120Hz monitors worth it?

[Distractor_Beam]

Go to Fry's, Best Buy, whatever and look at the running models yourself. If you don't see a difference then don't worry about it. Most people do.

Is it worth it? Of course. Why spend a grand on a tower and spend all of your gaming time looking at a mediocre monitor. If you're talking $/value I'd go with a few inches > a few hz. That's what HE said.

[SabreWulf69]

I want it all - IPS Panel, with 120Hz, LED Backlighting and a fast response time. The only thing I have found remotely like this so far is this --> http://www.nrnl.org/mitsubishi-intro...panel-t60.html That is the monitor I want

[[XC] Oj101]

An interesting read

[SabreWulf69]

Yup, exactly it. This is why for my next monitor upgrade, I want a lot of improvement in a lot of different factors like lighting accuracy, color accuracy, timing, refresh rate amongst other general improvements. I always color calibrate my monitor to the best of my abilities and have seen many a newer one fail in comparison and my monitor is old and shoddy at best. I'm waiting for laser technology, but that seems years away, and I also believe that has been bought by Mitsubishi Electronics, the very same people that make the next monitor I want (if it ever comes out).

Of all the new '3D' monitors that have come out in recent times, the only one of interest to me is the one from Mitsubishi Electronics. This is as it's not only 120Hz, but it's an IPS panel for superior color accuracy, has really decent timing for an IPS panel too (5.5.ms) and is LED backlit for superior lighting accuracy.

Read about my dream monitor here for more information --> http://www.nrnl.org/mitsubishi-intro...panel-t60.html

[RPGWiZaRD]

AFAIK that's just bringing TV interpolation technique to monitors... hopefully I'm wrong though but I find it a lot more likely to be interpolation than true 120Hz. It's year 2011 and we can't even get both great motion smoothness and image quality which was both found in CRTs...

[PaganII]

Get a 120Hz DLP 3D projector and game on a 120" screen instead of hunched over a 24" monitor.

[SabreWulf69]

Hunched over? My PC is in my bedroom and my monitor sits on my desk, if I had a 120" screen, my neck would be very sore lol

[PaganII]

Projector 8" from the screen is only 68" display. You can make it any size you want!

[slowfreight]

Go to Fry's, Best Buy, whatever and look at the running models yourself. If you don't see a difference then don't worry about it. Most people do.

Is it worth it? Of course. Why spend a grand on a tower and spend all of your gaming time looking at a mediocre monitor. If you're talking $/value I'd go with a few inches > a few hz. That's what HE said.

I went to Frys, Im always at Frys for that matter, and I did not notice too much of a differecne between 60Hz and 120Hz LCDs. Not to mention that 120Hz displays IMHO are too small. Im a bit biased towards bigger IPS 60Hz displays.

[SabreWulf69]

I believe projectors at such a 'small' resolution cannot compare to an actual, physical screen. Big screen then yes, in a bedroom then no. My current monitor of 21.5" sits maybe not even a meter away from in front of me, and I have a massive desk. If I want a bigger screen then I have me TV hooked up to my sound system for movies in dual-screen. As it is now, my eyes have to dart quite a distance as for instance now when typing I sit a little closer when typing but move away when I am gaming for the full FOV, and I think 24" would be stretching it. If a big screen is sitting 1m in front of you that for example 1 theoretical billion inches across, then your not gonna have too pleasant an experience in gaming and typing let alone movies. I can't speak for others, but the 'immersion' I get from my monitor is perfectly fine, compared to having to move my neck so much, cos whilst I don't speak for others, personally my eyes can move around a lot faster on just their own compared to the movement of both my eyes and neck combined. Graphics design is cool, cos it's not movement your dealing with but a lot of pauses and still images which you can then allow for clearer finite detail at larger sizes. But as a general use monitor as I said I want a good combination of IPS (color accuracy), fast timing almost like TN panels (5.5ms), fast refresh rate (120Hz), decent blacks as in sound - silence matters as contrast affects everything, making above all the lowest levels of shades of colors all the better (LED lighting). Just a theory, guess honestly I would actually have to see it practiced in person. I am a big believer in the THX certifications, and would love to see all this combined technology achieve one or surpass it.

