05/22/2020 UPDATE. The IPS 240hz monitor tier list.(I've measured/tried the all) and my honest explanation why.

[Chief Blur Buster]

i probalby purchased around 12 monitors used/refurbed. 12/12 of them had a stuck/dead pixel

All 12 of them? Wow. What a poor state of the used monitor market.

More than 80% of my units have no dead pixels -- but then again, they're pratically all purchased new (or get samples from manufacturers along the course of Blur Busters work).

[RLCSContender*]

i probalby purchased around 12 monitors used/refurbed. 12/12 of them had a stuck/dead pixel

All 12 of them? Wow. What a poor state of the used monitor market.

More than 80% of my units have no dead pixels -- but then again, they're pratically all purchased new (or get samples from manufacturers along the course of Blur Busters work).

when i purchase new, for me it was 25% there's a stuck/dead pixel and 75% had no dead pixel/stuck pixel.

But yes, i'm no longer gambling the "used" lottery. I've tried everything./

"like new, item will come in original packaging"===>horrible BLB and there's always a dead pixel somewhere
"renewed/refurbished inspected/cleaned/repaired by an amazon certified technician"===>dead pixels everywhere, BLB though is good.

So whenever I purchase something Used, i never look forward when they actually ship it because i will only get upset if i find a dead/stuck pixel. i would say 8/12 of the used/refurb monitors i purchased, within just TURNING IT ON, i would instantly see it(since i have a black and white background my default). the other 4/12, i had to look for it by using the dead pixel checker.

From my experience. the LG and AW panels NEVER have any dead/stuck pixels when i purchased them new. The Asus/Acer however, not so much. Then again, those asian companies mass produce their monitors so Quality control would be bad

[RLCSContender*]

RLCScontender hope you don't mind if i repeat the question (in case you missed), and also:

- Did you have eye strain with any? (have you ever had eye strain in your life?, if not i guess you won't start now )

Thanks anyway .

Previous question:
"Can i ask, as you have had all the models, which one has the best screen coating or what differences did you notice? (if you happen to have photos of all, i'd love to check them to see all on the same place).

Also, you talk about a "yellow tint", can you please explain that further? (I hate any kind of tint and can't understand why these have any, i mean, i have an "old" TV LG 32LD420 -not sure if is semi glossy or something- that, by looking at its side, is perfectly clean and clear, why can't we have these?).

Thanks in advance ."

best screen coating by far is the LG 27gn750, also had the best colors and viewing angles. It's not the AHVA panel, LG used their nano panel(but removed the wide gamut backlight)

runners up are the 2 alienware(excellent QC) and tied for 3rd is MSI and xg270. Very coating and uniformity too despite being AHVA IPS panels.

the acer and the asus 280hz, oh boy. it looked grainy as fuck.

Not only did it have that yellow tint(black had brown uniformity, whites had rainbow/yellowish uniformity , but they looked grainy but NOT in a good way, but the bad way.

BAd way as in, the bad uniformity amplified the contrast of each individual pixel. Because these monitors doesn't have color banding since it doesn't have FRC/Dithering, the colors look WARM and inaccurate. Then again, it's AHVA panel from AU optronic. it's closer to being a VA than an actual IPS.

White background (rainbowish looking up close, Yellowish cat piss looking when afar)
black background gave a brown and warm tint. Just look how grainy this is. No dithering and no color banding doesn't help since it cannot get a 10 bit signal which proves FRC and dithering(the MSi can get a 10 bit signal, other 240hz monitors can't(although i could be wrong, feel free to fact check me)



because it looked grainy,to avoid each and individual pixel, i had to sit on the visual acuity distance(the optimal viewing distance from a person with 20/20 vision to not be able to see ONE single individual pixel)

(tested this on my 28" 720p 15 yr old HDTV)





btw. 24.5" vs 27" 1080p, there's BASICALLY ZERO difference when it comes to sharpness. The higher PPI of a 24.5" 1080p doesn't matter because the visual acuity for both of them are only 2 inches apart. So if a person with a 27" monitor compares a 24.5" monitor with the same resolution, if the person viewing the 25" 1080p sat 2 inches further, he wouldn't tell if the difference. a 2" difference is non-existent.

