BenQ XL2420T or Samsung S23A700/750D

Hi,

I asked this in the benq thread but it got lost in all the other posts Just want to know which is better, or are they both really good and I would be happy with either?

I currently have an AMD 6950. And I am looking for a monitor with the lowest input lag for playing cs:source mostly. Want to try some 3D too.

I can get the S23A700D for around £80 cheaper than the XL2420T, and it comes with the glasses and the emitter for 3D. Don't you have to buy the Nvidia Kit for the XL2420t?

But, I would sacrifice 3D if the monitor was as good as my CRT for gaming. So maybe I should change the question, which 120hz monitor is the closest thing to a CRT for games like CS:source.

I was also trying to decide between these 2 monitors. In the end I bought the Samsung S23A750D and it's amazing. Very fast response with no ghosting (possibly the best?) and low input lag. Coupled with very good image quality (for a TN panel.)

The Benq is also designed for fast response, but I found a review which mentions poor image quality (colours, etc..) but they did say it was excellent for CS. The Benq also has DVI and every adjustment you can think of. It's also an inch bigger.

I mainly play CS Source, but I also wanted a monitor which would be decent for other tasks too, so I picked the Samsung. The Benq certainly has way more features, but it was the better colour reproduction of the Samsung which decided it for me. And I think they are both just as fast as each other in terms of pixel response.

Image quality is fantastic for a TN panel. Best I've ever seen.

X3T said:

I was also trying to decide between these 2 monitors. In the end I bought the Samsung S23A750D and it's amazing. Very fast response with no ghosting (possibly the best?) and low input lag. Coupled with very good image quality (for a TN panel.)

The Benq is also designed for fast response, but I found a review which mentions poor image quality (colours, etc..) but they did say it was excellent for CS. The Benq also has DVI and every adjustment you can think of. It's also an inch bigger.

I mainly play CS Source, but I also wanted a monitor which would be decent for other tasks too, so I picked the Samsung. The Benq certainly has way more features, but it was the better colour reproduction of the Samsung which decided it for me. And I think they are both just as fast as each other in terms of pixel response.

Click to expand...

X3T said:

I was also trying to decide between these 2 monitors. In the end I bought the Samsung S23A750D and it's amazing. Very fast response with no ghosting (possibly the best?) and low input lag. Coupled with very good image quality (for a TN panel.)

The Benq is also designed for fast response, but I found a review which mentions poor image quality (colours, etc..) but they did say it was excellent for CS. The Benq also has DVI and every adjustment you can think of. It's also an inch bigger.

I mainly play CS Source, but I also wanted a monitor which would be decent for other tasks too, so I picked the Samsung. The Benq certainly has way more features, but it was the better colour reproduction of the Samsung which decided it for me. And I think they are both just as fast as each other in terms of pixel response.

Click to expand...

There's no way the BenQ XL2420T has poor image/colour quality when calibrated....it's not far off my HP LP2475w which says a lot.

Besides both monitors are great, go with what you like look of to be honest lol as they both seem pretty much equal.

700D due to cost, for basically the same screen you're paying a lot less, though I've not checked prices recently.

Also seen mention of getting it from europe somewhere because for some reason the 700D (think 750 too?) is way cheaper not in the UK. We often seem to get stung for monitors in the UK vs everywhere else in the world

Probably a lot of hassle though, but the 700d is a saving worth making.

Well considering the BenQ was made literally for Counter strike and all gaming in general, and you say you would be willing to play that bit extra if its as good as your CRT...

I think it sounds like the BenQ is the best bet, its the closest thing to a CRT in terms of response time/ input lag and performance and the colours are on par with the best TN panels I have seen.

Basically this monitor was made for counter strike with feedback and input from CC player sand gamers in general, and I doubt you will have a better time playing CC/any competitive game on any other monitor out tbh, even the very best CRT's due to it being on par and having the added bonus of widescreen and a flat panel.

And I must say dont get reviews of the XL2410T mixed up with the XL2420T.
Because the older model had backlight bleed and colour issues, this newer model seems to have not just fixed that but made everything about it better and the best it can

If you have an AMD graphics card and want to run games in 3D then you really want to go for the Samsung - since that monitor does 3D via Displayport. In contrast the BenQ does 3D via dual-link DVI - so the 3D mode only works for Nvidia graphics cards (in conjunction with the 3D vision kit).

cmndr_andi said:

If you have an AMD graphics card and want to run games in 3D then you really want to go for the Samsung - since that monitor does 3D via Displayport. In contrast the BenQ does 3D via dual-link DVI - so the 3D mode only works for Nvidia graphics cards (in conjunction with the 3D vision kit).

