Overclock.net › Forums › Components › Monitors and Displays › IPS vs. 120Hz
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

IPS vs. 120Hz

post #1 of 13
Thread Starter 
Why are there no 120Hz IPS panels yet? Demand is obvious for gamers.

However there seems to be some technical issues wink.gif. Does somebody here know if thats an inherent technical limitation of IPS or just "not yet"?

Just had to make that tough call myself and ended up going for the 120Hz (2x Benq 2420T) after "borrowing" one of those from work.

Without chance to test it i would have gone with the IPS, however if you once experienced the 120Hz the colors and viewing angle simply dont cut ti anymore.

Would upgrade to an IPS with 120Hz at once, but well...
post #2 of 13
There is already 120 Hz IPS (overclocked) --
It's the Catleap 2B and the Tempest Overlord X270OC.
However, it does not completely solve the motion blur problem.
Quote:
baseline - Typical 60 Hz LCD
40% less motion blur - 120 Hz IPS LCD overclocked (1.7x clearer motion)
50% less motion blur - 120 Hz TN LCD (2x clearer motion)
60% less motion blur - 144 Hz TN LCD (2.4x clearer motion)
85% less motion blur - 120 Hz LightBoost (7x clearer motion)
92% less motion blur - 120 Hz LightBoost=10% (12x clearer motion)
90-95% less motion blur - Sony GDM-W900 CRT
post #3 of 13
It has to do with the switching speed and response times of the transistors inside of a TN panel vs. an IPS panel.

IPS offers better viewing angles and wider color gamut
but, are slower response times and refresh rates

TN offers faster response times and refresh rates
but offer less viewing angles and narrower color gamut

But, technology innovations are being made on both ends. Currently, the word is out and consumers are finally aware of IPS panels being superior looking for video editing, movies, etc. so there are more and more cheaper IPS panels coming out. They are all variations on IPS technology, but there are too many for me to keep up with. For example, my Dell U2312HM was bought last summer for around $200. That's really cheap for an IPS but it uses e-IPS. The e stands for economy and it's basically a cheaper way to produce around the same quality as a true IPS. This is similar to what most of the sub $400 IPS monitors are using with the exception of the 27" 1440p Korean IPS monitors.

I think what people are forgetting is that TN panels are starting to look better and offer better viewing angles too. Pretty much all laptops still use TN panels but the viewing angles are improving and color reproduction too. My Dell Studio XPS 16 had some of the best color reproduction and widest horizontal viewing angles I've seen in a laptop, even better than some desktop monitors.

Point is, give it some time, I think we will see 120 Hz IPS monitors soon.
post #4 of 13
edit
Edited by senna89 - 4/7/13 at 2:02am
post #5 of 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doomtomb View Post

It has to do with the switching speed and response times of the transistors inside of a TN panel vs. an IPS panel.

IPS offers better viewing angles and wider color gamut
but, are slower response times and refresh rates

TN offers faster response times and refresh rates
but offer less viewing angles and narrower color gamut

But, technology innovations are being made on both ends. Currently, the word is out and consumers are finally aware of IPS panels being superior looking for video editing, movies, etc. so there are more and more cheaper IPS panels coming out. They are all variations on IPS technology, but there are too many for me to keep up with. For example, my Dell U2312HM was bought last summer for around $200. That's really cheap for an IPS but it uses e-IPS. The e stands for economy and it's basically a cheaper way to produce around the same quality as a true IPS. This is similar to what most of the sub $400 IPS monitors are using with the exception of the 27" 1440p Korean IPS monitors.

I think what people are forgetting is that TN panels are starting to look better and offer better viewing angles too. Pretty much all laptops still use TN panels but the viewing angles are improving and color reproduction too. My Dell Studio XPS 16 had some of the best color reproduction and widest horizontal viewing angles I've seen in a laptop, even better than some desktop monitors.

Point is, give it some time, I think we will see 120 Hz IPS monitors soon.

Sorry but U2312HM have an aggressive AG coating with dirty look, less sharpness and reduced native color vibrancy. And the only better color fidelity can not compensate for the impairment of the image vision.
Koreans 1440p are glossy so beautifuls and haven't this problems.
Edited by senna89 - 4/7/13 at 2:00am
post #6 of 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by senna89 View Post

Lightboost can be used even with 144Hz or only up to 120 ?
Only up to 120Hz. However, LightBoost at 120 Hz has less motion blur than non-LightBoost 144Hz. It's the same reason why CRT 60fps@60Hz has less motion blur than non-LightBoost LCD 120fps@120Hz. Hz does not always equal motion blur -- you also gotta factor in whether the display is static (sample-and-hold) or flicker (impulse-driven like CRT) because flicker does a stroboscopic motion-blur-eliminating effect.