[RLCSContender*]

guess which is the MSI and guess which is the asus

u guys might think i'm "cherry picking" but i'm not. same camera, same distance, same dark blue background.

people here like to COPE and defend their monitor by saying things like "u juss have a defective panel bro"

really? because for me, i'm ABLE to see these differences because my point of reference of buying and returning basically all of the 240hz IPS monitors. Most people who buy 240hz IPS monitors are usually competitive players who used TN. this is their first 240hz IPS, they would think it's "normal" and "acceptable" but in reality if that person had more of a point of reference, they would EASILY know the differences and what is acceptable and not acceptable.

The TN lovers in this forum are great examples. They claim their "TN's" colors are good and acceptable. But in reality, they've probably NEVER owned an IPS panel to know just how bad TN colors are.

instead of yellowish tint that looks like cat piss, you will see DOODOO stains in the uniformity and it will amplify if you even MOVE your had (especially from verticle due to bad viewing angles).

even if you sit in FRONT of a TN, it will look distorted bcuz the corners will start to look circular and have shifting corners because when u view a monitor, your eyes are only looking at a specific area fo that monitor, but the corners will start to look circular as if you are looking at black hole. How do I know this?

i had a TN(HP omen x 27). Prior to buying it, i only owned IPS so i thought "This couldn't be dat bad, i only sit in front of my monitor anyway" OH BOY, the moment i turned the monitor on...

But hey if u guys like colors that a unicorn puked out that looks like a black hole even if u sat in front of it due to image distortion(the side effect of TN technology) be my guest.

I maybe abrasive and borderline obnoxious when i post these things, but at at the end of the day, you have to respect me honesty. I know ppl here will claim "it's subjective" "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" and what not, but i would rather be honest and blunt than uphold a positive image in this forum. I always speak in the best interest of the consumers bcuz I have been a victim of dishonesty due to manipulative marketing.

[Blehhh]

guess which is the MSI and guess which is the asus

u guys might think i'm "cherry picking" but i'm not. same camera, same distance, same dark blue background.

people here like to COPE and defend their monitor by saying things like "u juss have a defective panel bro"

really? because for me, i'm ABLE to see these differences because my point of reference of buying and returning basically all of the 240hz IPS monitors. Most people who buy 240hz IPS monitors are usually competitive players who used TN. this is their first 240hz IPS, they would think it's "normal" and "acceptable" but in reality if that person had more of a point of reference, they would EASILY know the differences and what is acceptable and not acceptable.

The TN lovers in this forum are great examples. They claim their "TN's" colors are good and acceptable. But in reality, they've probably NEVER owned an IPS panel to know just how bad TN colors are.

instead of yellowish tint that looks like cat piss, you will see DOODOO stains in the uniformity and it will amplify if you even MOVE your had (especially from verticle due to bad viewing angles).

even if you sit in FRONT of a TN, it will look distorted bcuz the corners will start to look circular and have shifting corners because when u view a monitor, your eyes are only looking at a specific area fo that monitor, but the corners will start to look circular as if you are looking at black hole. How do I know this?

i had a TN(HP omen x 27). Prior to buying it, i only owned IPS so i thought "This couldn't be dat bad, i only sit in front of my monitor anyway" OH BOY, the moment i turned the monitor on...

But hey if u guys like colors that a unicorn puked out that looks like a black hole even if u sat in front of it due to image distortion(the side effect of TN technology) be my guest.

I maybe abrasive and borderline obnoxious when i post these things, but at at the end of the day, you have to respect me honesty. I know ppl here will claim "it's subjective" "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" and what not, but i would rather be honest and blunt than uphold a positive image in this forum. I always speak in the best interest of the consumers bcuz I have been a victim of dishonesty due to manipulative marketing.

Thanks for explaning everything truly appreciate it.
just wondering how far do you sit with a 27inch monitor and also with your msi 25inch how far away do you sit? best viewing distance for 27inch and 25inch?

and ive somewhere you ordered XB253QGXbmiiprzx acer to test it out, wondering if you tested this monitor already? or is still on the way.
Thanks in advance and have a nice day

[RLCSContender*]

24.5" at 1080p is sort of a weird resolution to screen sized ratio.

