Dreams come true but expensive.
Mitsubishi Intros VISEO 120 Hz Monitor with IPS Panel
http://www.techpowerup.com/134672/Mitsubishi-Intros-VISEO-120-Hz-Monitor-with-IPS-Panel.html

Some people say it's fake 120hz - I don't know really)

Dream just disappeared - pdf in japan consists string 76hz ((
sorry )

says something about 240hz too tho? ... im gonna look into this

240hz = AC frequency?

What? It's usually 220-240VAC/50Hz in Europe or like 120VAC/60Hz in US?

Good point, and now I look like a tit.

A tit who bought a 2268WM that is! And it's lovely. Haven't had a chance to play QW on it yet but I'm rather pleased, especially as there's no dead pixels yay. Even the shitty speakers are useful since I don't want to have to get proper speakers which would be yet more cables and clutter, and I'm going to play with headphones most of the time anyway. So success, and thanks for everyones feedback.

!!! 23" 240 hz IPS panel !!!

http://www.oled-display.net/lg-display-introduce-23-inch-240hz-ips-lcd-for-monitors


just wondering how many thousands that will cost :l

Looks like a fake 240Hz:

Also it would take 11,9Gbps bandwidth to run FullHD resolution (1920*1080) at 240Hz, I don't know if it's practical, at least with current/released DVI-technology.

can the panles actually show 240 frames? why interpolate if its running 120hz.. ridiculess

Nice! 425$ ouch...

Do you know if it supports 120hz for all resolutions? One thing I don't really understand is the backlight bleeding issue, why can't they get rid of it?

No, I don't know. I just wonder why it wouldn't, it's not limited by the tech at least.

You'd think when you see a monitor that has LED backlighting, it wouldn't have the backlight bleeding issue, but what do you know. It seems to be the same crap as it's always with TN panels + some more:

1) viewing angles... sigh
2) blacklight bleeding... sigh
3) colors that can't be calibrated to a good result... unbelievable
4) overdrive trailing... sigh
5) contrast ratio on par or worse than your average TN panel... sigh
6) black level on par or worse than on your average TN panel... sigh

Everything about this monitor seems to be mediocre or just plain bad, even the price seems too high. Well, at least it has no input lag.

I think I want to see another review of the monitor on either prad.de or on digitalversus, but if nothing changes, I think we have a really crappy monitor here.



EDIT: note to self: never base anything on just a review, unless you have tested the product yourself...

I stand corrected, the monitor is actually quite good (yes, I have it).

My 150Hz CRT hasn't (quite) died yet. Though, it buzzed and blinked once and now i have a permanent vertical line down the middle of the screen, straight shaft anyone?

Thanks for the info I have been wondering if it is a good monitor...

http://www.engadget.com/2010/12/13/eizo-announces-more-detail-on-glasses-free-3d-duravision-lcd-re/
no frog without foot

What about connecting the monitor... When I look at the GF9600 card I got for my next pc, I see a DVI (Dual Link) and when I look at those 120hz monitors, they got DVI-D as input. The specs don't say whether it's Dual or Single link.
And according to this picture, these are all different inputs:


So will DVI (Dual Link) actually fit a DVI-D input or do I need to get another card if I want such a monitor?

afaik, those 120hz monitors needs 2xOutput from the graphics card...

The 120Hz monitors ship with the required dual-link DVI cable. Any modern graphics card (NVIDIA 6800ultra or later, ATI something) has dual-link DVI outputs (yes, two of them, you are going to need only one of them), so there is really no need to worry about it.



When unsure, you might want to check manufacturer's specifications to be absolutely sure.

Ah thanks. Well, I brought it up because BPS posted that he couldn't connect his monitor to his PC... So, if Renzo's '6800ultra or later'-info is correct, I guess BPS was gaming on a Pentium 100 or something

Anyway, I'm not sure if I'll buy one, but one other reason then Quake to buy a 120hz monitor, especially LED, might be because it's better for my eyes? I totally don't know if that's the case, but I assume it is easier on the eyes then a 60-75hz monitor...

I may have to take back what I was saying based on that one review.

Well... here is another one
http://www.pcmonitors.org/monitor-reviews/benq-xl2410t

Not very promissing...

Yes, the test itself is not. I wouldn't even call that a review, their "results" are just crap. Flatpanelshd review is rather ok, but even that lacks proper calibration results. Maybe tftcentral makes a good review, we'll see. I have the xl2410t myself and I can say that it is a lot better than 2233RZ, as I wrote on my blog (no full review yet though). Also, I don't agree on all of the points on those reviews.

I have to agree with renzo. Initially I didn't like the xl2410t much. The colors were horrible and I had to change between FPS mode and Standard when I was in windows or in quake to make it tolerable. This had to be done through an OSD menu with like 10 clicks.

But with some assistance from renzo I got it calibrated and I can use just one mode all the time. I also have to agree that this screen is better than the 2233rz. It just feels faster somehow.. even less lag, more bright colors and much better build quality. It's very flexible and sturdy and got a nice little area under the screen where you can store your small stuff like wallet/usb sticks/mobile phone. perfect

I don't know. I've been waiting a lot for a decent replacement for my old CRT and I'm still not satisfied.

I think I'll grab the Dell U2410 for my daily uses and then, if the need arises, I'll grab one of those 120Hz. Although I barely play Quake World anymore (or any other game, for that matter), I still watch a lots and lots of demos, and I think the U2410 will be enough for that. If it isn't I can always turn the CRT back during "Quake time".

One thing that I really do not like about the current LCD generation is this whole 1080 trend. While I can see why they are being fabricated like that ($$$), I cannot really see why the consumers are accepting. IMHO those 120 vertical pixels that I am so used to see (on a 1920x1200 monitor) will make a lot of difference in every single task I can think of, except, maybe, when watching movies.

I am really looking forward for a full 120Hz review done by Quake World players. Many (console) games (and gamers) today are more than happy with capping at 60fps, while we have been playing at 72+ for more than 10 years. We (well, you) know the difference a monitor capable of showing more frames per second can make and I really wanna hear what you guys have to say about it.

I still remember the discussions on CHTV when ParadokS (@100) beat Dag (@72) on DM6... good times.

Those were server frames, so running at 100 actually altered the physics, hence the drama.

TFTCentral review is up, finally a good review. Notice the calibration settings + color profile.

I've just bought a U2410 and it's an impressive bit of kit. I have it sitting next to an NEC screen that cost twice as much and the difference between them is very small. I tried it out for some games and it wasn't too bad at all, at least compared to the NEC which is an input lag monster. That said though, I'm still using a CRT for qw, although I've got my eye on that BenQ now...

I am waiting for my U2410 to arrive. Heard nothing but good things about it. And it also comes with Dell warranty, which is great: "something is not right? All right, we are sending a replacement right away. AND YOU ONLY SEND THE BROKEN ONE BACK AFTER YOU RECEIVE THE NEW!". Neat huh?

Anyway, unless my CRT dies on me, I think I am going to pass the current 120hz generation.

Got my 120hz now :> feels good man