The LCD sample-and-hold effect is currently the major cause of motion blur nowadays, not pixel response time. When pixel response time is less than half a frame, the motion blur is now chiefly caused by eye tracking motion on a sample-and-hold display. On newer 1ms-2ms panels, the LCD pixel response time becomes almost a negligible cause of motion blur -- most motion blur is caused by eye tracking motion while tracking moving objects onscreen, and only flicker displays (one stroboscopic flash per refresh -- CRT, LightBoost) eliminate that kind of motion blur.

TFTCentral has a good article -- Motion Blur Reduction Backlights.

Another interesting reading is that even 0ms panels can have motion blur -- See Why Do Some OLED's Have Motion Blur? -- same cause; the sample-and-hold problem -- motion blur caused by eye tracking across statically-displayed refreshes that don't have large black periods between the frames (like stroboscopic displays).

It depends on what you use the monitor for. Fast games? Slow desktop apps? Graphics design? Sensitive to motion blur? LightBoost can outweigh IPS for some people, while for other people, IPS outweighs LightBoost. But if you clearly see the difference between 60Hz and 120Hz, you may likely see yet an even further improvement by enabling LightBoost if you play 'fast' games.
Edited by mdrejhon - 4/7/13 at 2:04am
post #7 of 13
so at 144Hz lightboost is 0% or the set appairs disabled ?

And If i want to use 10% lightboost to reduce the minimum brightness ?
Edited by senna89 - 4/7/13 at 2:06am
post #8 of 13
Is BenQ XL2420T still best gaming monitor ?
My System
(17 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 2500K Asus P8Z68-V Gen3 Gigabyte r9 280x Kingston HyperX blu DDR3 8GB 1600 Mhz CL9 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
WD 640GB Blue Vertex 3 240 GB Thermalright Silver Arrow Windows 7 x64 Ultimate 
MonitorPowerCaseOther
Dell 2209wa LC Arkangel 850W Enermax Chakra Sennheiser HD 598 
Other
Creative X-FI Titanium 
  hide details  
Reply
My System
(17 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 2500K Asus P8Z68-V Gen3 Gigabyte r9 280x Kingston HyperX blu DDR3 8GB 1600 Mhz CL9 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
WD 640GB Blue Vertex 3 240 GB Thermalright Silver Arrow Windows 7 x64 Ultimate 
MonitorPowerCaseOther
Dell 2209wa LC Arkangel 850W Enermax Chakra Sennheiser HD 598 
Other
Creative X-FI Titanium 
  hide details  
Reply
post #9 of 13
2420T is 120Hz not 144 and has always suffered by overshoot.
Edited by senna89 - 4/7/13 at 3:31pm
post #10 of 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by senna89 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doomtomb View Post

It has to do with the switching speed and response times of the transistors inside of a TN panel vs. an IPS panel.

IPS offers better viewing angles and wider color gamut
but, are slower response times and refresh rates

TN offers faster response times and refresh rates
but offer less viewing angles and narrower color gamut

But, technology innovations are being made on both ends. Currently, the word is out and consumers are finally aware of IPS panels being superior looking for video editing, movies, etc. so there are more and more cheaper IPS panels coming out. They are all variations on IPS technology, but there are too many for me to keep up with. For example, my Dell U2312HM was bought last summer for around $200. That's really cheap for an IPS but it uses e-IPS. The e stands for economy and it's basically a cheaper way to produce around the same quality as a true IPS. This is similar to what most of the sub $400 IPS monitors are using with the exception of the 27" 1440p Korean IPS monitors.

I think what people are forgetting is that TN panels are starting to look better and offer better viewing angles too. Pretty much all laptops still use TN panels but the viewing angles are improving and color reproduction too. My Dell Studio XPS 16 had some of the best color reproduction and widest horizontal viewing angles I've seen in a laptop, even better than some desktop monitors.

Point is, give it some time, I think we will see 120 Hz IPS monitors soon.

Sorry but U2312HM have an aggressive AG coating with dirty look, less sharpness and reduced native color vibrancy. And the only better color fidelity can not compensate for the impairment of the image vision.
Koreans 1440p are glossy so beautifuls and haven't this problems.

What on earth does that have to do with anything I explained about the different technologies in my post. I said the 1440p Korean monitors are the exception, not using cheaper IPS, because there are A- panels from the Apple Thunderbolt display.

Please keep your opinion to yourself about matte displays.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Monitors and Displays
Overclock.net › Forums › Components › Monitors and Displays › IPS vs. 120Hz