Blur Busters Forums

Hi, Im going to buy a new gaming monitor for competitive FPS gaming. Im currently looking at BenQ XL2540K (dont need dyac) or Asus VG258QM (Wait for it to come in stock in my country), is it worth waiting for reviews on Asus VG258QM before buying a monitor?

Thanks

Bump! I have also narrowed it down to these two. According to a member on here 3 out of 3 of his xl2540k's had pixel inversion artifacts. Here's where i'm at, if i knew that the vg was indeed using a newer or even different panel than the xl I would probably buy it because there's at least a chance that there's no pixel artifacts. However, if I knew it was the same panel or had artifacts of its own, i would probably buy the xl because I feel like it's faster because it's made for esports. There was a chines website that when translated said "Finally, the panel, now the best TN panel belongs to AIA's 3 Fast M250HTN01.7, M250HTN01.8, M250HTN01.9 three but from the color range is similar, VG258QM is the same as Mingji XL2546." Im not sure if thats right or if thats even the correct translation. I think its suggesting that the vg258qm has the same panel as the xl2546(k?). What do yall think? Anyone have any experience with the vg? I cant find anything in it. There's only 1 youtube video on it and its an unboxing. My goal is pure speed. Fps.

Just found this. A second chines person confirms the vg258qm uses the Q250HTA00.

Translated:
Please help me to see which effect is better.

The first-generation 120hz monitor purchased by Benq in early 2011 has been in service for 10 years. Recently I have nothing to do and picked up a gun to kill time. In line with the principle of technical inability to make equipment, I recently bought an ASUS vg258qm 240hz monitor. The students showed me which monitor is better. My wife said that the vg is good and the contrast is high, and the bq is foggy. I may still find the bq comfortable after watching it for a long time, although its clarity is indeed not as good as the noble Asus.
The panel comparison is as follows:
xl2456k/s Q250HTN00 A200
vg258qm/xl2546 Q250HTA00

AFAIK all of the 24" benq TN monitors are 6 bit+frc and will show inversion artifacts to some extent.

The 2540K is using the AUO M250HTN018 that suffers from pixel inversion artifacts.
The Q250HTN00 A200 on the XL2546K doesn't suffer from pixel inversion artifacts.

djcreative wrote: ↑

15 Mar 2021, 03:07

Just found this. A second chines person confirms the vg258qm uses the Q250HTA00.

Isn't it the panel used on the OG PG258Q? If I search it on Aliexpress some vendors sell it as the panel for the AW2518HF (but displayspecifications.com says otherwise).

That's a 2016 panel, unless Asus is getting all the good bins or it's a new revision of the same panel it's going to perform like the two monitors I just mentioned.

axaro1 wrote: ↑

15 Mar 2021, 11:33

The 2540K is using the AUO M250HTN018 that suffers from pixel inversion artifacts.
The Q250HTN00 A200 on the XL2546K doesn't suffer from pixel inversion artifacts.

It's worth to mention that I recently had a second unit of XL2546K and this time it was visibly affected by pixel inversion artifacts.

Thank you so much for the responses! That's interesting that the vg258qm supposedly uses such an old panel. It sounds like there's going to be some pixel artifacts on any high hz tn monitors. Since that's the case, I think I'm going to go for the xl2540k instead of taking the gamble with the vg258qm. It would be nice to have some numbers on it though. Any objections? LOL

Speancer, I tried private messaging you but I didn't see an option to. Which is faster in your opinion the xl2546 or xl2540k (since supposedly those are the two panels that are in question)? I get that each company can "tune" each panel differently, but for sh*ts, which is faster?

djcreative wrote: ↑

15 Mar 2021, 15:28

Thank you so much for the responses! That's interesting that the vg258qm supposedly uses such an old panel. It sounds like there's going to be some pixel artifacts on any high hz tn monitors. Since that's the case, I think I'm going to go for the xl2540k instead of taking the gamble with the vg258qm. It would be nice to have some numbers on it though. Any objections? LOL

The XL2736S doesn't seem to have any pixel artifacts. This is a true 8 bit panel.
It looks like all of the more recent Benq 27" panels (whether 1080p or 1440p) are true 8 bit, EXCEPT for the XL2720Z, which is 6 bit + FRC.
The old XL2720T was a CMI panel, afaik and also may have been 8 bit. Only Chief would know that for sure though.

djcreative wrote: ↑

15 Mar 2021, 16:20

Speancer, I tried private messaging you but I didn't see an option to. Which is faster in your opinion the xl2546 or xl2540k (since supposedly those are the two panels that are in question)? I get that each company can "tune" each panel differently, but for sh*ts, which is faster?

It's not really the question which is faster, but which suits your needs better. The major difference is the DyAc on XL2546, although the panel in XL2540K is supposedly faster, as it's much newer revision rated for 0.5 ms GTG, while XL2546 is already a dated contender.

DyAc/DyAc+ is Zowie's strobing technology, it basically fights off all or most of motion blur on the expense of strobe crosstalk artifacts (more or less visible for me depending on the game). I'd rather buy XL2546K instead of XL2546 right now (better panel, better tuned strobing supposedly). If you don't need strobing and still want a TN panel, I'd choose XL2540K or the upcoming ASUS.

Mind you, for FPS games like CS:GO - in my opnion - strobing is not really that useful, as it's a stare-at-crosshair game, I personally found very little to none difference between DyAc+ on and off. It's more useful in eye-tracking situations. Also, I much prefer using the new fastIPS panels, like ASUS VG259QM, it's my main monitor for competitive CS:GO, I switched between XL2540K/XL2546K/VG259QM, and I'd still choose VG259QM. I just hate the typical TN downsides and love all the IPS upsides, and I honestly think for many players the difference in motion clarity will be negligible or minimal in actual gameplay between these monitors, at least in CS:GO. If I had a newer rig, I'd probably switch to the new 360 Hz IPS.

Zowie XL2546K monitor is not that good as some people would say, if you ask me. It introduces a lot of visible overshoot even on first overdrive level (it was fine for CS:GO though), and a lot of smearing/ghosting with overdrive off, but it seems to depend much on a certain game how much it's visible (CS:GO seems to have high overshoot tolerance, at least for me, I don't notice it much in this game). Basically, the only reason to buy XL2546/K is DyAc, and if you don't want to use it, it's pointless. Also, DyAc+ was ok for CS:GO, but for example in Aim Lab it caused distracting crosstalk artifacts. I just couldn't use Aim Lab comfortably on any settings when testing XL2546K It was either blurry (AMA off), overshooting (AMA High/Prem) or crosstalk artifacting (DyAc+).

djcreative wrote: ↑

15 Mar 2021, 15:28

Thank you so much for the responses! That's interesting that the vg258qm supposedly uses such an old panel. It sounds like there's going to be some pixel artifacts on any high hz tn monitors. Since that's the case, I think I'm going to go for the xl2540k instead of taking the gamble with the vg258qm. It would be nice to have some numbers on it though. Any objections? LOL

You also gamble with the XL2540K, my unit suffered from pronounced pixel inversion artifacts, and my last unit of XL2546K also had pixel inversion issues. I believe there is no reason to believe VG258QM would be any better in that instance. We also don't know for 100% what panel VG258QM uses, do we? Just to add, some of my high refresh rate IPS panels also had pixel inversion issues. It really is a pain in the arse. It can visibly vary between individual units of the same monitor apparently.

/Edit: some minor text changes