AOC G2460PQU 24-inch 144 Hz Gaming Monitor Review

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

heydan

Distinguished
Jul 24, 2009
97
0
18,630
Can some of the guys complain about the 1080p/60hz monitor put some own benchmark demonstrating that you can get at least 120fps on 1440p?, obviously you can get them, but with very low detail and I don´t think that if you have a Titan Black (that even this card can't get 120fps on 1440p and is a $1000 card!!!) you´re gonna play with low details.

Here´s a review for the Titan Black, even at 1080p you only get 120fps+ for a few games. So please stop complain about these reviews, is not mainstream run 120fps even on 1080p.

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/nvidia_geforce_gtx_titan_black_review,11.html
 


I have a $1,000 Dell IPS, a $240 Asus 120 Hz and a $260 Asus 144 Hz.

The Dell does a great job for watching TV shows online, movies and really excels at photo editing. After editing grandma's my son sent me pics and looking at them on the 144Hz , colors were a bit over saturated..... cheeks were so pink she looked like a madame in a brothel :).

However, in gaming, it's poor. When 2 kids are gaming, guess which computer sits unused ? The one with the IPS Monitor.

1. Brightness and contrast are way down from the TN panels.

2. Edges are fuzzy blurry

3. Lag and ghosting is evident

The other thing.... IPS panels are great for what they do well..... but this greatness does not extend to the $200 price range.

24"WS 6ms G3G LG.Display e-IPS
asus_pa248q.jpg


27" 2ms G2G Chi Mei Innolux TN Film +144Hz
asus_vg278he.jpg



If above images not showing go to www.tftcentral.co.uk and look at any review, the responsiveness and gaming sections shows real G2G response times and lag images for various displays.
 

bin1127

Distinguished
Dec 5, 2008
736
0
18,980
do people buy titan cards to play on 1080? I always though if you pay that much for something you would want the best experience at 1600 resolution.
 
To many the best experience is "no ghosting".... until we see 120 / 144 Hz at resolutions higher than 1920 x 1080 (i.e RoG Swift if it ever goes on sale) that won't be possible.

http://rog.asus.com/296652014/news/rog-announces-the-pg278q-swift-27-inch-wqhd-g-sync-gaming-monitor/

BTW, Asus describes why they don't use IPS for gaming monitors.

Why is the display TN rather than IPS/PVA/MVA, etc?

Not all TN’s are made the same: the premium panel used in the PG278Q is of very high quality. IPS panels (and their derivatives like PVA/MVA etc) are not suitable for a multitude of reasons: 1) the response rate is simply not fast enough to react to the active change in refresh rate and 2) Current panels available cannot reliably achieve >60Hz without significantly affecting the quality of the image. IGZO technology (and LTPS – low temperature polysilicon – likewise) – yields 100′s of times faster electron mobility versus standard amorphous silicon panels – and thus can provide a response rate comparable to TN (up to 60Hz currently), but, however desirable this technology is, it is still currently cost prohibitively for many PC gaming enthusiasts at this moment, which is why ROG has used a better price:performance, high quality TN panel.
 


It may not be as noticeable at 120hz, but you most certainly get refreshes back to back with the same image when your FPS drops below 120 FPS. And having two refreshes with the same image mixed in with successive images changing with the refresh will result in less smooth frame delivery. That is what happens whether or not you notice these things. The good news is that it is less noticeable.

Most of these allow you to drop it to 100 Hz with the strobing, and some even go as low as 85 hz.
 

Adroid

Distinguished


Thats fine and good, and I like tftcentral alot... I wish they had more reviews because they do great ones. You will find the ips screens there they recommend for gaming, and they are actually good screens for gaming. I'm guessing your 1000$ model isn't one.

Some ips screens are viable gaming screens. I actually went through 2 somewhat high-end TN panels before I settled for my ips screen.
 
I have yet to see an IPS panel that doesn't ghost in TFT's testing. I'm not saying they don't say "Yeah you can game on this" .... what I have never seen is "This IPS is as good in gaming as the 144 Hz TN panels". And actually the U2711 is listed by TFT as one of the better IPS panels for gaming.

