[Valorant FPS]- VG279QM vs XL2746s

[nightside]

Trying to pick a monitor for Valorant.

vg27qm higher hz

xl2746s faster gtg?

What are you opinions?

[forii]

VG279QM is still best at 240hz.

xl2746s will have best motion clarity, becasuse its TN panel

VG279QM will have better colors

[Chief Blur Buster]

Welcome! Many gaming professionals often have steered towards TN panels at this time for CS:GO gaming. However, 1ms IPS has some advantages for games. There are pros/cons which you've heard.

As a rule of thumb, in these refresh rate stratospheres, you need more dramatic Hz increases (of same panel tech) for benefits. The Blur Busters advises approximately 1.5x jumps for major measurable benefits. The jump 240Hz to 280Hz is only barely more than a ~1.1x jump.

From a motion blur perspective (assuming instant GtG 0ms):
60Hz to 144Hz = 2.4x better
144Hz to 240Hz = 1.6x better
240Hz to 360Hz = 1.5x better
144Hz to 360Hz = 2.5x better
144Hz to 165Hz = 1.1x better
240Hz to 280Hz = 1.1x better
Assuming same theoretical 0ms GtG speed

Geometrically bigger jumps are often needed (e.g. 60Hz -> 120Hz -> 240Hz -> 480Hz -> 960Hz) to continue significantly human visible benefits in the refresh rate race to retina refresh rates. But as a rule of thumb, even a small increase in Hz can be worthwhile as long as the quality doesn't degrade significantly. Today, manufacturers now has a road map to 1000 Hz displays (ASUS also confirmed this too) but that's several years down the road. But, 40Hz difference is tiny in this stratosphere. 10feet vs 20feet is big, but 1000 feet versus 1010 feet is tiny. See what I mean?

Also, mathematicaly 280Hz 1ms versus 240Hz 0.5ms is extremely similar:

1/280sec + 1ms GtG = 4.6ms
1/240sec + 0.5ms GtG = 4.6ms

It's only a very rough guideline, GtG is not an exact science and not perfect math. But for users, this approximation can give you an approximate yardstick on how slower GtG sometimes cancels-out higher-Hz. That's why 165Hz IPS 3ms were often much worse than 144Hz TN 1ms historically. For that comparison, 3ms GtG outweighed the 1ms GtG for such a small refresh rate difference. But today we got 1ms IPS which is now much more esports ready!

Keep in mind GtG is a curve (see Pixel Response FAQ: GtG Versus MPRT)

Now, there are other benefits. Colors. IPS versus TN. Etc.

I know this doesn't make your decision easy. That said, the BenQ ZOWIE XL series is more well-tested in esports, while 1ms IPS is very new. Some esports teams have discovered the benefits of 1ms IPS for certain games where IPS benefits more (e.g. certain games other than CS:GO).

Lately, ~75% of esports teams on prosettings-net are using the BenQ ZOWIE XL series 240Hz, so there's a choice between trying something new (and potentially better) or something tried-and-true that wins many championships and big prizes already. But most users won't care about these ultra-tiny differences -- you still want to have fun playing games, and this is where you might prefer good quality IPS colors.

ASUS TUF 280 Hz is sold out at many places, but if you get it, let us know how it performs.

Current 240Hz BenQs:
BenQ ZOWIE XL2540 - 24.5" 1920x1080 TN 240Hz
BenQ ZOWIE XL2546 - 24.5" 1920x1080 TN 240Hz
BenQ ZOWIE XL2740 - 27" 1920x1080 TN 240Hz
BenQ ZOWIE XL2746S - 27" 1920x1080 TN 240Hz
...And the upcoming XL2546S.

[Blehhh]

VG279QM is still best at 240hz.

xl2746s will have best motion clarity, becasuse its TN panel

VG279QM will have better colors

VG279QM best at 240hz? meaning is better to play on 240hz compared to 280hz with or without ELMB sync on? or do you mean is better than XL246s at 240hz? sorry im new to this monitor stuff

[forii]

VG279QM is still best at 240hz.

xl2746s will have best motion clarity, becasuse its TN panel

VG279QM will have better colors

VG279QM best at 240hz? meaning is better to play on 240hz compared to 280hz with or without ELMB sync on? or do you mean is better than XL246s at 240hz? sorry im new to this monitor stuff

Well, if it comes to speed then VG279QM is still best at 240hz. But actually I found 280Hz more clear, and it also has lower input lag.

