can enjoy my Forza Horizon 3 in glorious 4K 60. 144Hz monitor gives you the ability to sharpen your skills if you desire to do so. Not everyone can afford that, but there is certainly a market for it.
  • ddferrari
    233738 said:
    What about the ASUS ROG STRIX XG258Q and the Dell Alienware AW2518Hf?


    Did you even read the review? They were both in the comparison charts.
  • ddferrari
    2575351 said:
    Let me know when we have 4K, 32", 120hz+ on a true HDR 10bit colour with 1000nits. Oh wait, nothing of the sort is available until 2H2018. All we've got is garbage that 'supports' HDR signal input without actually displaying it.

    Is this the "cool" thing to do now- proclaim that anything less than the ultimate *whatever* (that doesn't even exist) is beneath your high standards? Here are a few facts to chew on, which apparently you haven't thought about:

    a) There's barely any HDR content in any format available right now. You do realize that feeding any old thing into an HDR monitor does not give you an HDR picture, right? The content has to specifically offer HDR support.

    b) There is no GPU in existence that can come close to 4K 120Hz. Not even the first gen of Volta will be able to. Certainly nothing from AMD for years to come.

    This dream monitor of yours doesn't exist yet for a reason.
  • ddferrari
    2134771 said:
    Who the hell wants to buy a 1080p monitor at 240hz and 25". Please discontinue this monitor now. It is a waste of money.

    So it's not for you, therefore it shouldn't exist? Really?
  • d--anderson
    370387 said:
    2575351 said:
    Let me know when we have 4K, 32", 120hz+ on a true HDR 10bit colour with 1000nits. Oh wait, nothing of the sort is available until 2H2018. All we've got is garbage that 'supports' HDR signal input without actually displaying it.
    Is this the "cool" thing to do now- proclaim that anything less than the ultimate *whatever* (that doesn't even exist) is beneath your high standards? Here are a few facts to chew on, which apparently you haven't thought about: a) There's barely any HDR content in any format available right now. You do realize that feeding any old thing into an HDR monitor does not give you an HDR picture, right? The content has to specifically offer HDR support. b) There is no GPU in existence that can come close to 4K 120Hz. Not even the first gen of Volta will be able to. Certainly nothing from AMD for years to come. This dream monitor of yours doesn't exist yet for a reason.


    There's heaps of HDR media, even Dolby Vision content (12-bit colour). Many TV's are already capable of the above specs, but monitor tech lags behind tv's.

    Not everything is about gaming, or I'd have mentioned input ms as well.
  • papality
    $400 for 1080p? in 2018? mental.
  • papality
    370387 said:
    2134771 said:
    Who the hell wants to buy a 1080p monitor at 240hz and 25". Please discontinue this monitor now. It is a waste of money.
    So it's not for you, therefore it shouldn't exist? Really?


    the 1080p/240Hz market is so niche and silly that *yet another* edition of the panel probably shouldn't, no. Maybe if manufacturers would move past a resolution standard from a decade ago and put some effort into 1440p/144Hz, there would be more than a handful of actually decent monitors.
  • ddferrari
    995762 said:
    370387 said:
    2134771 said:
    Who the hell wants to buy a 1080p monitor at 240hz and 25". Please discontinue this monitor now. It is a waste of money.
    So it's not for you, therefore it shouldn't exist? Really?
    the 1080p/240Hz market is so niche and silly that *yet another* edition of the panel probably shouldn't, no. Maybe if manufacturers would move past a resolution standard from a decade ago and put some effort into 1440p/144Hz, there would be more than a handful of actually decent monitors.


    I'd imagine many 1080p/240Hz gamers would say the 1440p/144Hz monitor is actually the niche product here, as they require an expensive GPU that many people can't afford. Hamburger and filet mignon have coexisted for ages, so I don't see how 1080p is somehow holding back 1440p. It certainly isn't holding back other advances, like HDR and Quantum Dot.

    Speaking of choices, I'm on a 3440x1440p/120Hz/Gsync/1900R/IPS monitor (my 1080 Ti has its hands full), and there are exactly two of those on the market. At least with 1440p/144Hz, Newegg has around 30 to choose from. Obviously, I'm not a 1080p fanboy- I just disagree that mfrs should start "herding" people into 1440p by fazing out 1080p. It's a big world and a big market; there's plenty of room for both.
  • alextheblue
    I'm gonna act like the 4K "true" HDR (whatever that means one year to the next) elitists for a moment:

    I declare that any monitor with lower than 240hz refresh rate is obsolete trash and should be discontinued. Call me when we have true 480hz displays.

    See how that works? If the display isn't for you, move on. Every single time they review a gaming monitor we get the whiners deriding a product that isn't even targeted at them. Unbelievable.
  • Lutfij
    Nice write up Chris, keep up the good work! ;)