Welcome to another very educational article here at GND-Tech, home of the real myth busters! Once again we evaluate the gaming industry, this time to pinpoint and shoot down the biggest myths that won't seem to go away. Most of these myths arise from people being sheep and not thinking for themselves, and they do serious damage to the industry. Dispelling these myths is a universal good that will help raise humanity to higher levels, so do pay attention. Without further ado, let's begin.
"TN monitors are for gaming, IPS is for graphix!"
There are a lot of myths surrounding IPS monitors and their relation to gaming. For those who don't know about different panel types like TN and IPS, do a google search. Basically, every consumer-grade modern LCD monitor, be it a computer screen or television, is a TN panel. They're the cheapest to produce, and provide image quality that is significantly worse than IPS and VA.
Lately there has been a craze for TN monitors due to lower response times, higher refresh rates, and now G-Sync. G-Sync is a legitimate desire; again if you don't know much about it, google it. Only a few monitors feature G-Sync, and they're all TN. What a shame.
Typical PC gamers are convinced that IPS sucks for gaming and TN is the way to go, and that IPS is only meant for professional photo editing and the like. This actually was true about ten years ago, but not anymore. Let's go over the common concerns for IPS monitors.
1) "I want 120 Hz or moar!!1"
- Higher refresh rates are a strong desire for enthusiasts, and with good reason. They can lead to less motion blur, less strain on your eyes, and they allow you to finally witness what higher frame rates look like (equivalent to the value of the refresh rate). It's more smooth. You can find newer TN monitors available in 120 Hz or even 144 Hz. That's nice, but there are IPS monitors capable of this as well.
The QNIX QX2710 is one such monitor, and one of the cheapest options at about $350. It uses the Samsung PLS panel, which is the same panel found on a $500 ASUS monitor. Although the stand appears cheap, and overclocking leads to some inconsistency, it's easily capable of 96-110 Hz according to those who have used it.
There's also the Yamakasi Catleap, the one that started it all. It's probably the most inconsistent option you could get though, I recommend the QX2710 or the next one I'm about to mention.
There's also the more pricey ($450) Overlord Tempest X270OC which uses the LG AH-IPS panel, which is found on $700+ Dell UltraSharp monitors. This is one of the highest rated monitors by enthusiasts, as it's also easily capable of 96-110 Hz with greater consistency, decent build quality, and amazing picture quality according to all who have used it.
These monitors are 60 Hz out of the box, but can easily be overclocked to 96-110 Hz. They're built to run at such refresh rates and will be reliable. 120 Hz isn't rare for these monitors either, though it generally takes more tinkering with timings and is often less reliable before PCB modding. I've even seen 130 Hz and 140 Hz reported. But 96-110 Hz is practically a guarantee for the QX2710 and X270OC. Diminishing returns kick in rather quickly beyond this point anyway, 144 Hz and 144 FPS won't be a night and day difference.
2) "IPS has crappy blacks!"
- Again, about 10 years ago this was true. IPS panels couldn't display blacks very well. Nowadays, with newer IPS panels such as Samsung PLS and LG AH-IPS, they're about equal to TN panels in this area
3) "I want 1ms response time!"
- This is related to an often baseless obsession with numbers. People see superclocked!
and think they have to buy it, this is no different. In reality, the difference response time makes depends on a number of things, like refresh rate. At 60 Hz, 1ms vs 5ms or even slightly higher isn't going to make a noticeable difference. At 120 Hz however, lower response times become more helpful in reducing motion blur. You should aim for around 8ms or less at 60 Hz, and 4ms or less at 120 Hz. I dominated the competitive shooting scene on a 60 Hz, 5ms monitor so people really shouldn't obsess over this. The difference most people will point out is simply placebo effect.
Take a look at reviews of modern