Can't all panel types do 120Hz input?

[dqniel]

My point was mostly that due to the IPS's poor response rate, it doesn't make a great 120hz panel. Perhaps as they get better that will change. That isn't to say that they can't do 120hz, but TN panels are better at 120hz.

Now perhaps they may make 1440p TN panels, or maybe IPS will improve enough to get great response times.

have you seen a 120hz IPS panel for yourself? the reason i ask is because i've seen a 144hz Asus TN and my IPS at 120Hz has a very similar feel. i don't notice any of this "colors not fully changing" thing that you're talking about. the only way the asus feels superior in terms of motion blur is when the lightboost "hack" is used. and i say that from having played FPSs on both screens, with sufficient frames per second.

Well I do not see that disprooing what I said and what misconception. Please tell I'm here to learn are you.

puha I feel like calling a spade but I won't let that part of me get the best..

IPS is a type of LCD. are you trying to dispute this?

 

[Anarchist420]

I guess they won't ever make monitors that don't suck then.

I don't know why the Tempests have to be panels with such low color gamut.

I'd get one and underclock it to run 1920x1200 @ 120Hz but it uses WLED so it sucks and it doesn't sound like the processing lag is 0 even though it has no OSD and only one input.

 

[BrightCandle]

I am not convinced that IPS (or another high quality color reproduction layout) won't produce a suitably high refresh rate. 120Hz is a smoother and superior experience and there is clearly market demand. With appropriate overdrive and backlight I suspect IPS can give us lightboost 2, at least I hope so because as much as I love my Ben 2411XT it looks awful compared to the dell 2410, but its just so smooth.

 

[Black Octagon]

IPS is a type of LCD. are you trying to dispute this?

That is indeed, exactly what he said:

the big problem is (this is real hard in english for me), that you expect the concept refresh to be the same for ips and lcd, but it's not. I did not invent this madness someone else did. So you cannot compare...

and then, after being corrected:

Ips is not lcd end.

...which is of course nonsense.

From the LCD sticky on these very forums:

"All desktop LCDs are based on a-Si (amorphous silicon) TFT (thin film transistor) technology. We effectively have three major classes of TFTs: TN, VA (MVA/PVA), and S-IPS. Each of these main classes has its own subclasses, but the differences tend to be minor...(continue reading for more about these different panel types within the LCD family)."

But hey, let's not just accept any old nonsense we read on a forum. What do the folks over at TFTCentral have to say?

"LCD stands for "Liquid Crystal Display" and TFT stands for "Thin Film Transistor". These two terms are used commonly in the industry but refer to the same technology and are really interchangeable when talking about certain technology screens. The TFT terminology is often used more when describing desktop displays, whereas LCD is more commonly used when describing TV sets. Don't be confused by the different names as ultimately they are one and the same. You may also see reference to "LED displays" but the term is used incorrectly in many cases. The LED name refers only to the backlight technology used, which ultimately still sits behind an liquid crystal panel (LCD/TFT)."

and further down that same page:

"Panel Type
While this aspect is not always discussed by display manufacturers it is a very important area to consider when selecting a TFT monitor. The LCD panels producing the image are manufactured by many different panel vendors and most importantly, the technology of those panels varies. Different panel technologies will offer different performance characteristics which you need to be aware of. Their implementation is dependent on the panel size mostly as they vary in production costs and in target markets. The four main types of panel technology used in the desktop monitor market are:

TN film (Twisted Nematic + Film)...
IPS (In Plane Switching)...

VA (Vertical Alignment) ...

PLS (Plane to Line Switching)... "

etc. etc.

 

[Puffnstuff]

Sure does seem like some folks are purposely trolling this thread to get a rise out of people. I personally use ips and va panels but am very interested in the newer pls panels.

 

[dqniel]

I guess they won't ever make monitors that don't suck then.

I don't know why the Tempests have to be panels with such low color gamut.

