You have two contradictory posts.
RLCScontender wrote: ↑06 May 2020, 04:55
There are ZERO advantages a TN has over the fastest 240hz IPS monitors. because what the TN is known for(response times) become an oxymoron at these refresh rates and framerates.
Disagree. While the TN-vs-IPS venn diagram now easily overlaps -- and I am a fan of 240Hz IPS panels -- there's many TN advantages that remain.
RLCScontender wrote: ↑06 May 2020, 05:00
Except i RARELY post opinions. There may have been comments that i'm guilty of such as occasionall making blanket statements or being fact checked from time to time, but generally speaking i'm fairly accurate in majority of my posts and i usually back it up with videos or photos.
However, around here, bashing TN to the extent I'm seeing here is not something Blur Busters wants to see (it's even "accidentally dishonest" even if good intentions). It neglects to mention many of the things I've mentioned in many earlier posts. You've already been repeatedly warned about the need to respect TN. As much as a 240Hz IPS fan I may be, I have respect for the nuances of TN.
OLED is theoretically superior to both TN and IPS, but there are still OLED quirks/disadvantages too. And compare to plasma? CRT? DLP? They all have their unique quirks, pros, and cons.
On Blur Busters, I take big issue about avoiding escalations of TN-vs-IPS holy wars, intentional or unintentional or otherwise. Everyone is entitled to their opinion but the evangelism-intensity is nearly what is deemed (in Blur Busters opinion) to be holy-war levels, so I'd like to see that tone down. Big issue enough that I may begin moving posts like "zero advantages of TN versus IPS" type posts to the Off Topic Lounge.
Yes, we love to see posts with great data and great test results. Sure, show that IPS monitor X is superior in certain traits than TN monitor Y. But to say a universal catchall is discouraged, given the complex nuances that creates different preferences for IPS-feel vs TN-feel (vs CRT vs plasma vs OLED). TN and IPS is sufficiently different enough that "Attribute X of this TN panel is superior to that IPS panel, according to the test data I've posted here.", while simultaneously "Attribute Y of this IPS panel is superior to this TN panel, according to the test data I've posted here". Those are fair conclusions. But simple things like sample sizes, user preferences, even room temperature differences, overdrive settings availabilty, sensitivity to artifacts (e.g. preferring more motion blur but less coronas), GtG curve shapes, and dozens other quirky factors, can tip IPS-vs-TN scales, etc. It's so big a venn diagram that it's unknowable and does not deserve a blanket "zero advantages of TN versus IPS". That's nonsense. Even if you buy hundreds of thousands of monitors of all factory runs of all models of monitors, became a Ph.D in all the needed areas (including how surprisingly big double-digit-percentage population of human vision differences -- no two human see perfectly identically) and was able to test in all situations (bright and dark room, hot and cold room, bright and dark games, high and low frame rate games, etc). Reviewers don't even test to that depth! Generalities can be made, but we don't like to see blanket holy-war-instigating conclusions here.
Sure, you've seen me be enthusaic about the new fast IPS panels. But Blur Busters policy is to not bash TN (And that's not even because of any profit motive at all!). It's based off plain honesty and science. One can be pro-IPS without bashing TN, and vice versa. You see many do. That's perfectly OK too. Find ways to write conclusions without even mentioning the other panel technology (and if you do, cherrypick items only in a non-blanket manner). That's how many professional monitor reviewers do it.