But even tho the Dell outdid the 4 other IPS panels it was compared against in the TFT review, like every IPS review on TFT ends with wording similar to the following:

This [120 Hz] can really help improve smoothness and the overall gaming experience so these screens still have the edge when it comes to fast gaming. From a pixel response point of view the U2713HM performed very well, but there are some other areas you still need to think about when it comes to high end gaming. It couldn't keep up with the very fast TN Film models with 120Hz support.
.

See the Asus IPS statement a cupla posts back on why they didn't consider IPS for the new RoG Swift (1440p / 144 Hz w/ GSync)
 

Adroid

Distinguished
Well admittedly, my IPS screen does ghost/lag occasionally in certain rare scenarios, but it's very bearable and I hardly ever notice it. The low response time still allows me to be competitive. My opinion is subjective, but for me I would rather have a better looking picture than a very slightly faster and uglier one.

I did glance at the ASUS RoG Swift article on the Asus website from the link above. The key for me being:

"(and LTPS – low temperature polysilicon – likewise) – yields 100′s of times faster electron mobility versus standard amorphous silicon panels – and thus can provide a response rate comparable to TN (up to 60Hz currently), but, however desirable this technology is, it is still currently cost prohibitively for many PC gaming enthusiasts"

Well that's the type of screen I'm waiting for. I want my cake and eat it too. The color accuracy and picture quality is non-negotiable for me. TN panels simply don't do modern games justice. I'm willing to pay extra for a faster screen with a better picture.. That said I'm not willing to spend 2000$ on a 24" panel (no idea how much they actually cost) - so when manufacturing costs of the newer technologies are able to drop some, I'm willing to spend around 500$ for a excellent monitor, and hopefully this will happen in the coming years.
 
The thing that you have to recognize is photo editing is a different world from gaming. The subject in the photo is "realistically rendered" and the color accuracy of an IPS makes it the choice for photo editing. But gaming is not "real" .... it's manufactured and they are designed for the lowest common denominator. Much like a CD is mixed to sound "best" on the most common playback devices.....that being boom boxes and iPhones with $5 sound cards, when you play it back on an audiophile system it most often with popular titles grates on the ears.

When I sit at our IPS panel, and many of the other IPS panels on systems that were built here, (Eizo $1900 model was best) it really doesn't seem bad at all. If you are a photo buff like Son No. 2 here, he "settles" for what the IPS delivers cause it's worth it to have what he needs at his disposal when photo editing. But he invested in a high end IPS in order to reach that level of acceptability. That is not available on a $200 IPS panel.

The difference really doesn't show up until you place them side by side. The 144 Hz TN just pops whereas the IPS looks dull or "washed out" by comparison, due to both the much higher brightness and contrast. Edges on the 144 Hz TN are sharp and crisp whereas the IPS looks "fuzzy".....kinda like text before you eliminate the "jaggies" with font smoothing.

So the color accuracy advantage if IPS is somewhat lost on gaming because the colors are not accurate to begin with. Just as the example I gave before, if I look at a photo on a TN panel, grandma's tastefully done makeup job for her glamour photos makes her look like a Las Vegas madam because the TN panels. But the games are developed on TN panels and the artists use a color palette that looks best on the screens they are using.

One of the most common questions here is "what is the best type of monitor ?" Kinda like asking "what is the best tool ?". The answer in both questions is "It depends on what you are attempting to do with it. A pair of pliers is a good all around tool... you can pull a nail, unscrew a bolt, get out a screw (if ya can grab the head) ..... but a hammer is better at nails, wrench us better on bolts and screw driver is better on screws. If ya want the best tool in multiple situations, you need a set of tools not just one. Using an IPS panel on "real" color sources like photos is the best option available. But on "created content", it's best to use what the designer anticipated you using when he created the artwork. This will get you closer to the original idea of what the artist intended.
 

Adroid

Distinguished
Well I don't truly understand the point about photo editing. Clearly, IPS screens are and have been the best screens for professional photographers for many years due to their color accuracy. There is no debate there. The $200-300 e-Ips screens where not targeted for professional photographers.

