Gaming TFT comparison

Kozmo · 15 Dec 2006 at 01:18

At the moment I have a 4ms Samsung Syncmaster 930BF.

Is it worth getting a 2ms ViewSonic VX922.

I game a heck of a lot, but how do these compare, will I even notice a difference?

fish99 · 15 Dec 2006 at 01:54

The VX922 may be a touch quicker, but chances are you'd be hard pressed to see any difference with the two screens side by side, so I would say it's not worth it, not when you already have a very quick screen. Do you find your 930BF too slow then?

For the same price as the VX922 you could get a 22" widescreen.

AmaTeX · 15 Dec 2006 at 02:09

Get a 22" ws, much more intense for gaming and you can get some excellent screens for around £220 e.g. belinea, V7 and fujitsu siemens 22" models.

kbc · 15 Dec 2006 at 02:19

Agree with AmaTeX, Get yourself a 22" screen or something for gaming. You'll appreciate the larger screen when you come to game. Also, its pretty minor to just go for a slightly faster screen, i.e 4ms to 2ms.

jdderbys · 15 Dec 2006 at 08:42

22" makes the games a lot more immersive

mrk · 15 Dec 2006 at 12:25

So does 20"

ms has nothing to do with gaming these days, it's all down to the panel quality and technology.

Fr0dders · 15 Dec 2006 at 13:15

fish99 said:
The VX922 may be a touch quicker, but chances are you'd be hard pressed to see any difference

hard pressed ?

you wont see any difference full stop. There is no way the human eye is capable of determining 2ms difference in response time.

if your going to upgrade, get yourself a 20" widescreen or a 22". Money will be much better spent on that

iGiDK · 15 Dec 2006 at 13:25

I went from a 19" Sammy 930BF (which I really liked for the year that I had it) to the 20" NEC 20WGX2 and haven't looked back

Gaming is far more immersive and the image quality is second to none. I have been very happy with the upgrade

Hen_Dawg · 15 Dec 2006 at 13:38

jdderbys said:
22" makes the games a lot more immersive

That I can believe but does anyone think that it makes it easier to get kills?
I mean, with that larger viewing area (assuming high-res) does it make it that bit easier to aim in on someone accurately? Just wondering.

btw I use a 2ms 19" Viewsonic VX924 which I think is a great monitor. You won't see a difference between the 2ms response times (if there is any, they are only manafacturer quoted). Your choice should be based on image quality, screen size and max resolution.

fish99 · 15 Dec 2006 at 13:53

MrLOL said:
hard pressed ?

you wont see any difference full stop. There is no way the human eye is capable of determining 2ms difference in response time.

Well, remembering that the quoted response time is only a rough guide to the actual performance, and different manufacturers exagerate their panel speeds by different amounts, it is possible that under certain tests you could see some difference. Or at least I don't think you could say definitively without seeing both screens side by side.

I've used two TFTs which were both rated 8 ms and yet one was miles quicker than the other, so clearly you can't read too much into the headline response times figures.

jdderbys · 15 Dec 2006 at 14:15

i dont think its easier to get kills but i find it were easy to spot the slightest of movement on COD2 which makes sniping more fun. Although i did go from a 17" to 22". Not sure that 1 or 2 " would make a difference

Hen_Dawg · 15 Dec 2006 at 15:27

jdderbys said:
i dont think its easier to get kills but i find it were easy to spot the slightest of movement on COD2 which makes sniping more fun. Although i did go from a 17" to 22". Not sure that 1 or 2 " would make a difference

Maybe a 2560x1600 30" monitor would make a difference

If I had a spare £1000...