[Smileypuppy]

So is a 37 inch 120 hz LCD HD TV a good choice? Theres even a 480Hz refresh rate 46 inch Vizeo out there but really is to big for my taste. I am about to build a new system and would like an awesome monitor for gaming but want larger than 22 or 27 inches. Maybe 27 would be OK but I have a difficult time understanding the 1ms refresh compaired to 240 hz refresh. Then there's the 2560x1600 higher res issue my new cards will put out. I just cant find a solution, any suggestions? Sorry not an attempt at thread jacking! just sort of on topic and something I have been thinking of as well.

[PaganII]

I believe projectors at such a 'small' resolution cannot compare to an actual, physical screen. Big screen then yes, in a bedroom then no. I'm also on a low budget, so hopefully the Mitsubishi Viseo monitor I have mentioned will also be more affordable than a 120Hz DLP projector just for my bedroom.

$479usd is not affordable for a 3D 120Hz DLP projector?
Good luck finding a 3D OR 120Hz anything for that.

That monitor you linked to is over $1400 usd!

[SabreWulf69]

OK, my bad, I didn't know that. Barring price, the other stuff still stands though.

[PaganII]

That IS a cool monitor! Need 3 of them side by side, ha ha.

[.Logic]

I want it all - IPS Panel, with 120Hz, LED Backlighting and a fast response time. The only thing I have found remotely like this so far is this --> http://www.nrnl.org/mitsubishi-intro...panel-t60.html That is the monitor I want

Only it's not true 120Hz

Oh and the aspect ratio is 16:9... eww

[SabreWulf69]

I though that most decent movies are 16:9 (1920x1080P). ??. Fine... that monitor is just an example, still my desire for my next monitor upgrade is having these features - IPS Panel technology, 6ms or below, true 120Hz technology, RGB LED backlighting, 1080P or beyond, and 24"+. Realistic or not, I don't care, I'm happy to live in my dream world, but that's what I want to make it worth an upgrade in my books. A true 'enthusiast' screen no matter the price.

[phantomferrari]

I want it all - IPS Panel, with 120Hz, LED Backlighting and a fast response time. The only thing I have found remotely like this so far is this --> http://www.nrnl.org/mitsubishi-intro...panel-t60.html That is the monitor I want

if you google lG E2370V-BF you might find a monitor that meets your demands


while i cant find the articles the monitor is suppose to be a 120 hz monitor

its also suppose to come out in the US around march

[Jamesrt2004]

So is a 37 inch 120 hz LCD HD TV a good choice? Theres even a 480Hz refresh rate 46 inch Vizeo out there but really is to big for my taste. I am about to build a new system and would like an awesome monitor for gaming but want larger than 22 or 27 inches. Maybe 27 would be OK but I have a difficult time understanding the 1ms refresh compaired to 240 hz refresh. Then there's the 2560x1600 higher res issue my new cards will put out. I just cant find a solution, any suggestions? Sorry not an attempt at thread jacking! just sort of on topic and something I have been thinking of as well.

Most TV's lie and use a different way to market the fact they are 600hz or w/e they want to call it... but its all marketing, true 120hz tv's are pretty damn expensive then some are now double that due to the crappy inplementation for marketing again of 'bigger is better'

but if you get a 3D tv it'll be 120hz atleast =)

I though that most decent movies are 16:9 (1920x1080P). ??. Fine... that monitor is just an example, still my desire for my next monitor upgrade is having these features - IPS Panel technology, 6ms or below, true 120Hz technology, RGB LED backlighting, 1080P or beyond, and 24"+. Realistic or not, I don't care, I'm happy to live in my dream world, but that's what I want to make it worth an upgrade in my books. A true 'enthusiast' screen no matter the price.

Nope its more around about 21:9 (rounded up )

if you google lG E2370V-BF you might find a monitor that meets your demands


while i cant find the articles the monitor is suppose to be a 120 hz monitor

its also suppose to come out in the US around march

it isn't 120hz mate =)

nah it isn't 120hz im afraid =(

[BeepBeep2]

no point.

its a nice concept - but a solid 60 FPS is still fine.

I'd much rather play on my 17" CRT with it's 1280x960 res at 75-85 hz...than I would my 2ms 22" ASUS LCD...

But the aspect ratio isn't enough to see what's around me.

I find 75 much more playable than 60, and I do see a difference between 75 and 85. IMO, I would enjoy a 120hz monitor for sure, but I don't have the money to buy one.

[SabreWulf69]

Think I need to read an article on aspect ratios, I'm so confused, what is all this fuss about with 1080P movies and videos then? *sigh* not more marketing crap I've fallen for I hope or are you all just yanking my chain? Blu-ray is pretty popular and always brags about it's superior 1080P video along with almost all TV's, and when entering the 1080P resolution which is 1920x1080 on an aspect ratio calculator like this --> http://www.digitalrebellion.com/weba...pect_calc.html I get an answer of 16:9.

About DVD resolution -
From Wikipedia -

Frame size and frame rate

To record moving pictures DVD-Video utilizes either MPEG-2 compression at up to 9.8 Mbit/s (9,800 kbit/s) or MPEG-1 compression at up to 1.856 Mbit/s (1,856 kbit/s).

The following formats are allowed for MPEG-2 video:
At 25 frame/s, interlaced (commonly used in regions with 50 Hz image scanning frequency):
720 × 576 pixels (same resolution as D-1)
704 × 576 pixels
352 × 576 pixels (same as the China Video Disc standard)

At 29.97, interlaced (commonly used in regions with 60 Hz image scanning frequency):
720 × 480 pixels (same resolution as D-1)
704 × 480 pixels
352 × 480 pixels (same as the China Video Disc standard)

The following formats are allowed for MPEG-1 video:
352 × 288 pixels at 25 frame/s, progressive (Same as the VCD Standard)
352 × 240 pixels at 29.97 frame/s, progressive (Same as the VCD Standard)

All resolutions support video with 4:3 frame aspect ratio. Only full D1 resolutions support widescreen (16:9) video, via anamorphic DVD.

MPEG-1 formats do not support interlaced video. MPEG-2 formats support both interlaced and progressive-scan content, with the latter being encoded within interlaced stream using pulldown.

An MPEG-2 encoder can add flags in video stream to indicate scanning type, field order and field repeating. A DVD player uses these flags to convert progressive content into interlaced video suitable for interlaced TV sets. These flags also help reproducing progressive content on progressive-scan television sets.

I'm not talking about actual in-cinema movies, but the *popular* releases to *popular* media formats for use at home. All I see there is 4:3 and also 16:9, what am I missing?

[GoldenTiger]

Think I need to read an article on aspect ratios, I'm so confused, what is all this fuss about with 1080P movies and videos then? *sigh* not more marketing crap I've fallen for I hope or are you all just yanking my chain? Blu-ray is pretty popular and always brags about it's superior 1080P video along with almost all TV's, and when entering the 1080P resolution which is 1920x1080 on an aspect ratio calculator like this --> http://www.digitalrebellion.com/weba...pect_calc.html I get an answer of 16:9.

About DVD resolution -
From Wikipedia -


I'm not talking about actual in-cinema movies, but the *popular* releases to *popular* media formats for use at home. All I see there is 4:3 and also 16:9, what am I missing?

Many BluRay movies are released in 2.35:1 aspect ratio, not 16:9, thus we end up with squishing on 1080p 16:9 displays and black bars on the top/bottom (letterboxing). You don't get the full resolution out of it unless it's a 16:9 disc, but yes you get a lot more than with a 720p set for example. Additionally far superior overall quality in terms of bitrate, audio selection, and video algorithm. Additionally, while you're not getting full resolution, you get significantly more than a DVD since movies in 2.35:1 on those are subject to the same letterboxing to maintain proper aspect ratio for the display.

I run a 1080p projector myself (Epson HC 8100) on an 84" screen and love it... would go for bigger like 106-120" but I don't have room in my place to fit it right now. The difference between blu and dvd is night and day, no contest whatsoever, both on sound and video.

[SabreWulf69]

Thanks a heap for clearing that up. Always wondered why some Blu-rays still had black bars on them. Is a shame then with most screens being 16:9 because I prefer watching stuff at native res so no aspect ratio problems occur. Nice setup you have there A whole load of movies I have ripped to my PC are at a weird resolution of 1920 by 8 hundred something. I wish the industry would stick to a single standard.