Worlds Fastest Competitive Gaming Monitor - G2G Extreme Over Drive

[SquishyLemonsX]

Hello. I currently own the Acer XF252Q and if you see the photo I attached, it has a 2.1 G2G Average on EXTREME MODE!

I'm wondering, is there a faster monitor with a lower G2G Average on Extreme Mode?

If I have a 1v1 Sniper Battle I win EVERY TIME because of this monitor. But I want to know if a faster monitor is out there.

Acer XF252Q G2G.png (16.67 KiB) Viewed 4401 times

[Unixko]

Hello. I currently own the Acer XF252Q and if you see the photo I attached, it has a 2.1 G2G Average on EXTREME MODE!

I'm wondering, is there a faster monitor with a lower G2G Average on Extreme Mode?

If I have a 1v1 Sniper Battle I win EVERY TIME because of this monitor. But I want to know if a faster monitor is out there.

Acer XF252Q G2G.png

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1c2- ... mrau4/edit
scroll down there is some monitor result

[slaver01]

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1c2- ... mrau4/edit
scroll down there is some monitor result

Is this guide update?

[sieger]

it has a link for I225-V win7 driver and also talking about 360hz monitors. So apparently it is up to date.

[chenifa]

If I have a 1v1 Sniper Battle I win EVERY TIME because of this monitor.

Very unlikely. Stuff like peekers advantage, human reaction time, holding at an off angle and so on will make a difference in the range of hundreds of milliseconds, compared to single digit ms you shave off by having a good monitor.
That said aiming feels better even with a few milliseconds less, so your question about monitors is very valid.
I'd say wait until those review sites test more of the new 360hz panels and the new crystal panels that have faster pixel response times. Remember monitor lag is not only g2g/pixel response but also processing time...those 2 values combined give you a better picture of how fast a monitor will be.

[howiec]

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1c2- ... mrau4/edit
scroll down there is some monitor result

Is this guide update?

Probably up-to-date in some areas but not everywhere and it's tough to keep up with numerous product releases to be comprehensive too. E.g. I'm surprised the XL2546K isn't on that list unless it's the same as the XL2546.

[chenifa]

Remember monitor lag is not only g2g/pixel response but also processing time...those 2 values combined give you a better picture of how fast a monitor will be.

Just quickly looked at rtings.com....look at those 2 tables

Best monitors, input lag wise:
https://www.rtings.com/monitor/tests/inputs/input-lag

Best monitors, pixel response time wise:
https://www.rtings.com/monitor/tests/mo ... ponse-time

If you combine input lag values from the first table, with total response time values of the second table, you get:
1) ASUS VG279QM (280 hz) with total latency of 7.4ms
2) ASUS ROG Swift 360Hz PG259QN with total latency of 7.7ms
3) Dell Alienware AW2521HF (240hz) with total latency of 8.1ms

The first thing that will skew these results is that they don't test all overdrive settings. For example the BenQ ZOWIE XL2546K has 7.6ms total response time but next to it they declare the best overdrive setting to be "off". I guess they used this setting for their response time test, so the result might look a lot different if they used premium overdrive.

[chenifa]

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1c2- ... mrau4/edit
scroll down there is some monitor result

The link inside this doc: https://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/as ... qn.htm#lag

"Response time comparision" chart shows average g2g as 2.6ms.
"Average lag comparision" chart shows "response time element" to be 1.3ms.

g2g is already not reasonable since grey to grey is way faster than normal pixel shifts in colored games, so why use half the g2g as a usable number for input lag?

Their results for input lag are less than 1/3 of what rtings meassured, 0.45 vs 1.6. I guess it shows that testing methodology will make a huge difference.