Click to expand...

Yeah essentially the choice depends on your GPU. The Benq does Nvidia 3DVision 2 which the Samsung doesn't (it did via a hack but I'm not sure if this still works). The Samsung would proabably be a better fit if you have an AMD GPU.

I have the Samsung S27A750D 27" 120hz and it is the same/better than gaming on CRT (I used to have Samsung 19" 997MB and I would not go back after using this), I was skeptical at first until I tried it and omg I was amazed, Source runs so smooth and looks so good on this as does everything else

Have not personally tried the BenQ but always been a fan of Samsung and always will be and from what I have seen with reviews etc definately go for the Samsung

At the end of the day the OP's end question was;
"So maybe I should change the question, which 120hz monitor is the closest thing to a CRT for games like CS:source."

And it is without a doubt the BenQ because that is exactly what it has been designed for, and they pulled it off amazingly this time with the added bonus of good colours and minimum backlight bleed.

The OP's main concern isnt 3D, its gaming, and in particular Counter Strike.

Although these video's are all marketing, I think you should just watch them because it will for sure make your mind up And I think anyone who has this monitor can confirm its the best monitor for gaming you can get right now, and the colours for a TN look very nice.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKqk-Wz3HvM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7TXLN3ZT7s4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_209Br7Ywp8

This monitor wasn't just made for gaming in general, but Counter Strike in particular, its main aim is as a gaming monitor, unlike the Samsung and pretty much any other 120hz which are aimed for 3D, although that doesnt mean the BenQ's 3d is bad, because it has the new Nvidia lightboost tech and is meant to be pretty good, but like I say isn't the main intention for this monitor, the main intention is for exacting someone like you

PancakeSniffer said:

At the end of the day the OP's end question was;
"So maybe I should change the question, which 120hz monitor is the closest thing to a CRT for games like CS:source."

And it is without a doubt the BenQ because that is exactly what it has been designed for, and they pulled it off amazingly this time with the added bonus of good colours and minimum backlight bleed.

The OP's main concern isnt 3D, its gaming, and in particular Counter Strike.

Although these video's are all marketing, I think you should just watch them because it will for sure make your mind up And I think anyone who has this monitor can confirm its the best monitor for gaming you can get right now, and the colours for a TN look very nice.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKqk-Wz3HvM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7TXLN3ZT7s4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_209Br7Ywp8

This monitor wasn't just made for gaming in general, but Counter Strike in particular, its main aim is as a gaming monitor, unlike the Samsung and pretty much any other 120hz which are aimed for 3D, although that doesnt mean the BenQ's 3d is bad, because it has the new Nvidia lightboost tech and is meant to be pretty good, but like I say isn't the main intention for this monitor, the main intention is for exacting someone like you

Click to expand...

Lovely though that is (and I am certainly glad you are happy with your BenQ) none of that really addresses the question you have redefined, either. The elements that make a monitor 'CRT like' are basically low latency coupled with low response times across a range of pixel transitions - without any 'artifacts' resulting from overblown pixel overdrive (case in point on the last one - XL2410T also marketed with Counter-Strike in mind). Whether the monitor is made with Counter-Strike in mind and marketed with some of their more infamous professional players is irrelevent. BenQ as a manufacturer are perfectly capable of producing a monitor which satisfies much of this criteria. But then again - so is Samsung. The S27A750D I have tested, for example, has extremely low input lag (we are talking something like sub-4ms base latency over DisplayPort) and very well implemented pixel overdrive. It is a very responsive monitor indeed. Now I am not saying that the BenQ is worse than that, but there is only so much improvement you can make over something that is already very good. Seeing as you haven't tested the Samsung I don't think your one-sided and somewhat sensationalist view is partiularly fair.

When I review the BenQ XL2420T I will be having it alongside various other monitors (inluding an SA750 and SA850) so should be able to get a good feel for how well-tuned it is with respect to the aforementioned desireable factors. Another key factor is, of course, image quality. Now an immediate difference that should occur to anybody who wishes to compare these two monitors is the screen surface. The Samsung has a glossy Ultra Clear surface whereas the BenQ has a possibly quite high-haze matte antiglare surface -refer to the reviews or 'matte vs glossy article' on my website for why this is significant. I have high hopes for this BenQ, I really do, but please don't skew the OP's deision with unjustified partiality.

