• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

TN ( Gaming ) / IPS Monitor ??

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

Gh0sT-NoVa

Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2012
Location
Malaysia, South East Asia.
Well this is bad luck, my good old Dell U2414H IPS monitor just died on me today, not entirely dead, but it's showing black dotted lines vertically on my screen ( only one line , top to the bottom )
So I guess I be going to warranty it, but at the mean time, I think Im gonna change to a new monitor.
Now I really like this monitor honestly the bezel is thin, the picture is beautiful, but my friend have asked me to switch to a gaming monitor instead, since all I do is actually game most the time, he said that a 144hz monitor will really feel different specially in FPS games which I mostly play.
But all gaming monitors are TN panels....I was wondering, will those monitor's " picture " / " graphics " still look as good as my Dell ??
Or it be lesser. But I haven't actually try any gaming monitor at all till now, how much of a difference are both of them in terms of

1) Picture / Color quality, basically things look more " Eye Candy "
2) Smoothness, I guess the 144hz definitely be smoother ? Since almost everyone claim it's so, some even did a blind test switching between refresh rate to test it to show it make a difference

So what's your opinion guys ?? I would want to get a FreeSync monitor, but they Overpriced it here. Example a normal BenQ gaming monitor here is like RM2,200 non FreeSync, now the FreeSync model is RM3,200, really ? What the **** ! The price jacked up by RM1000 ! Which is hell lot here...
If it's a G-SYNC yeah I guess so, but still even for G-SYNC is way overpriced as well.

Also I would still prefer good old 1080p @ 23"
 
My suggestion:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...YFxPbdxB0GAysU5ZsFSHcaAsvD8P8HAQ&gclsrc=aw.ds

I bought this when it was $100 off, probably the best buy I've made in a long time. The image is very clear, and looks amazing with all games, movies, and pics. Its a 2k monitor with AMD Free Sync, so for the price and package, when on sale, the monitor is a great buy. The only downside I have had has been the ultra-wide 21:9 aspect ratio. Its not a bother when it comes to videos, because they will never come in outside of the 16:9 ratio. Depending on which game, it will either be supported for 21:9 or it will not. When a game is not configured to run at this aspect ratio, it can be tiresome to get the game to run properly. Luckily there is a very dedicated community pushing for more developers to adopt the new aspect ratio.
 
Well this is bad luck, my good old Dell U2414H IPS monitor just died on me today, not entirely dead, but it's showing black dotted lines vertically on my screen ( only one line , top to the bottom )
So I guess I be going to warranty it, but at the mean time, I think Im gonna change to a new monitor.
Now I really like this monitor honestly the bezel is thin, the picture is beautiful, but my friend have asked me to switch to a gaming monitor instead, since all I do is actually game most the time, he said that a 144hz monitor will really feel different specially in FPS games which I mostly play.
But all gaming monitors are TN panels....I was wondering, will those monitor's " picture " / " graphics " still look as good as my Dell ??
Or it be lesser. But I haven't actually try any gaming monitor at all till now, how much of a difference are both of them in terms of

1) Picture / Color quality, basically things look more " Eye Candy "
2) Smoothness, I guess the 144hz definitely be smoother ? Since almost everyone claim it's so, some even did a blind test switching between refresh rate to test it to show it make a difference

So what's your opinion guys ?? I would want to get a FreeSync monitor, but they Overpriced it here. Example a normal BenQ gaming monitor here is like RM2,200 non FreeSync, now the FreeSync model is RM3,200, really ? What the **** ! The price jacked up by RM1000 ! Which is hell lot here...
If it's a G-SYNC yeah I guess so, but still even for G-SYNC is way overpriced as well.

Also I would still prefer good old 1080p @ 23"

If you can afford it get an IPS monitor, the color accuracy and viewing angles are far superior to TN panels for the lack of a little bit of refresh rate. I just picked up an Asus Freesync 27'' 1440p 144hz monitor and it is beautiful next to my 2 other 1440p IPS screens.

Only get a g-sync monitor if you plan to move to an nVidia GPU at some point as the extra money spent will be worthless if you don't.
 
A point on G-sync vs A-sync:

G-sync is a closed protocol that Nvidia forces companies to use to get asynchronous syncing.
A-sync is an open protocol that AMD shares freely and can be used by any GPU or Monitor company. However, Nvidia GPUs currently do not support A-Sync, but are capable.
 
