Help picking a Monitor.

[Billy Umehara]

Apologies guys, dont mean to clutter the thread, but im just looking to get a little help deciding which monitor to buy. Primary use is going to be for a tate setup w a 360, but Im also going to be running shmupMAME with it and also using it for a text editor display.

Looking at the BenQ RL2460HT, as its been recommended by a bunch of friends who play FGs, but I noticed a slightly cheaper and similar model, the BenQ GL2450HT, it doesnt have the HDMI out feature but I really dont care about that. Im basically just looking for the least input lag I can get for my money.

BenQ RL2460HT
http://www.amazon.com/BenQ-RL2460HT-24- ... B00ITORJRQ

BenQ GL2450HT
http://www.amazon.co.uk/BenQ-GL2450HT-- ... B00BPL078S

Any thoughts or experience with these?

Also considering this;
iiyama ProLite GB2488HSU-B1
http://www.amazon.co.uk/IIYAMA-ProLite- ... B00IPN552M

[Fudoh]

lots of other threads covering this topic already, e.g. this recent one: http://shmups.system11.org/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=52761

In short: in general (and especially if you want to rotate your display) don't buy a TN panel, but get an IPS one instead.

[Billy Umehara]

Thanks buddy. Got some better ideas from reading that thread. IPS it is. Think Im getting too hung up on the lag. played DFK for on a friends dell monitor in yoko just to test and it was absolutely awful in comparison to the CRT Ive been using for years. So been a bit tentative since then, as he'd assured me it was lagless (and still does) and was clearly fucking not. My CRT bit the dust recently, hence the monitor shopping.
Think im just gonna bite the bullet and order one, Im sure a frame of lag wont ruin my life.

[Ed Oscuro]

Is it the blur you're noticing? People talking about lag and blur are generally talking about different things - however the better review sites identify lag as the total of input processing time (which on the Dell might be close to lag-free) and additionally the pixel response time. Most LCD monitors have pretty bad pixel transitions, leading to that muddy blur look.

Personally, I like IPS for its viewing angles and color reproduction - but there are some better TN panels out now with great color, if viewed on-axis. At least some TN panels used to be optimized very closely around their narrow viewing angles, so that the best viewing location was not directly head-on. Rotating stands brought out a color shift (since you were intended to be looking at the screen with your eyes level with the top, rather than near the center in rotated).

However if you want that fast CRT-like pixel response time, TN is going to be better. Plasma and OLED are much better still, but I don't think there's anything out there suitable for gaming, and the lag time of Sony's new expensive video monitors isn't known, and all the plasma TVs appear to be kind of old and have slow processing. IPS is getting better but it's still pretty slow for pixel response.

In terms of helping to bring down lag, you might be interested to look at FreeSync or G-Sync also, which help you get arcade-accurate refresh rates without visual problems and while additionally reducing lag over v-sync. Unfortunately I don't think you can yet use this in conjunction with high frame rates or blank frame insertion / backlight strobing in order to reduce blur.

[Billy Umehara]

Sorry, dude, I am less than savvy when it comes to technology, consider me an imbecile, absolute caveman level. I should have made myself clear.
When I say lag, I mean as in response time. Im happy to have a low quality picture if I can get a near to lagless as possible, I dont even mind spending a few hundred quid.

Ive used a crt for years now for pretty much everything I play regularly and Im just so used to it. Got a PS3 running in my living room on an old (2007ish) 26" Sony Bravia TFT/LCD/flatscreen or whatever TV, and its fine for Demon's Souls and the like, but not long ago tried a friends copy of Ketsui on it just to see what it'd be like, and it was noticeably sluggish. Don't get me wrong, it's not like you tap the stick and a second later the ship moves, but its a tiny delay that is just detectable and it drives me nuts.
Ive got an old 19" CRT PC monitor by some company called 'Xiod', I'd just use that with the 360 VGA cable but Its a desk space issue. I keep my 360 in my office and I really cant spare the surface space for the massive, yellowing bastard and some speakers.

