Just upgraded from a Benq XL2411T to a Eizo FG2421
Posted: 22 Feb 2014, 16:48
I thought I'd share my observations and opinions after this upgrade. I won't get technical and this is just repeating what many reviews have stated but I thought people might be interested. and trying to decide between these monitors.
Turbo240 is much better than the forced lightboost mode on the XL2411T; the screen was so dark and the colours were so washed out it actually made it harder to do well in games no matter what settings I tried to fix this.
With Turbo240 enabled on the EIZO, the screen is barely any darker and the motion tests show very little blur!
The EIZO screen (from OCUK) has no visible artifacts, crosshatching etc mentioned in other forums. You get minor overdrive artifacts when Turbo240 is enabled but its much better than having the motion blur with it off imo. There is a slight ghost toward the bottom right of the screen when Turbo240 is enabled but this is only noticeable on desktop text / taskbar. In a very dark game with very high contrast settings there is also bleed along the right edge of the screen but these are extreme conditions and you won't notice it 99% of the time.
Contrary to many people here I like my monitor quite bright for gaming. I use gamma 2.0 and brightness 100, at full brightness in Turbo240 mode the EIZO is a little darker than the XL2411T (around 10%), but the added colour depth is worth it.
The XL2411T is still a great screen, especially for ~£180 but the colour and brightness lost in forced lightboost mode is appalling, the FG2421 is a keeper if you have the budget, get a good screen and can afford the higher asking price.
If you're not going to use Turbo240/lightboost then save yourself the cash and buy the XL2411T
I've also owned the XL2420T and it is a very similar screen to XL2411T performance-wise but with a 120hz limit.
Turbo240 is much better than the forced lightboost mode on the XL2411T; the screen was so dark and the colours were so washed out it actually made it harder to do well in games no matter what settings I tried to fix this.
With Turbo240 enabled on the EIZO, the screen is barely any darker and the motion tests show very little blur!
The EIZO screen (from OCUK) has no visible artifacts, crosshatching etc mentioned in other forums. You get minor overdrive artifacts when Turbo240 is enabled but its much better than having the motion blur with it off imo. There is a slight ghost toward the bottom right of the screen when Turbo240 is enabled but this is only noticeable on desktop text / taskbar. In a very dark game with very high contrast settings there is also bleed along the right edge of the screen but these are extreme conditions and you won't notice it 99% of the time.
Contrary to many people here I like my monitor quite bright for gaming. I use gamma 2.0 and brightness 100, at full brightness in Turbo240 mode the EIZO is a little darker than the XL2411T (around 10%), but the added colour depth is worth it.
The XL2411T is still a great screen, especially for ~£180 but the colour and brightness lost in forced lightboost mode is appalling, the FG2421 is a keeper if you have the budget, get a good screen and can afford the higher asking price.
If you're not going to use Turbo240/lightboost then save yourself the cash and buy the XL2411T
I've also owned the XL2420T and it is a very similar screen to XL2411T performance-wise but with a 120hz limit.