For very sweaty gayming
Supposedly CRT-like motion clarity with backlight strobing
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GOgs15DmGqU
https://blurbusters.com/press-release-version-20-of-blur-bus…
Limit 1 per customer
ViewSonic XG2431 24" 1080p 240Hz IPS Gaming Monitor $379 + Delivery ($0 SYD C&C/ $20 off with mVIP) @ Mwave
130
povogamer on 13/09/2023 - 20:55 mwave.com.au (283 clicks)
Last edited 13/09/2023 - 23:00 by 1 other user
Last edited 13/09/2023 - 23:00 by 1 other user
Related Stores
closed Comments
**tren
The AOC 24G2SP 165Hz FHD IPS Monitor was just $167 at PC Byte.
Paying an additional $210 is too high of a premium for 240Hz. Those extra frames will only make a difference if you play competitive games at a high level, and if you play at that high level, you will probably want a 360Hz DyAc monitor.
Average response time on the AOC is 6.5ms, with a very wide range. So it's sluggish FHD 165Hz IPS versus solid 240Hz IPS with high tier strobing.
All pales in comparison to the 360Hz - 500Hz TN and 240Hz OLED in the mix today. 360Hz & 480Hz OLED next year.
If you meant to reply to me, try looking at the code they're very clearly promoting on the website.
I bought an LG C1 for the backlight strobing and found my ability to sight read rhythm games improved to the point I went from Oni 7-star in Taiko to low Oni 9-star. I ended up upgrading my PC monitor to an XG2431 and if anything it's better; I love the ability to completely customize the settings of the strobing.
It's not something you can see if you like by watching a YouTube video and for some people it will be too distracting, but for me it's now an essential feature.
Just called BFI on an OLED as it has no backlight, so it just pulses a black frame.
16ms of latency seems wasteful for a 240hz display. That's 4 frames of lag.
Can I ask where you get this number from?
Straight out of their arse, because the actual figure is 2.2-2.7 ms from various outlets.
By that logic the fastest screens on the chart are even more wasteful, no? The chart is looking end-to-end latency, and it seems like a fine performer in this regard.
@itscyanide: Yes, the faster screens with similar latency are worse. 16ms is what you'd find in a gaming monitor from 15 years ago. TBH I'm wondering if this review has bad methodology because on RTings the numbers for pretty much all high refresh rate monitors are much lower.
@umexcuseme: Not bad methodology, they are just different tests so it's not apples to apples between them. There's actually an RTINGS review for this specific monitor where you can see that it does in fact score and perform similarly to other high refresh monitors in its class.
Notice the screenie you linked says Nvidia LDAT and lists a bunch of seemingly unrelated hardware such as the video card and mouse - that's what the end-to-end test is measuring the total latency for.
The breakdown in this article gives you an idea of what's being measured, hence the higher latency in ms in the results.
Thnx bought x10