Strictly from a gaming standpoint, IPS does everything that TN does, but better - except for the response times, ghosting, and input lag. I don't agree with your "dull or washed out" assessment, because my IPS screen overall looks/performs better than 3 TN panels I looked at. I returned 2 TN panels (one ASUS and one 2ms Samsung) because the picture was absolute crap. I couldn't see anything in low light scenarios in game.. Either scenarios with smoke/fog was too dense or the screen was too bright.

You continue to mention you own some expensive, high-end and color accurate photographer type IPS screens, but gaming is not the correct application for those screens, clearly. I encourage you to try a faster IPS screen and see if you have the same results.

On another note I was excited to see the article about the "Overlord" 120hz IPS monitor Tom's posted yesterday...

I still believe manufacturers have not completely abandoned IPS gaming screens. As manufacturing processes improve, IPS screens will become more affordable. Now whether or not they have abandoned 16:10 resolution is another topic. If Overlord does a 120hz 16:10 screen, preferably in a 24" resolution, I will definitely be looking to buy one. I don't care for 16:9 gaming screens. 27" is almost too big up close.
 
It has to be recognized that:

1. A $1,000 IPS screen is in a different world that a $200 IPS screen.
2. Lowering response time and input lag, especially via the use of "overdrive" impacts screen image.
3. It has to be recognized that a 144 Hz TN screen is in a different world than a 60 Hz TN screen.
4. All screens need to be calibrated and adjusted, preferably with a Spyder or other professional solution. Using IPS w/o a Spyder / CalMan calibration will negate a significant part of the color accuracy advantage
http://spyder.datacolor.com/display-calibration/
5. I did mention that we have had many IPS panels here, so your implication that the conclusion is based upon experience with just one monitor is not accurate. I do CAD builds for engineers, clients, colleagues and with 3 kids in different age groups, 3 sets of friends from the neighborhood and High School / College. I'd estimate maybe 2 dozen were IPS. I just happen to choose the Dell because to my mind it offered the best price / performance ratio. I'd love an Eizo premium monitor but that kinda budget is not in the cards. However, many peeps read reviews on one of these $2,000 IPS jobs and expect the same benefits out of any $200 IPS . It doesn't happen.
6. While I will do a final "look see" in person for most purchases, I tend to rely mostly on published reports and testing from reputable sites, all of which clearly state the limitations of each alternative in hard numbers rather than subjective observations.

That Overlord article is a bit "late to the table".

http://www.overclock.net/t/1450386/overlord-tempest-x270oc-reports

But with the quality so variable, I don't see it gaining much in popularity and why the Korean alternatives have been so popular. Frankly, I feel too "iffy" about either. The idea of having to "patch" after the thet at least monthly (sometimes 2 or 3 a month) is also annoying. You moght get 120 hz out of any particular unit..... you also might get 96. And with no OSD, calibration is a bit of a chore ....

The only image control available [on the Overlord] is brightness, which moves in fairly coarse steps of about 8 cd/m2 per click. To complete our benchmarks, we used CalPC to generate a software look-up table after measuring the X270OC’s default state. For more information on the CalPC process, please refer to Do It Like Tom's: Calibrating Your Monitor With CalMAN RGB,where you’ll find a step-by-step guide.

For $249, you can calibrate your HDTV using a DVD as your pattern source. And if you like to tweak, you can get fairly close to the power of CalMAN’s professional solutions for around $400. Or, spend $1000 on a SpectraCal C6 meter.

The Overlord's does very well with black luminescence but has the typical IPS white luminescence and maximum contract limitations (60% and 66% of of Asus 144 Hz respectively). It also falls down on minimum white luminescence (Asus 144 Hz is 7.5 times better) and minimum contrast (Asus is 7.14 times better). Even after calibration, the Overload does 50% worse on Black Luminance, Asus does 47% better on contrast ratio. This is what's responsible for the "washed out" appearance....especially in dark scenes which instead of being midnight black are like predawn dark gray. This is the exact cause of the problem you observed .... in low light scenarios, the background light intended by the designer to be provided is hampered by the brightness and contrast issues. The high speed TN panel's single biggest feature is right here.... minimum contrast is 6591 on the Asus versus 922 on the overload.....the minimum black luminescence is 0.01 versus 0.09. The problem is that there is a base light haze on a total black screen which washes out the things you are trying to see in low light conditions.....simply not enough contrast.

