Age :38
Group: Moderator
Location: Funland
Activity killed the cat?
Hardware  /  13 Nov 2012, 22:06
Asus VG278HE 144Hz TFT monitor
So I have one. Coming from two 120Hz monitors (2233rz and xl2410t) it feels a kind of a fresh beginning. I might actually end up playing some rounds of QW since I actually played one 2on2 already to see how this monitor performs. Oh and it performs beautifully, the initial impressions are very positive so far:

No input lag, no ghosting, minimal blurring, minimal backlight bleeding, acceptable colors and contrast and even acceptable viewing angles. And it's actually huge, maybe a bit too big.

Maybe more impressions at a later date, as for now, more testing.
Update: some testing between different refreshrates on LGC2 / dmm4_3 by Phil

Note to 60Hz players: thanks for the insane handicap you are giving to players NOT playing at 60Hz. At this refreshrate, everything looks absolutely shitty and feels even shittier.
http://i.imgur.com/HZqaG.png


100Hz is an improvement to 60Hz, looks a lot better but doesn't feel all that good yet.
http://i.imgur.com/ID5uV.png


At 110Hz things start becoming acceptable, not everything is a total failure at this refreshrate.
http://i.imgur.com/pXbMb.png


Your standard 120Hz - it feels and looks smooth, but is still somewhat blurry when moving around.
http://i.imgur.com/vadM5.png


Everything becomes more fluid, blurring gets some reduction but the botmatch doesn't become any better...
http://i.imgur.com/gOvxr.png



At this point it's pretty much clear. Any player still clinging into a 60Hz monitor has absolutely no idea what he/she is missing. Players with faster monitors should probably be putting some handicap to themselves when playing vs 60Hz players, maybe 60% of normal damage would even up things nicely?

Monitor review probably coming up later, as it has been requested.
Comments
2012-11-13, 22:23
Very nice, would be cool with another one of your full reviews
2012-11-13, 23:23
Max of only 1080p for 27" is weird. Looking forward to your review though.
2012-11-16, 00:08
The resolution is not a problem in my opinion, unless you are staring the monitor from a 30cm distance. The size itself is a problem, you really have to stay further away from the monitor, but if you don't have all that "deep" desk, then it's going to be a bit of a problem. Unless you like turning your head when you want to see the edges of the monitor...
2012-11-16, 10:43
Even though i agree that 60 hz sucks and above 100 hz is way better for moving and fast actions, for me it mostly proves that you're an lg whore
My results on
100hz - http://i.imgur.com/YTW2S.png
120hz - http://i.imgur.com/K7o8R.png
160hz - http://i.imgur.com/eQSYE.png
2012-11-16, 11:07
I heard that the human eye can't perceive more than 60, 70 hertz...

Of course I've tested, like 10 years ago, and I could only note a difference between 60 / 75, anything more than 75 hertz I really CAN'T see the difference... becouse "they were made to run shitty at 85hertz and nice at 120hertz..... simply...

BUT, i'm using monitors that were made to run like this (old CRTs), and of course, if this fancy ASUS monitors were made to run swell at 120 hertz, I just think that "in this case", and I mean mostly, in the LCD case, a difference can be perceived....

BUT, I think, (correct me if I'm wrong), this maybe just the specific LCD hardware, couse with all CRTs that I have tested in my life, I never noticed any advantages of using a higher frequency than 75, 85hertz...

My eyes can't see it... (in CRTs)

Maybe it's a commercial/capitalist thing too... why would they sell a brand new LCD at 85 hertz? now the 3D movies/games requires 120 hertz, soh it's a whole new reality....

(also, I feel pitty for my friends here who plays with 60hertz, hehehe)
2012-11-16, 11:15
pov and dmm4_3 are not comparable. Also I used modified LGC2 that supports a lot more maps than the original and not LGC3 that was modified from LGC2 (there is no spawn pent on LGC3 if I remember it correctly).

That aside, my point was mostly in fact that there is slight improvement on going from 120Hz to 144Hz and also having below 120Hz things start getting worse gradually.

Obviously there are other factors too, like the input lag of the monitor but I don't have any real numbers for this VG278HE. I do know that Samsung 2233RZ has ~15ms input lag and BenQ XL2410T has ~6ms input lag with "instant mode" enabled. VG278HE doesn't feel more laggy or worse than XL2410T, so I'm guessing the difference, if there is any, is neglible.

wernerml wrote:

couse with all CRTs that I have tested in my life, I never noticed any advantages of using a higher frequency than 75, 85hertz...