A point on G-sync vs A-sync:

G-sync is a closed protocol that Nvidia forces companies to use to get asynchronous syncing.
A-sync is an open protocol that AMD shares freely and can be used by any GPU or Monitor company. However, Nvidia GPUs currently do not support A-Sync, but are capable.

A note on this, all the testing I've seen shows that G-Sync is superior to FreeSync (never heard A-Sync).
 
A note on this, all the testing I've seen shows that G-Sync is superior to FreeSync (never heard A-Sync).

I've never seen a test where G-sync came out as superior. Many G-sync monitors deal better with low frame rates because they start to double draw frames but other than that there really isn't much difference.
 
I've never seen a test where G-sync came out as superior. Many G-sync monitors deal better with low frame rates because they start to double draw frames but other than that there really isn't much difference.

So, what you're saying you've seen is that they perform about the same at high refresh rates, but at low refresh rates G-Sync is better.
To me, that is EXACTLY what I said, G-Sync is superior because low frame rates are where we have issues with typical monitors.

Edit: Going to post some snippets and links here for you...

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2015/04/09/g-sync-or-freesync-amd-nvidia/
Anyway, I’ll dispense with the suspense right away by saying that, as things stand, G-Sync is very clearly the better technology by pretty much every metric save for cost. Firstly, it’s just smoother, especially at lower frame rates.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-freesync-versus-nvidia-g-sync-reader-event,4246.html
freesync-or-gsync.png

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2974...rate-displays-make-pc-games-super-smooth.html
Nvidia has a slight advantage at the very low and very high end of the frame rate spectrum, and its G-Sync does a better job with ghosting, but these are what we’d call edge cases that won’t affect the vast majority of gamers.

Shall I continue?
 
Last edited:
Think you will be disappointed with a cheap TN panel.

If you never used a good monitor it would not be as big of deal. there is no going back
 
i always stuck with tn because of response times (i bought an ips at work to try out and i don't like the response times on it just for work stuff), i recently bought a 29" LG ultrawide ips and the response times are awesome they have come a long way in that field. mine has freesync but i don't even use it, i plan on it but amd + win10 has issues with it i guess i haven't tried updating drivers or anything either yet though as it doesn't bother me... i guess im just used to screen tearing lol.
 
A note on this, all the testing I've seen shows that G-Sync is superior to FreeSync (never heard A-Sync).

I think he meant Adaptive Sync, which is FreeSync from AMD.

Ok one more question and I really appreciate for all your replies, I was wondering will there be ANY DIFFERENCE AT ALL if I were to game @ 60 FPS on a 144hz compared to a 60hz monitor ?

Since I still prefer to lock my FPS in games / basically turn on VSYNC, funny thing is, when having VSYNC ON, everything felt alot smoother too on my Dell U2414H monitor to be specific, compared to letting the FPS run all over the place, thus why I lock my FPS, also at same time it keeps my card running quiet and cool
 
So, what you're saying you've seen is that they perform about the same at high refresh rates, but at low refresh rates G-Sync is better.
To me, that is EXACTLY what I said, G-Sync is superior because low frame rates are where we have issues with typical monitors.

Playing under 40 FPS is kind of ****ty experience regardless of the adaptive sync technology used. Freesync has the capability to support very low refresh rates and if you plan on gaming on low FPS you should choose a panel that has that extended low range support.
I wouldn't call Gsync superior just because most free sync monitors don't support extremely low refresh rates.

Yes Gsync has advantages over Freesync and vice versa but for normal gaming at around 60fps or above they work pretty much the same.
 
I think he meant Adaptive Sync, which is FreeSync from AMD.

Ok one more question and I really appreciate for all your replies, I was wondering will there be ANY DIFFERENCE AT ALL if I were to game @ 60 FPS on a 144hz compared to a 60hz monitor ?

Since I still prefer to lock my FPS in games / basically turn on VSYNC, funny thing is, when having VSYNC ON, everything felt alot smoother too on my Dell U2414H monitor to be specific, compared to letting the FPS run all over the place, thus why I lock my FPS, also at same time it keeps my card running quiet and cool

Not sure I follow what you're asking, if you get a 144Hz G-Sync panel you won't use V-Sync.

Playing under 40 FPS is kind of ****ty experience regardless of the adaptive sync technology used. Freesync has the capability to support very low refresh rates and if you plan on gaming on low FPS you should choose a panel that has that extended low range support.
I wouldn't call Gsync superior just because most free sync monitors don't support extremely low refresh rates.