The Overload does better in grayscale, color and and gamma measurements which are very important in for example getting correct flesh tones. However the RGP color is not quite what I'd be comfortable with in photo editing..... Color uniformity however is a surprise in that is is 10 times worse than Asus 144 Hz. However all of these are not of significant impact in gaming.

What was missing from the THG review however was how well it does in 3D gaming. Personally, I dislike 3D movies and the 1st time I played a 3D game I experienced a slight case of motion sickness. However, I gave it a 2nd try and found the experience a real kick. Similarly 120 / 144 Hz, Lightboost and later G-Sync was a boon to motion blur, and I really wouldn't bother with a gaming screen that did not support all of the above.

So while lower priced IPS and specifically the Overlord have made inroads and provide an "acceptable" compromise solution to both Gaming and Photo Editing .... I hardly consider them the "best" option for either. For gaming, I still want the RoG Swift..... For Photo Editing, I still want a Dell or preferably Eizo IPS..... I should note I still have an Eizo CRT (1600 x 1200) that cost me 2 grand back in the 90's that I use in the office for image editing. Like a pair of pliers, a low cost gaming IPS can get both jobs done .... if ya only have 1 tool or one monitor and need to do both jobs, pliers gaming oriented IPS make sense. But if ya want a better job, use a wrench on bolts, a screwdriver on screws and a hammer to get nails out.

I also much prefer 1920 x 1200 as I like the extra 120 pixels down at the bottom of screen so as to eliminate alt tabbing and having quick access to utilities or viewing temps etc.....sadly the industry has moved away there and they are pretty much shrinking in number every quarter.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1450386/overlord-tempest-x270oc-reports

27" makes a poor monitor at 1920 x 1080 for people with normal vision and at normal viewing distances. The human eye us able to distinguish individual pixels below about 96 ppi (CRT screens were designed at 96 dpi for this reason). A 27" is down at 81.6 pixels per inch making the screen appear grainy
 

Adroid

Distinguished
I still don't understand why you keep referencing photography. This is a review of a panel meant for gaming. I am strictly speaking of IPS as a gaming screen/option, and I have one good enough for me, but would like to upgrade when the right panel comes out.

Not claiming to be an expert, but compared to the dozens upon dozens of TN panels I have laid eyes on, my 230$ Dell e-ips screen looks much better. So I don't need the "perfect" $2000 color accurate professional photographer's screen calibrated with a Spyder, but to a layman such as myself the picture quality of the eIps is far superior to that of any TN I have seen.

The Eizo and other $1000-2000 IPS screens you keep referencing, by the standards of TFT Central (which is a source me might could agree as reputable) are not ideal gaming panels. There are however several faster Ips screens that TFT Central reviews as decent gaming panels and good color accuracy out of the box, with relative low input lag and response time etc.

I'm curious how many Ips screens you have used that are recommended for gaming screens (by TFT Central), and if you have, we will have to agree to disagree, as I don't think that my monitor is "dull or washed out" compared to the horribad Asus TN panel I sat side by side with my Dell, or the superior (to the Asus) but inferior (compared to the Dell) Samsung 27" and LED-TN 24" panels I looked at.
 
I reference it because reality is that's where IPS has it's major benefit. The gaming IPS panels are not on the market to fill a technical niche, they are there because someone wants a dual use monotor for photography, video editing whatever and wants to game also or someone goes on the internet and reads that IPS has "better color accuracy" so they want one. It's like modular PSUs...they provide no benefit whatsoever. What in the world could anyone possibly see that a fully modular PSU has to offer over a hybrid modular one ? Certain cables must be used so all making them modular does nothing but introduce a potential failure point, add resistance and add cost. Hybrid modular PSUs with the absolutely necessary cables hard wired and the optional ones modular is a best of best worlds approach, yet how many posts on THG start out with someone listing "modular" as the characteristic of highest importance in their PSU selection. Unless you are re-sleeving the cables for aesthetics, full modular has 0 advantages over hybrid modular and several disadvantages.