All I honestly care about is response (as in display lag, press jab > minimum delay, ideally none, before it happens on screen) and it taking up as little room as possible on a cluttered desk. I think 24" is perfect. I like that iiyama monitor because the base is small.

I really dont care about how vivid or good the picture is, or about the quality of the speakers attatched to the monitor as long as there is some. If it feels good, is rotatable, has a compact base, and has built in speakers Im happy.

So from what you're saying, TN is the way forward. Gonna look more tonight. You did say something that's made me think though, about the viewing angles when rotated. Does that mean there's a chance that I could get a monitor, rotate it and if I sit straight on there's a chance some colours will look weird? Is it minimal or something super noticeable?

[Ed Oscuro]

The difference from IPS to TN is likely less than half a frame (8ms) in the worst cases for decent, recent gaming monitors. I'm guessing that TN panels' response times hover around 2ms, while fast IPS panels probably are around 6ms. This can be made a bit faster, though. It's up to you - TN's color shift in off-axis viewing can be really distracting, but I keep hearing that things are getting better. If at all possible check out some newer monitors at a local store to get an idea what you're likely to be dealing with.

And some other general thoughts about the market (not covering TVs):

Overall responsiveness does depend slightly on the same things that screen blur depends on. Blur in a screen isn't usually a big deal for shmups and classic arcade games, but it is a sign that the panel is taking a bit of time to respond to new scenes.
Additionally, a monitor with a high refresh rate (like 120Hz or 144Hz) should have lower input lag and faster response overall, even if you aren't running a high refresh rate signal on it.
Adaptive Sync (FreeSync, G-Sync) was mainly intended for FPS players who don't like a new frame appearing on the screen during a refresh - meaning that the bottom portion of the screen is newer - but I doubt this is a problem for arcade games. Maybe it's possible to momentarily lose sight of an object in a shmup, but this probably won't happen in a fighting game. Whether this feature is worthwhile comes down to how well you mind running MAME or other sources at "unusual" frame rates, like 53 frames a second for Mortal Kombat. Hardly anything runs at exactly the rate PC monitors normally run at, and (at least for MAME) adaptive sync should fix this, letting each frame get displayed fully.

For finding out pure lag numbers, a good English language site for monitors is here:
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/
There's also other good sites that deal with input lag in monitors - http://www.displaylag.com/display-database/ is one of them. The only problem is that right now there's a lot of gaming monitors being released, all with slightly different markets in mind, and the sites have to catch up. Additionally, the Leo Bodnar tester is for TVs, not really for monitors with unusual frame rates or resolution. Overall, input lag should be getting much better for monitors, however.

Right now the market feels like it's in upheaval, though I think that the underlying trends are pretty solid and have been for a long time. Good thing many CRTs are going strong - there's plenty of technology that could more or less replace it, but a lot of that isn't available for monitors or TVs at a good price (if at all). The computer monitors I'm interested in right now are new and possibly expensive - especially if you want an adaptive sync technology so that MAME games with unusual frame rates display at the correct frame rate. We're talking probably in the realm of $700-$1400+ (so 400-800 GBP I'd guess). There are cheaper options too. There are some good-looking options out there for not much money, and it'll be very easy to get one with a much bigger screen than what you currently have. Without adaptive sync, I think some good fast gaming monitors around the 24-27 inch size and even running at 120 frames per second should be well within your price range - for example Monoprice announced a monitor like this recently.

[Fudoh]

When I say lag, I mean as in response time

no, you actually don't. You mean input lag. Pixel is response time is just a part of that and that's what usually stated in the manufacturer's specs.

With a good IPS you can come as lot as 4-5ms in total lag. That's absolutely nothing you would ever feel or have any other impact on your gameplay.

[Ed Oscuro]

4-5ms is right on the dot for 1/4 of a frame in latency. That's either a really good new panel, or running a bit of overdrive.