There is definitely an improvement over these refreshrates even on CRT and a lot of people can notice it. If you don't, consider yourself lucky, you don't "need" better equipment to perform better. Well tbh CRTs behave a lot different from TFTs and even lower refreshrates are a lot better than say, 100Hz on a TFT, even 60Hz CRT feels somewhat smooth if you can handle the flickering of the screen and won't get headache from it.
2012-11-16, 12:27
I agree, i'm playing on a crt and 120hz is definitely way smoother than lower hz. But i also agree this différence is even bigger on an lcd !
2012-11-17, 01:21
Yeah Renzo, I heard that the 60 hertz on a LCD screen is totaly different from a 60 hertz on a CRT, and we can't compare, couse on the LCDs the screen doesn't get updated/refreshed completly, so if we would compare, we should say that (maybe):

[60hz LCD] = [45/50hz CRT]

But i'm just jealous of your fancy ASUS!!!!!! heheHEAhAEhaehea
2012-11-17, 06:38
I have the ASUS VG278H 120hz, very good monitor. Can you actually see the difference between 120hz and 144 and do you think its worth upgrading?
2012-11-17, 09:07
As I already mentioned it, while the difference isn't all that high, 144Hz has less blurring and is more fluid than 120Hz.

And no, I don't think it's worth to upgrade from VG278H to VG278HE, unless you get it exchanged for free basically.

If one has a smaller 120Hz TFT then you could call VG278HE an upgrade, as it has bigger screen, higher refreshrate and acceptable overall image quality . A lot of these 120Hz monitors like Samsung 2233RZ and LG W2363D (and others too) have pretty weak image quality, there's always something wrong with them, let it be backlight bleeding or colors or contrast ratio or gamma crush.

wernerml wrote:

Yeah Renzo, I heard that the 60 hertz on a LCD screen is totaly different from a 60 hertz on a CRT, and we can't compare, couse on the LCDs the screen doesn't get updated/refreshed completly, so if we would compare, we should say that (maybe):

[60hz LCD] = [45/50hz CRT]

No, you can't compare it like this at all.

The "problem" doesn't come from TFTs way of updating only those pictures that actually have changed, but from the fact that the pixels on TFT take time to change their color and brightness. With CRT the "pixel transition time" is virtually instant and also CRTs do not have "input lag" at all. TFTs need to process the information from the gfxcard before displaying it, so that's from where the "display delay" or input lag comes from.

Combine pixel transition time (response time) with display delay (input lag) and you have a lot more lag going on at the same refreshrate with a TFT than on a CRT.

As for comparison, 85fps on 85Hz CRT is smoother than 144fps on 144Hz TFT (with vsync enabled).
2012-11-21, 11:41
There is also fosfor trailing in crts. The real pixel update time is probably worse then a brand new 144 or 120, just because tft shows an actual sharp pixel. The crt shows a blurry dot..

And ofc, using a crt is Much more straining for the eyes, there is a big difference.

Another benifit is you can set maxfps at 288, which is fine, instead of 240, which is too low.. if you dont have a new gfx.


144/6 = 24, seems allright for video too, any thoughts on that renzo?
2012-11-21, 16:52
zzuper wrote:

The real pixel update time is probably worse then a brand new 144 or 120, just because tft shows an actual sharp pixel.

No it's not. Pixel update time in CRT is instant, this is shown by the oscilloscope measurements by prad.de CRTs afterglow can be seen, but it's nowhere near as annoying as blurring trailing that happens with TFT. As for TFTs being straining to eyes, "flashing" or "blinking" is possible with newer LED TFTs since their brightness is PWM controlled at certain frequency.

I wouldn't normally recommend using multiples of Hz framerates with ezQuake, since it causes internal timing jitter and it affects certain things, but for some reason with VG278HE the screen is a lot more fluid at say, 576fps (4*144) instead of 616fps (8*616).

zzuper wrote:
144/6 = 24, seems allright for video too, any thoughts on that renzo?

I've watched some movies with this monitor and I don't see any specific problems, it seems overall fluid. With some 60Hz and 75Hz TFTs I could notice occasional "jerk" at certain intervals, but with 120Hz TFTs I couldn't. I guess it works ok for movies.
You have to be logged in to be able to post a comment.
Username:
Password: