Jump to content


 


Register a free account to unlock additional features at BleepingComputer.com
Welcome to BleepingComputer, a free community where people like yourself come together to discuss and learn how to use their computers. Using the site is easy and fun. As a guest, you can browse and view the various discussions in the forums, but can not create a new topic or reply to an existing one unless you are logged in. Other benefits of registering an account are subscribing to topics and forums, creating a blog, and having no ads shown anywhere on the site.


Click here to Register a free account now! or read our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

Photo

Are "gaming" monitors better than ordinary monitors?


  • Please log in to reply
4 replies to this topic

#1 MickinPlymouthUK

MickinPlymouthUK

  • Members
  • 688 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:11:24 AM

Posted 21 April 2013 - 08:08 PM

I might need to buy a new monitor soon, and as I play fast-moving flight sims, should I get one that says "For gaming" on the box, or will an ordinary one do?



BC AdBot (Login to Remove)

 


#2 GreenGiant117

GreenGiant117

  • Members
  • 294 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:06:24 AM

Posted 24 April 2013 - 12:03 PM

doesn't matter if it says "for gaming" or not, look at the specs, you can spend a boatload of money on a high end "gaming" monitor and it could have lesser specs than a much cheaper one.

 

I am more biased towards Hanns G and Acer monitors, though others are great as well.

 

The things you want to look for are:

 

Display Colors - more colors = richer looking visuals... to a point anyways, the human eye can only distinguish somewhere between 7-10 million colors so above that isnt worth spending extra money on, also the source media may not render in that many colors so again lower than 7 million is fine, you just want a high number

 

Contrast Ratio - Now this one is tricky, again the higher the number the better, higher number = better difference between black and white (blacks look blacker, and whites look whiter) the most advertised number is the active contrast ratio, which means they put on a white screen full brightness and measure it, then take a black screen, dimmest settings and take a reading, and the difference is the ratio, but you want to look at the dynamic contrast ratio, this is measure with one setting, and with white and black on the screen, so this is a much more accurate measure of the screen. You can have a screen with an active contrast of 10 million:1 but only have a dynamic of 800:1 then have another with active of 50,000:1 and a dynamic of 2000:1 and the second would be much MUCH better. (common information will either list the dynamic separately, or they will show active followed by a number in parentheses (10,000,000:1 (1000:1))

 

Response Time - listed in ms (milliseconds) the lower the better, this is how fast the pixels respond/change colors so slower rates will have a bleeding/ghosting effect, a typical rate is 5ms which is what I have on my system, but you can find them as low as 1.5ms (only saw this once and it was super expensive) anything from 2-5ms should be fine, I wouldn't spend a ton more money on a super fast one, the 5ms that I have is fast enough for fps gaming that I do.

 

There are other things to consider but those are the 3 big ones in my opinion, make a list of what you want for these 3 and you can quickly narrow down the list, the other things to consider would be refresh rate, and brightness. Refresh rate will most likely be limited by your computer, 60 ro 120Hz (120Hz usually reserved for 3D monitors but not always) make sure your graphics card can do 120Hz before spending extra on one, and brightness is how bright the backlight is essentially, I like my screens a little dark so I don't care much about this number, but higher is generally better, and you can always turn it down if need be.



#3 MickinPlymouthUK

MickinPlymouthUK
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 688 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:11:24 AM

Posted 03 May 2013 - 10:17 AM

Thanks, i'll have to remember that a lower Response Time number is better than a higher number. 

I've been browsing some monitor online stats and here's a typical 'big three' techy readout for a 24"Hanns G HK241 LCD, does it look alright to you as a 'gaming monitor'?

The Response Time of 5 ms I can understand, but the other figures are a mystery

 

Display Colors 16,7 Mio Colors
Brightness 300 cd/m² (typ.) / Contrast (typ.) 1000:1 / X-Contrast (dyn.) 80,000:1
Response Time 5 ms (GtG)

 

PS- some monitors are advertised as LED (as opposed to TFT / LCD), which is best for gaming?


 



#4 GreenGiant117

GreenGiant117

  • Members
  • 294 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:06:24 AM

Posted 03 May 2013 - 10:25 AM

Hanns G are typically considered cheap monitors, they are good, but they arent all that great, the brightness and colors are good ratings (the GTG refers to grey to grey response time, black to black will be longer, but anything 8ms and less gtg is considered good)

Contrast of 1000:1 actual is pretty good. so overall thats a good one.

 

I prefer Acer, Samsung and a few other bigger names over Hanns G.

 

LED vs LCD is a lot to do with the power consumption (LED uses a lot less), true white rather than a yellowish coloring, and typically you get better contrast ratios with LEDs as well.

As far as response time, and performance other than coloring goes LED vs LCD theres no real difference.



#5 MickinPlymouthUK

MickinPlymouthUK
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 688 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:11:24 AM

Posted 04 May 2013 - 10:38 AM

 

 Thanks, and just to complete my education about "gaming" monitors so that I can shop around with confidence, would you mind telling me if I should stick to the numbers below, or is some flexibility okay?

You've already told me that Response Time should be anywhere between 2-5ms, but what about Display Colors/ Brightness/ Contrast/ X-Contrast, what range of flexibility should I stay within? 

(For example would anywhere from 15 to 17 Mio colors be an acceptable range? Likewise with the other figures, how far can I stray from the figures below?)

 

Display Colors 16,7 Mio Colors
Brightness 300 cd/m² (typ.)

Contrast (typ.) 1000:1

X-Contrast (dyn.) 80,000:1
Response Time 5 ms (GtG)






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users