Well thanks for all the replies!! I am now even more undecided haha. I am not a fan of marketing gimmicks. Like take the zowie mouse that was designed specially for FPS games by gamers, it was terrible for me anyway, my old logitech mx518 is way better. So I am not sure about the benq for that reason.

People seem to be happy with it tbh. Would love to get a measurement of inputlag/response time. On the samsung 700d I know that it's very low according to reviews etc. But I can't find anything out about the benq response time.

It seems to be from reading through the forums that there won't be much difference between the two for gaming. It seems that one is designed to work better with Nvidia cards and the other works better with AMD cards. Am I right in this?

Basically what PCM2 said lol I was writing my post and didn't see it until I posted mine glossy versus matter doesn't bother me. I am in room that I have great control over the light conditions, so reflective or not isn't an issue.

Well, like PCM points out, the matte vs. glossy thing is a big decision factor. Personally, I hate glossy screens, so the Samsung was an absolute NO for me.

I've been using a matte screen surface for a few years, and I was hesitant at moving to a glossy surface as my back is next to a window.

Now I have been using a glossy screen I think it's actually better for me than the matte one! The light used to 'glare' across the matte surface so I couldn't see anything behind that area, but now with the glossy screen there is no glare. Yes I can see the window in the reflection, but I can actually see the picture on the screen!

And when I was referring to the 'issues' raised in the reviews and that article - it isn't just one-sided. I would say that if you can comfortably accomodate a glossy monitor then go for it. I'm not saying rule out the BenQ for the sake of the screen surface, as that would be foolish. However; the extra vibrancy and clarity of a good glossy monitor is certainly welcome if reflections aren't going to be an issue. And X3T makes a good point. It isn't only the light coming out of the monitor that can adversely be affected by the matte surface but also the diffusion of incident light, which causes interference.

PCM2 said:

Lovely though that is (and I am certainly glad you are happy with your BenQ) none of that really addresses the question you have redefined, either. The elements that make a monitor 'CRT like' are basically low latency coupled with low response times across a range of pixel transitions - without any 'artifacts' resulting from overblown pixel overdrive

I have high hopes for this BenQ, I really do, but please don't skew the OP's deision with unjustified partiality.

Click to expand...

It was adressing the OP question........
The Samsung hasnt got the best input lag or response time in tests against other 120hz monitors, and the BenQ has been made especially for this and to feel like a CRT monitor, the Samsung wasnt, the samsung was made to be a very good 120hz and 3D monitor with good colours, its main aim wasnt to feel like a CRT which the BenQ is.

And using a CRT compared to the BenQ at home there is literally no noticable difference atall in input lag or response times, its amazing.
Now any other monitor I use (except CRT) I notice the lag, even when I enable Vsync I now notice mouse lag, the BenQ is as good as any CRT I have tried in terms of input lag and response times, obviously Scientificly not as good, but to the human feel and eye it certainly is.

And this is all coming from someone that compared many different monitors in store including the Samsung and Acer 120hz monitors, and the benQ was notably the best in this sense and is the reason I bought it, the samsung although had slightly better colour in store was not as instant or CRT like as the BenQ.
Which you obviously havent. So please dont be insulting and tell me "don't skew the OP's deision with unjustified partiality" Because it is completely justified and just my advice to the OP from my actual experience comparing both monitors....




As I said, the OP's actual question was;
"So maybe I should change the question, which 120hz monitor is the closest thing to a CRT for games like CS:source."

And it is without a doubt the BenQ, thats exactly what it has been made for and what it has achieved, the Samsung although an extremely good monitor wasnt made especially for this and also didn't achieve it (In terms of feeling like a CRT compared to the BenQ)

And the anti glare coat on the BenQ isnt too aggressive like you say and doesnt effect the picture quality atall, infact its better than the glossy, and other anti glare coats on my TV and other monitors.

I'm sorry PancakeSniffer but you are plucking numbers out of thin air. You are using what is likely very unscientific, inaccurate and frankly unreliable test data from 'the internet' to reinforce a flawed idea you have about a product you've never actually used. You say you have used these models side by side in a store? And how exactly did you find them side by side in a store? And did you thoroughly test them on various game titles in that store and make sure to assess the various overdrive modes? That seems very far-fetched to me, but you don't need to use that sort of post-purchase rationalisation here . Not to blow my own trumpet but I have produced the most reliable test data you'll find on the S27A750D's input lag which I referred to above. Taking over 120 measurements to get a much more representitive average than some numbers flying about from elsewhere. The notion that the S27A750D's input lag is somehow significantly higher than that of the BenQ is likely not true at all. Certainly this is a very weak premise to base your 'argument' on and in relation to the OP's question you are applying unjust bias. And regardless of whether you feel that the BenQ's matte surface is 'too aggressive' (your words, not mine) it does affect the image whether you like it or not. Anybody who doubts that would do well to read the aforementioned 'matte vs glossy monitor' article. It is simple physics - if it didn't affect the image then it wouldn't affect the incident light, either, and you would get no glare redution whatsoever.