Remember better color accuracy does not mean better color. While ya might be concerned if ya wedding photos come out having ya look a little pale or the brides rouge making her look like a hooker, the gaming experience is altered in no observable way by say a color being 240 degrees 0-0-255 versus 240 degrees 0-2-253. Is your gaming experience altered if a character in Far Cry looks maybe a bit "latin" because of slightly darker skin tones ? My wife might prefer "periwinkle" to "blue" for the water color in Far Cry but it in no way affects the gaming experience. I have seen water in many parts of the world and it looms very different from place to place and from day to day and by time of day. Do you have several people sitting either side of you while gaming so as to realize some advantage of a wider viewing angle ?

Less contrast makes edges blurry. Lower minimum contrast and minimum light levels stop dark scenes from looking washed out. Lag and ghosting just makes me wanna throw the thing out the window. These are numerically measured values which have been published and they are NOT close. And w/o 3D and G-Sync or at least Lightboost capability, a monitor is not going to make the "short list"

Gaming oriented IPS panels use electronic overdrive circuitry to artificially overcome the limitations of the panel type. If your eyes make the gaming IPS look better to you, then you should use one. However, you are missing a lot of what IPS has to offer if you haven't had it calibrated.....as is very compellingly shown in the Overlord article as well as just about every TFT article. But the numbers are the numbers and can not be countered by subjective impressions. Your "horrible" subjective impression is certainly contrasted by the test results indicating performance to the contrary. Contrast, light levels and lag are drastically different between 144 Hz TN and IPS. And still.... at 60 Hz..... Lightboost, G-Sync, 3D ?

Out of the 2 dozen or so that I have not "looked at for a few minutes in a store with bad lighting" but actually used for at least a week and as much a 3, about 75 - 80% have been for gaming / photo / multi-use rigs and the rest for hardcore Photo Buffs. As for the repeated reference to "looking at gaming IPS screens" did you read the part where I wrote that the 2711 was highlighted by TFT as being superior to the 4 IPS panels they compared it against ? It's gotten a bit long in the tooth since 2010 but still holds up fairly well.

Among the other ones i recall.....

Dell U2412
Dell U2711
Dell U2410
Dell U2311H
Asus PA248Q

All very good monitors but which paled sitting next to the 120 and 144 Hz TNs when gaming.

In the end, this says it all:

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/asus_rog_swift_pg278q.htm

When you consider that Asus have then provided NVIDIA's new G-sync dynamic refresh rate technology AND a blur reduction backlight, you really do have a monster of a gaming screen on your hands (not to mention also the support for 3D gaming!)......We will just re-iterate that at the moment we feel this is the ultimate gaming screen. Response times, lag, refresh rate, G-sync and the ULMB feature all delivered and impressed.
 
The point JackNaylorPE is trying to make, in a nutshell is these overclocked IPS screens are a compromise between a desktop oriented IPS monitor and a 120+hz TN gaming monitor. They are not the "best of both worlds". They are a reasonable compromise between the best desktop oriented monitor and the best gaming monitor.
 

filthypeasant

Honorable
Nov 23, 2013
4
0
10,510
the problem with the input lag here in the review is that it is measured with 60hz and the panel set up accordingly i believe. going by other reviews one reports the same good results for 60hz but much worse for 120/144HZ where input lag and switching times jump up respectivley when it should rather to the opposite if anything.
therefore i am still torn between the aoc g2460pqu as well as the ijama prolite gb2488-hsu-b1 to which i cannot find reasonable data on real input lag and pixel conversion rate when "direct drive" is active as well. else it will be just be the usual asus vg248qe but i cant stand its stupid gaming features, supposedly has worse (?!) color too and i feel the price point is still a little high.. mhhhh
 

ceberle

Contributing Editor
Editor
Dec 20, 2012
290
0
18,780


I'm sorry if I was unclear in the review. I did test the G2460pqu at 144 Hz using a PC. I filmed a mouse movement so I could see precisely how it took for that action to translate to the screen. I have yet to see any high-speed monitor show greater input lag at higher refresh rates.

-Christian-

 
Status
Not open for further replies.