U2413 is a professional display so there is little reason to get that for everyday usage. He'd probably want to wait for the U2412M to go on sale again. It's unfortunate since it was on sale for $240 twice two weeks ago during Dell's 7 Days of Deals.

Terakahn

Canada49 Posts

July 01 2013 08:28 GMT

#1043

I'm not worried about budget. I was expecting 250-500ish. Those both fit right in line. Isn't 8ms bad? or is it not even going to be noticable. I suppose I'm have that on my current set too, so.

You'd definitely recommend the U2412M? It's probably going to be used 70% for gaming, and 30% every day browsing and video viewing.

Edit: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824236313 This looks really good, but I think its 16 : 9. I'm wondering if that ratio isn't going to be as big a deal on a larger monitor. Since I'll be going from 19 or 22 to 24.
This was the other one that came up in searches a lot too http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/benq_xl2420t.htm

Alryk

United States2718 Posts

July 01 2013 13:11 GMT

#1044

Yes, the ultrasharp line is one of the more recommended panels here afaik. 8ms doesn't matter, each manufacturer measures it differently and displays different latency things etc.

Both monitors you linked are TN panels. While not inherently bad, you can have issues with color shifting etc. With them, especially compared to IPS panels. Also, 144hz only matters if your GPU can drive 144 fps, which for the most time at least in sc2 wont matter because your CPU will limit you below 60, I believe.

Somebody else might add more information!

skyR

Canada13817 Posts

July 01 2013 16:56 GMT

#1045

You asked for a 16:10 display and U2412M would be the most affordable option in Canada as it goes on sale quite often for ~$250 (well not as often as the 16: 9 U2312HM for ~$200 which is also a very good display). Both these displays have very low input lag. The only other options for 16:10 would be an expensive 30" 2560x1600 or an small 20" 1680x1050 monitor.

You should probably tell us where you're from. Your profile states Canada but you link to newegg.com which doesn't ship to Canada. If you're from the states than the Ultrasharp may not be the best option for you as it hardly goes on sale over in the states.

If you rather have a 120Hz+ display for gaming then I think you've found out that you're stuck with 16: 9. Not having those extra pixels (1080p as opposed to 1920x1200) probably won't be a big deal to you if you're gaming 70% of the time. Most games are made for 16: 9 anyways.

Terakahn

Canada49 Posts

July 02 2013 06:12 GMT

#1046

I'm from Canada. I was just linking to newegg because it's where I was looking. I can probably pick it up somewhere here in person or get it shipped from somewhere else.

Is going to 120Hz+ significantly better? I've never used one before.
The Asus VG248QE looks really appealing. The fact that it also has an HDMI input would help a ton for if I ever went to streaming console games. I could use the same display instead of having to figure out how to fit my TV on my desk, or moving my computer to an entirely different room. Price seems good too.

Would you recommend going 120 Hz or 16:10 for gaming purposes? My max resolution right now is 1680x1050, so even with the smaller ratio, I think I'm still getting a vertical pixel count bump from my current situation.

A lot of the reviews I read, had conflicts about whether IPS vs TN mattered much for gaming. Since I'm always viewing it head on anyway, I didn't think it made much of a difference. At least from what I understand about the differences.

skyR

Canada13817 Posts

July 02 2013 08:58 GMT

#1047

120Hz results in more fluid motion whereas IPS results in a better picture, better viewing angles and for the large part, more pixels than an equivalent sized TN panel (24", 27", 30").

If you play FPS games competitively then yes get a 120Hz without question. If you play mostly FPS games then yes I'd strongly consider 120Hz. For other genres where there isn't a lot of motion, the difference between 60Hz and 120Hz may not be as profound so I'd side with IPS while others will side with 120Hz. Its highly subjective.

Do keep in mind that if you plan on getting 120Hz, you should have a decent configuration capable of playing games at 1080p at an average of 60 FPS or higher.

Terakahn

Canada49 Posts

July 02 2013 09:43 GMT

#1048

I don't really play FPS games that often. I'm guessing that even high action non FPS games aren't going to be utilizing that 120 Hz potential. And even the FPS games I do play, I'm not playing at a super competitive level. I'm not actually that good at them =p. The majority of the usage will probably be Starcraft, a very occasional game of LoL, and probably a lot of the new games that will be coming out. Like Destiny, Watchdogs, GTA V, etc. I'm guessing the 120Hz difference is only going to be applicable in high intensity Multiplayer FPS games like Counterstrike, Unreal Tournament and other twitch shooters. And nothing single player related.

If IPS is going to give me better picture, it just seems like a better idea. I will definitely be playing at 1080p, 60 FPS.
I suppose ideally I'd get an IPS with 120Hz, but I imagine that's not a realistic choice haha.

the Ratio doesn't seem like it's going to matter as much given the significant monitor size increase I'm looking at. Though I think I definitely want an HDMI port now unless I'm forced to downgrade somehow to get it.