As I said, I went to the local store to test which monitor I was going to get before I went ahead and baught the 27" Asus.

I was also interested in the 120hz monitors so I looked at them and was convinced from the off thats what I wanted.

You cant tell me im "plucking numbers out of thin air. You are using what is likely very unscientific, inaccurate and frankly unreliable test data from 'the internet' to reinforce a flawed idea you have about a product you've never actually used." As that is quite frankly insulting and contradicting yourself because I have tried out the monitors in question in person and just given my opinion and advice on which is more CRT like and better for gaming, and you havent so who are you to tell me that im simply plucking numbers off the internet or havent even actually ever used?????


So I tested the 3 120hz they had on diplay (the Samsung, BenQ, and Acer) The Acer was not as good as the other 2 and actually hgad a buzzing sound on dark pictures aswell. The Samsung had better colour, the BenQ was only slightly but noticably more responsive and CRT like than the Samsung though, obviously not by much, but ther BenQ was certainly more CRT like than the Samsung, what else would you liek me to say?? I played with them for quite long before spending £300.

Honestly you are insulting to me, and contradicting yourself in somehow trying to say my advice or opinion and statement is false when Im the one who has tried both side by side and you haven't.....

I never said the input lag is significantly higher atall, and im not talking numbers and special tests. All I have done is very carefully tested both monitors to see which is more responsive and smooth and you can tell by hand and eye and in person more than you can by looking at numbers.
The BenQ was like I said more CRT like than the Samsung but the Samsung had a bit better colours, who are you to tell me that im not allowed to say that or that im wrong????

PancakeSniffer, you are perhaps too new here to know who I am or what I represent. I think that Melmac is aware of what I do and it will be up to him to assess everything that is said here and elsewhere. But that's no excuse for what could come across as arrogance. You have given him some valuable input about the XL2420T and that's great. I didn't mean to be abrasive at all but your posts above came across as highly supportive of the BenQ XL2420T but perhaps unfairly dismissing the Samsung monitors from the equation. The initial reasoning seemed to be based on the marketing with Counterstrike players and what frankly amounts to hype. To be blunt I am quite surprised that you would have been able to use a member of the SA750 series in a store - but even then there is not really much you could have done in the way of testing and I wouldn't put it past the store to have connected it up with HDMI and/or response time set to 'faster' not 'fastest'. It is up to the OP to weight his 'trust' of what you are saying here against what other people say but really he's going to have his own opinion anyway and may weigh things differently. If I were in his position I would see the S23A700D as the best deal and a good port of call. Unfortunately he would have to order from Germany and returning it even under DSR can be a fairly expensive business. The larger screen and greater ergonomic flexibility of the XL2420T as well as great value and reports of excellent responsiveness would probably sway me that way, knowing that DSR returns are more straightforward for this model from UK suppliers.

I have tested the S27A750D extensively and comprehensively, as I have done with hundreds of other monitor models. I had this one running alongside various monitors including a trusty CRT. It wasn't just me testing this though, several others including one particularly diehard FPS gaming fan all the way from California! You can Google 'Samsung S27A750D review' and look at the first link to follow that review up. And you are correct, I have not yet tested the XL2420T. As has been mentioned a dozen times I have been waiting just as patiently as the next person for BenQ to hand one over for review - and I am sure some of my animosity in this thread stems from my frustration at how long it is taking! For everything that can be said about these monitors and their input lag, in truth the subjectivity of this should not ever be underestimated. I have already received some reports that the BenQ XL2420T has implemented the overdrive too aggressively, for example, and this is something that the OP could find even more distasteful than a couple of milliseconds of extra theoretical input lag. I will obviously have to investigate this more thouroughly but I think it is best to leave the OP's options open and give a more rounded opinion of the monitors. On the same note I have received some complaints of relatively high input lag on the S23A700D (which was one of the models the OP was considering). I don't put it beyond the rhelm of possibility that the 23 inch versions and indeed the S23A700D is sufficiently different in terms of the driving electronics for there to be differences in input lag between this and the 27 inch varients. That fact may surprise people but it isn't unheard of and is something I have experienced with other models.