Overall I have to agree that if that was the main source of lag, that would be a really good result. The fastest monitors in the Display Lag .com database clock in around 10ms total.

Years ago I said my Planar was great for lag, but it's coming in around half a frame of lag.

I still like my suggestion - go turn some TN panels on their side and see if you like what you see. It seems needless to me to promote IPS, and the higher cost and potentially slower panel response, if you don't care about those benefits. But in my own experience, it's worth it. Then again, I wouldn't turn an IPS on its side either, unless it had really good viewing angles.

[Billy Umehara]

When I say lag, I mean as in response time

no, you actually don't. You mean input lag.

Yeah, that. Lag. Mate, if there's 2f of lag, Ill notice. Don't worry about it tho thanks.

I'm guessing that TN panels' response times hover around 2ms, while fast IPS panels probably are around 6ms. This can be made a bit faster, though. It's up to you - TN's color shift in off-axis viewing can be really distracting, but I keep hearing that things are getting better. If at all possible check out some newer monitors at a local store to get an idea what you're likely to be dealing with....

Thank, Ed. Very helpful post, Im grateful. Basically, Im looking for a TN panel with a high refresh rate it sounds like. Ill do exactly what you've advised and go check out some displays on sale to have a look.

I honestly had never heard of G-sync or that there could be so much variation in framerates or so many issues displaying them correctly. Adaptive sync sounds amazing though.
As for Mame, Ive never been really that bothered with emulation, I only came across shmupmame recently which made me more interested to try it again. Ive been playing a little batrider which has made me think about pursuing accurate emulation, but a frame or two of lag on a emulated game Ill never experience the original of hasnt worried me. If I ever go nuts for batrider Ill look at it more. Screen tearing annoys me though, is that something that adaptive sync could correct or is that just a combo of my shitty monitor and me not knowing how to calibrate anything correctly?

The computer monitors I'm interested in right now are new and possibly expensive - especially if you want an adaptive sync technology so that MAME games with unusual frame rates display at the correct frame rate. We're talking probably in the realm of $700-$1400+ (so 400-800 GBP I'd guess).

Any particular models you're interested in?

[Ed Oscuro]

Yes, screen tearing is specifically eliminated by adaptive sync. Adaptive sync spends a tiny bit of time negotiating frames between the graphics card and the video card, so that if a game's framerate dips or rises, the screen can just get that next frame as soon as possible. Adaptive sync also use the DisplayPort connection - I'm still using VGA and I notice other effects like horizontal bands moving down or around the screen due to frame mismatch (a kind of frame mismatch); G-Sync or FreeSync will eliminate this too.

It's a bit early to say that I'm interested in one thing or another. Supposedly some good stuff is shipping around March. For a specific model that hits my high points, the Acer XB270HU looks interesting. Still, waiting can pay off in this market!

A nice IPS version of this would be good too.

Some of the key buzzwords I'm looking for in a new monitor are:
27" or bigger
120Hz or 144Hz
G-Sync (or possibly FreeSync, we'll see if AMD puts out comparable graphics cards with nVidia - note that to use these adaptive sync technologies you need a fairly recent graphics card, so add on $100 or so, at least)
IPS (because the best color and viewing angles matters to me)
and on the "boring but interesting" side: Low lag, glow-free (IPS panels tend to have some uniform glowing), and flicker-free (some panels use potentially annoying methods to tone down brightness).

I view the first four things as "must-have," while the latter things would be nice.

If I was buying this mainly for shmups and other 2D arcade games, I would still want G-SYNC or FreeSync in a large size with IPS, but that would be about it. As long as the game runs at 60Hz or slower, the panel could support it. That said, any game running faster than 60Hz would drop frames or something.

BTW, 2f of lag would be = 32ms or so. So compared to that 5ms or so isn't too bad. Looking at the rankings, the top end monitors there are all around 9-10ms still.