Chief Blur Buster wrote: ↑30 May 2020, 12:50
TwentyFoe wrote: ↑30 May 2020, 05:41
No.... Come on, Chief. When you game, you stare directly at your monitor, so you don't (and shouldn't) care about the viewing angles, which leaves us with the colors. Good TN panels can calibrate very nicely and have rich colors, and if you want to make them even more vibrant, you can tune settings (digital vibrance and what not). Identifying opponents will not be the reason IPS panels will become the top pick despite their inferior latency, because there's no issues with identifying opponents in the first place (at least not in competitive games, and if so - again, you can adjust settings accordingly).
We believe in Right Tool For The Right Job. Different players and different games have different gaming tactics. Many do fixed-gaze-at-crosshairs (e.g. CS:GO sniping), while others will aim while running (arena games) and track eyes all over place. Also, crosshairsless games like Rocket League will have that bouncy ball flying all over the place. And clear motion during MOBA can be beneficial. And if you're flying low-altitude high speed helicoptor flyby over camoflaged areas (classic Battlefield 3 thing) you might need some motion blur reduction help. Or you might indeed use fixed-gaze-in-middle. Not all esports is all CS:GO.
Now, if you're playing a little more recreationally, the nuances begin to matter a lot less. If you're enjoying a great game of Crysis 2 or Cyberpunk 2077 with some occasional competitive CS:GO, your priorities may be indeed different. There are people scoring highly on 240Hz 1ms IPS already, anyway -- if you're having fun and not needing to earn money playing competitive.
I agree with you that there are TN panels that have excellent color. I've seen TN with better colors than IPS. Don't assume I am anti TN, the other day you probably saw me moderate someone who was bashing TN. I do not, however, believe in escalating IPS vs TN wars ala PC vs Mac, iPhone vs Android, though, and Blur Busters Forums historically moderates to tamp down such holy wars.
TwentyFoe wrote: ↑30 May 2020, 11:36
Maybe one day someone would test a bunch of competitive games on the new IPS and TN panels and see if they actually feel like the colors of the former have helped compensate and close the gap between the two.
Indeed, that's what we advocate.
Problem is, most small sites can't afford to buy up all models ever invented, and test to comprehensive depth that is deep enough to cover the esports gamut.
TwentyFoe wrote: ↑30 May 2020, 05:41
despite their inferior latency
While everything else you post generally is OK, I take issue with this statement -- It is now exactly as false as "Humans can't see 30fps vs 60fps". Sure, some weak-sighted humans cannot, but that doesn't mean other humans can certainly.
Likewise, for IPS vs TN latency, this is definitively no longer universally true anymore now. Software developer API Present()-to-photons for an IPS pixel to GtG50% (which is human visible) is now lower photodiode oscilloscope numbers than many TN panels. So I have to micdrop your statement as false because the truth is really "despite IPS historically inferior latency feel".
Also, it is true there are many opposing latency standards. RTINGS measures lag to GtG2% (still invisible to humans), while others stopwatch lag at GtG10% or GtG50% or GtG100%, also creating wildly different numbers. And stopwatch start may either have been at frame presentation time (ala Present() API) or at the vertical blanking interval. Due to the nonstandard latency measurement standards that often diverge from real-world esports measurements.
The fact is, there are many IPS lag numbers lower than TN lag numbers, so you must, henceforth, from now on, nuance your statements to avoid spreading misinformation on Blur Busters. As responsible forum member citizens, we cannot suppress players who dare to test 4 or 5 different 240Hz 1ms IPS to see if they really match TN. It's important for the world not to parrot outdated phrases like that without proper nuancing "despite their
historically inferior latency". Such qualifiers is generally mandatory for members who want to discuss this topic on Blur Busters Forums. Otherwise, you discourage players from bothering to test 240Hz 1ms IPS, slowing down the refresh rate progress.
So, while I agree on most of what you say, Blur Busters has a responsibility to mythbust outdated parrots like "Humans cannot see 30fps
vs 60fps". So we tamp down on IPS-vs-TN holy wars here. We helped BenQ XL2546s TNs very popular in esports thanks to our role in advocacy of high-Hz -- Blur Busters sells tons of those through Amazon affiliate links after all. The champions you see in the esports arenas, some of them bought them via Blur Busters links.
Also, you've noticed gamers are also famously picky about how much overdrive they like -- some react just fine to the leading GtG while others get distracted by the overshoot GtGs, or use the overshoot GtG as a colorcode to be alert with motion (like AMA Premium on BenQ), or prefer no overdrive artifacts at all. Just like people are picky about different aspects, keyboards, mice, etc. Everybody sees differently. The lag benchmarks don't factor in these complex nuances, and there are now IPS panels that are faster at all points of the GtG curve. Also, there are over
60,000 different GtG numbers on a panel surface, so reading about one lag number about one GtG number, does never tell you the whole latency story. The best one can do is to publish multiple lag benchmarks that most closely resemble real-world situations (like CS:GO).
The lag of 240Hz 1ms panels is now in the same ballpark as 240Hz TN panels. Just trying one 240Hz 1ms IPS monitor and thinking it's crap, doesn't buy a forum member a passport to be permitted to say "All 240Hz IPS panels are laggier". We want forum members to be honest.
Also, most OLED is much more laggy than both IPS and TN, even though OLED pixel response is instantaneous (0ms GtG). OLED is beautiful, mind you.
I was convinced the latency venn diagram of TN and IPS overlapped when I personally saw sub-3ms latency numbers on the ViewSonic XG270 from Direct3D Present()-to-photons GtG50% at high VSYNC OFF frame rates, it beat some of the 240Hz TN panels sitting in our laboratory, at all points of the GtG curve.
(Lag test disclosure (hey, being more honest than most review sites, despite this being Just The Forums): The lag stopwatch started at programming API Present() of white frame replacing black, VSYNC OFF, and the lag stopwatch stopped when pixels were beginning to emit photons at half the brightness of a fully-white pixel. Measured over 1,000 times). Many sites, including RTINGS, have now confirmed this. Mind you, it doesn't have the overdrive-exaggerating feature that is included as BenQ AMA Premium, that some people love (using Overdrive as a metaphor of tracer bullet feature to see motion better), but there are different models of 240Hz monitors that does have an exaggerated-overdrive feature that copycats that. Also, Blur Busters is an advocate of the 100-level Overdrive Slider, and we wish manufacturers would give complete Overdrive choice.)
Yes, we drive a few old "Human 30fps vs 60fps" parrots nuts, but we do make people quickly stop laughing in this refresh rate race, ahead of schedule... Sure, IPS is not universally superior. But we have to keep an open mind, and watch out for accidentally outdated phrases that are said in good intentions "I don't think 240Hz monitors are ever worth it for any individuals at all" (certainly commonly said in past). See our pre-emptive 1000Hz advocacy? Same thing -- it's intended to get to stop people laughing. 4K screens were $10,000 curousities 20 years ago, now it's a $299 walmart special.
Certainly, we aren't anti-TN, but we aren't anti-IPS either.
), so excuse me for that. Already forcing myself to comment now because it has been sitting on my head all day but I had to submit a paper.
