I have been reading reviews for three days now and have twitch in my left eye this can not go on as i was down town and my eye started to twitch and a women thought i was winking at her then my wife give me a dig in the ribs so i need help please. I am looking at the NEC Multisync EA241WM or the LG W2486l my budget is £300 can you please give me your thoughts on these monitors Thanks.
NEC OR LG
- Thread starter tiepan
- Start date
With this budget I would go for this:
http://www.aria.co.uk/Products/Moni...120Hz+Widescreen+LED+Monitor+?productId=42894
Just had a look at the Benq XL2410T monitor and it looks good better respons time then the NEC and 120hz so will not have much input lag thanks for that.
IPS monitors do have better quality but with 8-16 ms response time and double the price I personal would not recommend them especially for gaming. If you are in front of Photoshop all day and you are making money out of it go for it
Both monitors you were looking at are TN...so TN I recommended...
IMHO 120Hz,3D ready (for possible future upgrade) and within your budget TN is the way to go.
KING_OF_SAND
New member
it all depends on what you are doing. NEC (i believe is owned by DELL) makes business equipment. nothing they make is really meant for home use, unless they make something i have never seen. if your eyes are hurting while looking at the monitors you need one with a good response time. P2270 by samsung has a 2ms and i can stare at it for hours without issues. viewsonic has a 1ms response time.
Ya93sin
New member
IPS is far better quality than TN, but Tn is best for gaming. The response times are slower though.
So a TN is best for gaming, but response time so long as its under 8ms (Dell Ultrasharp U2410 is around 6ms, and 5ms was the standard for a long while, perhaps still is for TN), should all be fine.
Trouble is finding a good response time for £300 budget.
So if you are just gaming, go for TN, but if you want much better quality for for IPS
So a TN is best for gaming, but response time so long as its under 8ms (Dell Ultrasharp U2410 is around 6ms, and 5ms was the standard for a long while, perhaps still is for TN), should all be fine.
Trouble is finding a good response time for £300 budget.
So if you are just gaming, go for TN, but if you want much better quality for for IPS
KING_OF_SAND
New member
what are you talking about. if it has a response time of 8 that is absolutely terrible for gaming! the BEST gaming monitors must have a response time on under 2ms. the lower the response time the longer you can starre at your monitor, which leads to longer game play, and can result in you performing better in your games.
Ya93sin
New member
Yes, but this monitor in particular has 2ms GTG (Grey-to-Grey), so from black to white or X-colour to Y-Colour the response time is going to be higher, probably around the 5ms mark.
With IPS, the way they calculate the response times is different.
Then consider the human eye can only see the difference between response times of over 15ms, and only the most recent games would ghost at anything lower than about 10ms.Not sure why you couldn't stare at your monitor seeing as your eye wouldn't know the difference, 8ms-5ms=3ms, this is at least 5x smaller than the time difference your eye could actually notice.
Anyway, congratulations on your new purchase taz.
KING_OF_SAND
New member
Just because you dont notice a difference does not mean your eyes wont respond to it differently. I cannot stare at a 5ms monitor for longer than 2 hours, after that i start to tear up and get a head ache. with my samsung 2ms, while i myself cannot see a bit of difference but i can stare at it for 5+ hours with no tearing or headaches. its just like sound frequency, your ears can not hear anything below 10hz (it may be lower, but this is just an example) but prolonged frequencies of 10hz or 1hz can damage the ear, even though you can not hear it. refresh rate also plays a part but both my monitors are 60hz.
Ya93sin
New member
Well as long as your not affected its OK