I'd get one and underclock it to run 1920x1200 @ 120Hz but it uses WLED so it sucks and it doesn't sound like the processing lag is 0 even though it has no OSD and only one input.

why do you want a wider gamut? do you frequently process for print output? most peoples' uses benefit from sRGB gamut coverage, which i believe is what the tempest covers. also, no monitor has "0" processing lag. some minimize it well, but none are perfect. i don't notice any input lag with my x270oc, and i'm very, very sensitive to it as i played quake3 engine games at a high competitive level for years. that said, it's still not as smooth as my crt @ 160hz... but i fear that no LCD ever will :/

 

[nightspydk]

I stand corrected then (wow) and trolled maybe cheers.

 

[BrightCandle]

I stand corrected then (wow) and trolled maybe cheers.

I am stunned. This is the first post in the years I have been here where someone has actually changed their mind and maybe might even have learnt something.

This is a big moment for me. This post is getting bookmarked so I can forever say it can happen, regardless of how rarely!

 

[nightspydk]

Actually now you mention it, I can remember countless, endless debates and they usually end with one part skipping out, trolling and whatnot.

Weird really. :'(

 

[BrightCandle]

Having put TN and IPS monitors side by side for years in eyefinity I value the extra colour quality that IPS brings. I would pay decent money for a 120Hz IPS, not least because of the bug I found a few weeks ago on NVidia's cards that means I get very poor performance when mixing 59.98Hz and 120hz monitors on the same machine.

 

[Black Octagon]

^Then buy an overclockable IPS screen before they get even more expensive!

 

[dqniel]

^Then buy an overclockable IPS screen before they get even more expensive!

This. They're only getting harder to come by, unless somebody makes a surprise move and mass-produces some.

 

[Black Octagon]

This. They're only getting harder to come by, unless somebody makes a surprise move and mass-produces some.

Having said that, it looks like another overclockable screen may have hit eBay...this time a matte screen with a PLS panel:
http://www.overclock.net/t/1382348/post-your-pls-overclocking-results/60#post_19787649

 

[Anarchist420]

why do you want a wider gamut? do you frequently process for print output? most peoples' uses benefit from sRGB gamut coverage, which i believe is what the tempest covers. also, no monitor has "0" processing lag. some minimize it well, but none are perfect. i don't notice any input lag with my x270oc, and i'm very, very sensitive to it as i played quake3 engine games at a high competitive level for years. that said, it's still not as smooth as my crt @ 160hz... but i fear that no LCD ever will :/

The Apple 27 in LED cinema display has 83% of the adobe (RGB1988?) color space and it has much better color quality than the 24 inch LED cinema display (68% NTSC). The lower the color gamut, the more washed out everything looks and jacking up digital vibrance doesn't make my 24 in LED cinema's colors look like those of a 27 in LED cinema display... I saw the latter in a store one time and there was a huge difference in the color quality.

Also, Direct drive monitors have zero processing lag.

 

[dqniel]

The Apple 27 in LED cinema display has 83% of the adobe (RGB1988?) color space and it has much better color quality than the 24 inch LED cinema display (68% NTSC). The lower the color gamut, the more washed out everything looks and jacking up digital vibrance doesn't make my 24 in LED cinema's colors look like those of a 27 in LED cinema display... I saw the latter in a store one time and there was a huge difference in the color quality.

Also, Direct drive monitors have zero processing lag.

If you prefer wider color gamut because you like oversaturation, then that's your prerogative. To each his own. Just know that for those that want to see accurate (for web) color that sRGB gamut is what they need. Wider gamut (and the oversaturation that comes along with it when viewing sRGB content) monitors are only needed for for proofing for print, and require the use of applications that are color-managed for accuracy.

http://www.gballard.net/photoshop/srgb_wide_gamut.html

Also, I'd love to see some actual proof of a zero input lag monitor. Just telling me that it exists without giving any numbers or examples doesn't teach me anything. When I try to find evidence of a monitor with 0 input lag, I'm coming up empty.

Having said that, it looks like another overclockable screen may have hit eBay...this time a matte screen with a PLS panel:
http://www.overclock.net/t/1382348/post-your-pls-overclocking-results/60#post_19787649

Very interesting.

 

[cmdrdredd]

I think all monitors have some input lag but ones with single input have less. Probably low enough to be pretty much unnoticeable to the user and takes a side by side comparison to illustrate the difference.