oh i didnt see the sammy being 3d ready sorry but yea if theyre are 3d ready they are
i say get a 1080p or a 1200p monitor though, unless you wanna invest in some horsepower
Any 27" + 120Hz screens?
- Thread starter FunkyMonkey90
- Start date
oh i didnt see the sammy being 3d ready sorry but yea if theyre are 3d ready they are
i say get a 1080p or a 1200p monitor though, unless you wanna invest in some horsepower
FunkyMonkey90
New member
Well I was reading up on the sammy 1 and it uses a PLS screen which is meant to be cheaper to make therefore hopefully making it cheaper to buy.. If not I will a proud owner of another ASUS product =]
by horse power i meant in video cards to power all those pixels lol
i say go with the asus
do you live in the us?
theres a store having a sale on a 24" benq 3d monitor atm
here
FunkyMonkey90
New member
Ahh I see.. Well I'm thinking of getting a GTX560 SOC soon as well anyway ^.^.. Like I said If the sammy 1s cheap(ish) i'll get it.. if not hen oh well..
I'm from the UK.. And I don't think I could go right down to a 23.6" anyway.. thats a bit to small.. Heck i'm still hoping a 27" wont be to small xD
I'm from the UK.. And I don't think I could go right down to a 23.6" anyway.. thats a bit to small.. Heck i'm still hoping a 27" wont be to small xD
lol oops completely forgot about size
timby
New member
Hmmm ... I was under the impression (correct me if I'm wrong) that to get good 3D you would need 240 HZ refresh. I would like to interject something into this thread. I was told that monitors that have greater than 60 HZ refresh rates were good for movies and gaming as they had faster response LCD. That being said, I guess it depends on what the end user is going to do with this monitor (Auto Cad, graphics editing, serious gamer, etc)otherwise is the faster refresh rate really worth the cost?
Just my 2 cents ....
Just my 2 cents ....
Hmmm ... I was under the impression (correct me if I'm wrong) that to get good 3D you would need 240 HZ refresh. I would like to interject something into this thread. I was told that monitors that have greater than 60 HZ refresh rates were good for movies and gaming as they had faster response LCD. That being said, I guess it depends on what the end user is going to do with this monitor (Auto Cad, graphics editing, serious gamer, etc)otherwise is the faster refresh rate really worth the cost?
Just my 2 cents ....
Well if you had 240hz refresh rate and the game you were playing reached 240 fps+, then with the NVIDIA 3Dvision you'd have 120FPS in each eye, so to speak. But that's just silly. Monitors with greater than 60hz refresh rates are good for gaming, yes, but not for movies etc. Unless it was filmed and distributed at crazy framerates, it'll make no difference. For instance, if a movie is filmed at 24/30 frames-per-second, using a 120hz monitor is NOT going to make the footage magically fill in the missing frames. I've had 60hz monitors side-by-side with 120hz monitors playing the same movie and nothing was different. People can bring numbers up, but it's not going to take away from the fact that the technology's only really useful for gaming.
As for why they're good for gaming, if you're getting 156 frames-per-second with a 60hz monitor, you'll only see 60 out of those 156 frames. Get a 120hz and things will be a lot smoother when you aim, turn, the camera pans; people can chirp on about how it's a gimmick and all, but if you're a gamer it's jubbly. Overall quality does indeed depend on make and manufacturer. You just happen to be able to use 3Dvision on a 120hz. What 3D vision does is it uses 60 of those 120 visible frames in each eye, netting you a possible 60fps 3d experience, so forget 240hz for this technology: 120hz is fine. Besides, the technology is immensely demanding and I can't imagine getting most games to a stable 240 frames-per-second on a theoretical 240hz monitor with that technology enabled. God, the house'd be on fire.