Given those adjustments, what would you recommend?

skyR

Canada13817 Posts

July 02 2013 11:34 GMT

#1049

The ASUS PA248Q would fit your bill of 16:10 IPS with HDMI (and 1:1 pixel mapping for consoles) but it's also nearly $100 more expensive than the nearly identical U2412M.

n0ah

United States250 Posts

July 02 2013 18:13 GMT

#1050

Does anyone have any experience with one of the BenQ monitors that are used at the MLG events? I'm considering buying one for my next rig (not anytime soon though). They certainly look nice, but I don't know if it's worth it. Right now I have the Dell UltraSharp U2412M that has been mentioned several times throughout this thread...

So are BenQ's worth it? Or should I just stick with what I've got?

Alryk

United States2718 Posts

July 02 2013 19:28 GMT

#1051

Is there something wrong with yours? Otherwise I don't see any reason to upgrade. I don't think there are anything particularly wrong with the BenQ monitors, the assets are just different from the ultrasharp. One is TN (benq) which I think theoretically means richer colors slightly, and possibly a "lower" response Tim, and speakers (I think) while the ultrasharp is IPS, may negate the richer colors by just being a better panel, and is probably more sturdily built.

Speakers on a monitor aren't usually very good, and you probably will never notice a difference in response, whereas you will notice an IPS panel. So you wouldn't be wasting your money, but its not inherently better. You could always try it in dual monitors with yours and see which one you prefer (return it if you don't like it)

n0ah

United States250 Posts

July 02 2013 19:38 GMT

#1052

Ah yes perhaps I should have mentioned that I was thinking about using them in a dual-monitor setup. Either a dual-monitor setup, or a completely separate rig.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with my UltraSharp, I was just curious about other people's experiences with any of the BenQ monitors (specifically the ones used at MLG... can't remember the model name).

Thanks for your input!

Alryk

United States2718 Posts

July 02 2013 19:54 GMT

#1053

Well the two times I've competed at MLG they've been fine. I'm pretty sure they were using BenQ monitors both times, even when we had to play standing up to warm up (I'm not a VIP guy

)

It certainly won't be a waste of money. Just get one, and return it if you don't like it, and grab another ultrasharp

skyR

Canada13817 Posts

July 02 2013 20:08 GMT

#1054

If you're willing to pay up to $300 for a U2412M then why not consider the BenQ XL2420T used at mostly all the good tournaments rather than the cheap TN one used at MLG?

Myrmidon

United States9452 Posts

July 02 2013 21:52 GMT

#1055

I'm apparently a few months behind the times, but apparently these days Asus, LG, and Acer (if not more) have relatively cheap 1920x1200 IPS monitors for sale. Say ~$250 and below, of course under the models with fancier stands and connectivity, never mind the wide gamut stuff.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824236331
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824005496
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824009508

In US, the Asus VS24AH-P is going for $210 on the current promo code. Pretty cheap for 1920x1200.

Something BenQ promotes for gaming (that's cheap, below the 120 Hz models) is probably something like RL2450HT or similar. Not like you particularly want something like that, but just a guess.

n0ah

United States250 Posts

July 02 2013 22:17 GMT

#1056

I'm definitely considering it. StarCraft 2 looks so pretty on them :D

But like I said, I might just get one for a separate rig. My desk/furniture setup won't currently allow me to have two bigass monitors on my desk side-by-side. =/

Hokay

United States738 Posts

July 03 2013 01:38 GMT

#1057

I don't like playing fighting games, some shooters and even Starcraft 2 on my U2412M. I find the input lag really noticeable compared to my asus VH236H. I had to readjust my 1 frame link timings on my U2412M, and SC2 microing felt bad & unresponsive. I went back to my asus despite the crappier picture t.t

Terakahn

Canada49 Posts

July 03 2013 02:56 GMT

#1058

All this monitor talk has made me want to replace my primary too. Think I'm going to go with a 120/144Hz Primary, and a nice IPS secondary.
248Q Looks great, but I'm debating whether I should wait and save up for the 246Q. Lot of the reviews I've read seem to compare the 2.

Perhaps if I went with the U2412M, and VG248QE.

The U2412M has bad input lag? This worries me.

skyR

Canada13817 Posts

July 03 2013 03:47 GMT

#1059

PA246Q is in the same category as the U2413. These wide gamut displays are intended for professional usage, not every-day use.

U2412M has low input lag but not as low as some TN monitors of course. Every individual's senses are different so the only way to find out if it bothers you is to try it which is quite easy to do.

Blisse

Canada3710 Posts

July 03 2013 05:04 GMT

#1060

Holy shit the BenQ XL2420T looks nice. Is that thing where people said that the monitor refresh rate has an effect on motion sickness actually real or just bad research?