The visual acuity distacce is 3.2m and the maximum viewing distance( 3.4m). The visual acuity distance to the maximum viewing for a 24.5" monitor in my opinion is wayyy too close to each other. Even at 3.2m visual acuity, i start to see more peripheral vision of my ROOM than the actual monitor itself. Whereas if i sit visual acuity distance on my 27" 1080p 240hZ monitor, (which is 3.4m), i have less peripheral vision of my room, yet have a PERFECT viewing distance to not be able to see any pixels yet, have a field of view good enough for my head to not ever turn.

99% of ppl who own a 24.5" 1080p monitor sit way too close(some peiople literally have it within elbow length. How they manage to do that yet don't get annoyed by the pixelation that they see, is beyond me.

how far do i sit on my 24.5" MSI?

i have an L-shaped desk so i'm able to sit further than most people. About 2 and a half feet when using the internet/browsing/etc. and 3 feet when i game. I always sit slightly further when i play video games since i like to kick back, recline my chair slightly and relax. I never play when i'm leadning forward or hunched on the monitor(although most ppl do)

. I sit fairly far compared to majority of ppl. I just don't like seeing a pixelated screen. With my 27" 1440p, i'm able sit within arms length of it and not see pixelation. WHY? because 1440p allows it. The visual acuity dist ance fora 1440p 27" is about 2 feet. Which is PERFECT for normal every day computer use.

ppl here argue that at 24.5",has a "competitive advantage". That is further from the truth. Field of view and peripheral vision, our brain and eyes adapt to it, whether it's 27" or 24.5", it won't have an impact on performance. Hell, i can also argue that at 27", i'm able to do 'head shots" better because everythiing is larger.

it's ALL PREFERENCE, nothiing more. A smaller screen makes zero difference in any "competitive advantages" because with that logic, why buy a 24.5" when you can buy a 21"? It's nothing but preference.

I prefer 27" over 24.5" since i like the immersion more.I generally don't like playing on 24.5" monitors but because the MSI is a 24.5" monitor and the best th at i've tested and used, i just didn't have much of a choice.

[RLCSContender*]

ima do a review on the alienware aw2720HF, the 27" 240hz IPS monitor.

I'm doing a lot of digging and i see ZERO evidence that the 25" aw2521hf is a different monitor to the 27" aw2720hf. I'm 99% sure that the 27" alienware 240hz IPS monitor is the SAME panel as the 25" alienware, just at different screen sizes. I'm waiting for the price to drop bcuz those sleazebags 3rd party sellers on amazon keep on hiking up the prices if the monitor is sold out.

[jnashville]

24.5" at 1080p is sort of a weird resolution to screen sized ratio.

The visual acuity distacce is 3.2m and the maximum viewing distance( 3.4m). The visual acuity distance to the maximum viewing for a 24.5" monitor in my opinion is wayyy too close to each other. Even at 3.2m visual acuity, i start to see more peripheral vision of my ROOM than the actual monitor itself. Whereas if i sit visual acuity distance on my 27" 1080p 240hZ monitor, (which is 3.4m), i have less peripheral vision of my room, yet have a PERFECT viewing distance to not be able to see any pixels yet, have a field of view good enough for my head to not ever turn.

99% of ppl who own a 24.5" 1080p monitor sit way too close(some peiople literally have it within elbow length. How they manage to do that yet don't get annoyed by the pixelation that they see, is beyond me.

how far do i sit on my 24.5" MSI?

i have an L-shaped desk so i'm able to sit further than most people. About 2 and a half feet when using the internet/browsing/etc. and 3 feet when i game. I always sit slightly further when i play video games since i like to kick back, recline my chair slightly and relax. I never play when i'm leadning forward or hunched on the monitor(although most ppl do)

. I sit fairly far compared to majority of ppl. I just don't like seeing a pixelated screen. With my 27" 1440p, i'm able sit within arms length of it and not see pixelation. WHY? because 1440p allows it. The visual acuity dist ance fora 1440p 27" is about 2 feet. Which is PERFECT for normal every day computer use.

ppl here argue that at 24.5",has a "competitive advantage". That is further from the truth. Field of view and peripheral vision, our brain and eyes adapt to it, whether it's 27" or 24.5", it won't have an impact on performance. Hell, i can also argue that at 27", i'm able to do 'head shots" better because everythiing is larger.

it's ALL PREFERENCE, nothiing more. A smaller screen makes zero difference in any "competitive advantages" because with that logic, why buy a 24.5" when you can buy a 21"? It's nothing but preference.

