Originally posted by: darXoul
Originally posted by: xtknight
Tom's Hardware Guide measured the response time and it was definitely subpar:
http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/03/27/...spring_2006_lcd_collection/page19.html
Compare that to the VX922's graph:
http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/03/27/...spring_2006_lcd_collection/page35.html
They didn't like other aspects of the 90GX2 either. I was hoping it would be as good as their 20WMGX2 but it certainly fell short.
That's a premature and hasty conclusion. The 90GX2 is considered by far the best gaming display in Europe, most people who tried the NEC and VX922 or 930BF claim the NEC is by miles superior. The graphs on THG don't mean squat, to be honest. The VX924 scored very poorly in this test but side by side, it certainly ain't slower than the VX922 - which was measured as the quickest monitor ever produced.
Be careful with these graphs, on lesnumeriques you can clearly see that the 90GX2 is as good as VX922. I've read countless user reports, e.g. on prad.de. They all claim the NEC is on par with both ViewSonics, with better color, decent angles for a TN display and pretty good blacks. I can confirm this because my friend bought the 70GX2 last week, and actually I was amazed at how good a TN panel could look.
A few users even claim that 90GX2 exhibits a LESS pronounced motion blur than both 20WGX2 and VX922. According to them, all three show virtually no ghosting (though the slower bwb transition may hamper the 20WGX2 in some situations) but the 90GX2 shows a pretty sharp image even in high speed games, on the contrary to the other displays. This I have yet to verify but it looks like this monitor can't simply "suck" like Zebo said. Yes, it's TN, but according to many, it's the best TN out there.
BTW, I wonder why its color is listed everywhere @ 16.77M. It's a TN, it should be 16.2. The 70GX2 is listed @ 16.2M.