280Hz / 80 OD is 4ms response time,
when 240Hz / 80 OD is 3,6ms response time.

It is small difference and its hard to see it.

If you want good colors, go for IPS, if you want best possible motion blur go for TN.
But do you care that much about motion blur?

[nightside]

how is VG279QM faster? if its 1ms gtg compared to .5 gtg?

is there hidden input lag or something on the ben q?

[forii]

how is VG279QM faster? if its 1ms gtg compared to .5 gtg?

is there hidden input lag or something on the ben q?

After like 2,5 weeks spending this whole time with 4x different monitors I would now personally choose the Asus or MSI. Cheapest wins, I actually didn't have MSI, because its not possible to buy in my country.
I had for like 7 years the 144hz TN 1080p, 24 inch monitor. I was doing great and owning every server. After this time I checked that the response time of my TN monitor was around 5ms, and the input lag was also very high, around 6ms! I didn't bother about this before because I was doing great. So think about this as a example.
Now, after I went deep into all of this response time, input lag, motion blur, IPS colors vs TN colors I realised that my TN monitor was bad and I want an upgrade to 240HZ.
I found that they actually made the Asus VG279QM and I instantly become interested and just bought it for 14 days test.
This monitor has everything faster, 3,6ms g2g response time, input lag 2ms, all better than my older TN and the motion blur is almost the same.
What do I think is - now after they made the 240Hz IPS, every IPS with 240hz with response time 3,1ms-3,6ms~ will be similar to all other TN monitors, no matter if this will be 144Hz or even 240Hz TN. Its the same in competive gaming NOW. Due to 240Hz of IPS with less than 4ms - giving you almost the same motion blur like on TN.
If you would ask us about this question like 1 year ago I believe almost everyone would suggest you the TN monitor. Because there was no 240Hz IPS before, and 144hz Ips wasn't that that great for gaming.
But now, finally now, there is no correct answer, because they both win. TN wins and the IPS wins. Finally its a draw.
I had (still have) 144hz TN which my all life I believed is the best for gaming, now If i compare it to the Asus 240hz IPS, i don't want TN anymore due to colors.
First I bought Asus VG259QM, and I needed to get used to this and get rid of the thought that its not good for gaming, because I always believed that for gaming there is only TN panel, not IPS. I needed to delete this thought from my mind.
I bought the Benq zowie xl2540 (240Hz TN) and compared it with the asus, I insta throw the benQ away, the colors was trash on it compare to IPS. Also Imo, its not worth the price, its overpriced. If someone want the TN Panel I would recommend Acer Nitro XF252Q, much cheaper and also very fast,.
Yesterday I bought same Asus but version of 27 inch (VG279QM) and somehow it has better Overdrive setting for 240Hz (I made topic with that). Also it's bigger, I mean, yes there are pixel visible if you look at this for the first time, but after like 1 day you don't bother about this and you actually enjoy the bigger screen, you dont see any pixels anymore, its better for movies and also in my opinion - in gaming. Because everything is bigger, for FPS gaming - the enemies are also bigger - easier to hit. The reading text is fine for me also, I forgot how does it look on 24 inch already and I enjoy the 27 inch.
So, there we are, they are making fast and fast TN monitors (cuz they are maybe scary of fast IPS – they should ) with the race of who make the fastest response time, but what do I think is that... it doesn't matter anymore, esspecialy for me, the race is over.
The 3,6ms response time on the Asus with 240Hz, or even 280Hz with 4ms~ is amazing for gaming and that's enough. That is enough to become pro in every game. 3,1ms on MSI MAG251RXwill not make you pro, same with 2,6ms on 240HZ Acer. It really doesnt matter.
The motion blur on the asus is so acceptable that you actually will not care about this if you compare it with 240Hz TN. Unless you want to see if TN will have much better motion blur on the ufotest.com.
Yes, it will have better clarity in like maybe 20%, but... really? Who care about that in game, you will not see whole enemy blurred when he fly from the wall, you will see almost all details of it.
And if you compare it with TN - yes, the enemy will be much 20% clearer, and less blurry. But..? Does it bother you? When you are a shooter, do you care how does the enemy look? You don't you just want to see that he is peeking or jumping behind the wall and you aim and you kill him. You will kill him same fast and same accurate on 240hz Tn or 240Hz IPS.
That is my opinion if it comes to shooting games, maybe in other game the less blurry is better, but for me 240Hz is so good for gaming, making everything less blurry and.. smooth! The blur on 240HZ IPS now is so small that you do not care about this.
But wait.. You want everything much cleaner? You have very good ELMB, much brightness like all motion blur technology before, you can turn it on and enjoy. I personally now.. after 2 weeks when I needed to get used, because moving from TN to IPS might be hard, but now I don't even need ELMB for playing my fps games, I just simply enjoy of playing with 240Hz with 80 OD, I don't even use g-sync because tearing is no visible at 240hz compare to 144hz.