Yes Gsync has advantages over Freesync and vice versa but for normal gaming at around 60fps or above they work pretty much the same.

I never said you should play under 40FPS, but it's going to happen to everyone at some point.
Why not have the monitor that is better at that level???

I would absolutely call them superior because of a better extended frequency response, on a technology that is all about frequency response ranges.
 
I would absolutely call them superior because of a better extended frequency response, on a technology that is all about frequency response ranges.

Free sync has wider range support for refresh rates(9Hz-240Hz), It's up to the monitor manufacturers to decide what kind support they feel is needed.
 
Free sync has wider range support for refresh rates(9Hz-240Hz), It's up to the monitor manufacturers to decide what kind support they feel is needed.

And the FreeSync module uses frame doubling that low so it's useless compared to the G-Sync module at low rates.
 
Not sure I follow what you're asking, if you get a 144Hz G-Sync panel you won't use V-Sync.

No, Im not getting a G-SYNC / FreeSync monitor, firstly there aren't many choices here in my country, secondly mostly are 1440p monitors if there are, which I still prefer 1080p, thirdly both G-SYNC and FreeSync is overpriced here, they are charging extra for both specially FreeSync which is suppose to be same price as non-FreeSync monitors.
I know G-SYNC we have to pay a premium price, bout 200$ but it's about 300 - 400$ more here it's ludacris, fourth is that I own an AMD card so I won't be going G-SYNC.

What I was asking is, is there any difference at all to game on a 144hz monitor @ 60 FPS when compared to gaming on a 60hz monitor @ 60 FPS ?
I've tried Googling it myself and asking my friend, both Google search results and my friend's claim is that playing @ 60 FPS on a 144hz does feel smoother compared to 60 FPS on a 60hz monitor. But then again of course it feels laggy when playing 60 FPS rather than the usual 100 + FPS on a 144hz monitor.
 
Gsync uses doubling and tripling too, did I miss something?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but G-Sync doesn't double or triple anything. The monitor itself displays a frame for the entire time it needs be till the next frame is ready to display. There is no frame rate at all. That is why G-sync is superior and hardware dependent, as the monitor needs to sync with the frames being outputted by the video card, not vise versa.
 
No, Im not getting a G-SYNC / FreeSync monitor, firstly there aren't many choices here in my country, secondly mostly are 1440p monitors if there are, which I still prefer 1080p, thirdly both G-SYNC and FreeSync is overpriced here, they are charging extra for both specially FreeSync which is suppose to be same price as non-FreeSync monitors.
I know G-SYNC we have to pay a premium price, bout 200$ but it's about 300 - 400$ more here it's ludacris, fourth is that I own an AMD card so I won't be going G-SYNC.

What I was asking is, is there any difference at all to game on a 144hz monitor @ 60 FPS when compared to gaming on a 60hz monitor @ 60 FPS ?
I've tried Googling it myself and asking my friend, both Google search results and my friend's claim is that playing @ 60 FPS on a 144hz does feel smoother compared to 60 FPS on a 60hz monitor. But then again of course it feels laggy when playing 60 FPS rather than the usual 100 + FPS on a 144hz monitor.

Ah, understood.

If you can only push 60Hz there's no point buying a 144Hz monitor.

Gsync uses doubling and tripling too, did I miss something?

You did miss something, G-Sync doesn't use doubling or tripling.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but G-Sync doesn't double or triple anything. The monitor itself displays a frame for the entire time it needs be till the next frame is ready to display. There is no frame rate at all. That is why G-sync is superior and hardware dependent, as the monitor needs to sync with the frames being outputted by the video card, not vise versa.

Bingo.
 
Correct me if I'm wrong, but G-Sync doesn't double or triple anything. The monitor itself displays a frame for the entire time it needs be till the next frame is ready to display. There is no frame rate at all. That is why G-sync is superior and hardware dependent, as the monitor needs to sync with the frames being outputted by the video card, not vise versa.

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/Dissecting-G-Sync-and-FreeSync-How-Technologies-Differ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VkrJU5d2RfA


G-sync starts to redraw the same frame to keep refresh rate above 35Hz or was it 40Hz
Say the limit is 35Hz and your fps dips to 32FPS, Gsync then draws the same frame twice to double the refresh rate resulting 64Hz
 
Back