I prefer 27" over 24.5" since i like the immersion more.I generally don't like playing on 24.5" monitors but because the MSI is a 24.5" monitor and the best th at i've tested and used, i just didn't have much of a choice.

No offence but that sound like a "defending my purchase" reason.

Anyway truth of the matter is, ppl who play esports titles,prefer a smaller screen like 24.5 against 27inch due to peripheral vision. 27 is too big to see things like your crosshair and the radar of certain games. U will waste extra time moving your eyes/head to switch to see the radar and your crosshair, which is why esports players never use a 27inch.

Yes u can mention about sitting 2 inches away etc and all that reasoning. Basically it really sounds like the "defending your purchase" reasoning.

Ask any esports players, all will tell u the same thing no matter your reasoning.

[RLCSContender*]

No offence but that sound like a "defending my purchase" reason.

Anyway truth of the matter is, ppl who play esports titles,prefer a smaller screen like 24.5 against 27inch due to peripheral vision. 27 is too big to see things like your crosshair and the radar of certain games. U will waste extra time moving your eyes/head to switch to see the radar and your crosshair, which is why esports players never use a 27inch.

Yes u can mention about sitting 2 inches away etc and all that reasoning. Basically it really sounds like the "defending your purchase" reasoning.

Ask any esports players, all will tell u the same thing no matter your reasoning.

do you have evidence or are you going to blurt out pseudo science?

the only time your argument would "matter" is when a person likes to sit close to the monitor(for example 8-12 inches), yet if he buys a 27" monitor and sits at the same distance, he would need to move his head more and he would have less peripheral vision. But the thing is, HIS preference of sitting up close supports his argument that a smaller screen is better. So withiin HIS preferences of sitting close, is the basis as to why he would even think "24 is better bro" would ONLY matter to HIS own specific preference of sitting close.

I don't know about you but I adjust depending on whichever screen or monitor i play with. I don't sit at a fixed distance.

it's PREFERENCE, nothing more. 24.5" does NOT give an advantage above a 27". If you knew how the physiology of vision works, you would know that humans are extremely adaptive to perception. Yes, in THEORY a smaller screen has a wider field of view IF THEY ARE VIEWED FROM THE SAME DISTANCE. All i have to do is sit back a few inches, problem solved. As a matter of fact, a 27" monitor is more generous with viewing distances since its maximum viewing distanceisn't close to its visual acuity distance unlike the 24.5"1080p where the visual acuity(3.2M) to max distance(3.4m) ratio is SO clsoe to each other.

If you want to have a cordial debate, that is totally fine. But pulling up buzz words to deflect what i'm saying "but you're just defending your purchase" as an excuse for YOU to not give a valid retort fine with me. This is my thread and if u wanna pull psuedo science and deflection remarks, then i kindly ask you stop posting in it. I'm just here trying to help ppl make a better purchase, nothing more.

[rasmas]

...

best screen coating by far is the LG 27gn750, also had the best colors and viewing angles. It's not the AHVA panel, LG used their nano panel(but removed the wide gamut backlight)

runners up are the 2 alienware(excellent QC) and tied for 3rd is MSI and xg270. Very coating and uniformity too despite being AHVA IPS panels.

the acer and the asus 280hz, oh boy. it looked grainy as fuck.
...

After reading this ASUS VG279QM review, thought it would have better coating.


Guess the only way to try if any cause eye-strain or you can use it for hours with rested eyes is to test them in person.
I mean, maybe not having the perfect monitor on speed, blur, ... is not that important if you are 100% comfortable using it.

Thanks for the answer .

P.S. totally thought the Viewsonic XG270 and the ASUS TUF Gaming VG279QM (and most of the others) had gsync and not only FreeSync xD .