My answer is If I wouldn't ever see before how does 240Hz IPS looks I would go for 240Hz TN.
But now after I know how does it look It's really hard to choose the TN panel.

So yea, if you are perfectionist and want „the best” monitor for gaming because you care about motion blur and lowest response time, go for TN... but just give it a try and also buy in same time the 240Hz IPS and run both in same time sharing the screen. Let’s see which one you will like more, I think we both know the answers, because TN panel wins almost only due to lowest response time / motion blur, but as I said before the difference vs 240Hz IPS is so small, so small...!! You simply don't care about it.

[jnashville]

you are on point Forii.

u share the same sentiments as me.

for actual gamers, who plays FPS seriously, we dont care about the scenery or if that enemy character is super sharp because even when i am playing on a 144hz compared to a 280hz, i still can frag easily. its about your own ingame skill.

for those very critical about these response time, blur etc. you can bet my socks that they are not good in fps games are mostly casual gamers who care so much on the other detail except for the actual gameplay and ingame skill. But yea since this is a blur buster forum, definitely there are enthusiasts that are into so much detailed till the minute information but to be honest, a 144hz or a 240hz monitor, wont make you a better player AT ALL. that blur image of a moving character in game wont depict you to not aim him properly.

to be honest, now i am playing on 280hz. it feels much smoother in game due to the refresh rate.

Response time slower or faster is really too minute too dictate in a firefight at all. a 144hz with a higher response time vs a 240hz with a lower response time dont really matter in reality ingame. because a 4ms and 1ms is super super neglible. If there are people who still dont believe it, get a professional fps gamer to play on a 144hz monitor with 4ms and get a casual gamer to play on a 280hz monitor with decent fps gamesense. the casual will still lose out. Its not about the response time that makes u a better gamer, as the difference is so minute to even bother.

aiming is much easier due to the screen having more frames per second output but i care less about how sharp my enemy is on screen, as it really really does not matter at all. again to those that say it does, you are just probably not good in playing FPS.

[Jasa]

for actual gamers, who plays FPS seriously, we dont care about the scenery or if that enemy character is super sharp because even when i am playing on a 144hz compared to a 280hz, i still can frag easily. its about your own ingame skill.

.
.
.

aiming is much easier due to the screen having more frames per second output but i care less about how sharp my enemy is on screen, as it really really does not matter at all. again to those that say it does, you are just probably not good in playing FPS.

Putting the hilarious amount of arrogance aside, it is much easier to track somebody flying through the map in a quake/cpma style game (tf2/ratz instagib/reflex/tribes/diabotical/etc.), especially if you're also flying through the map, if you have less motion blur. In something like cs or valorant (from what I've seen, haven't played yet) I'm sure it matters a lot less. Feel free to call all the arena fps players who share my sentiments about motion blur bad at FPS games though lol. And this is also ignoring the more personal reasons that people have about wanting less motion blur (getting headaches from it etc.).

If OP you literally do not care about colors/viewing angles at all I would get a fast TN like the xl2546s or xf252q, I think objectively for raw gaming performance they still outmatch any IPS, especially since the strobing on the DYAC monitors is usually pretty good (negating the need for something like the XG270). If you care about colors even a little bit but are also semi-pro trying to break into the pro scene (I don't say pro here because if you are a pro your monitor choice is probably dictated by lan monitors anyway) and you want every inch of performance possible you could make an argument for the TN, but realistically even if you win a single 1v1/win a single teamfight with the TN panel that you wouldn't have with the IPS I'm sort of skeptical that that one changed fight will get you picked up on a pro team versus not getting picked up lol. For all other cases I would just pick one of the IPS panels.

[jnashville]

i have the benq xl2546 tn panel.

when i turn on DYAC, it has a little input lag on csgo. Just feel that my shots do not register as well when i turn it off.