Archives > Gaming
Gaming Desktop
JC:
--- Quote from: Reece on August 07, 2012, 11:26:57 am ---Converting me to switching to dell since I'm not planning on doing much FPS much anyway, atleast not at this stage.
You know much about the catleap IPS monitors and have an opinion whether it's worth the trouble? or just stick to Dell.
Tbh i just want a monitor that's going to make my graphics look beautiful in gaming :3
--- End quote ---
There's a guy on another forum I frequent that has recently purchased one, here's his notes that might help make up your mind:
--- Quote ---Quick Impressions:
The monitor is literally an LG panel in a custom housing, depending on the brand. You get what you pay for. The build quality is decent considering the price, but nothing conpared to Dell.
For this particular brand/model, the stand has been criticized for being flimsy and wobbly. However, I have found that it is actually quite solid once you have installed it correctly. Design wise, it may not be everyone's cup of tea. But for me, as long as it is not out of this world nor really stands out (for all the wrong reasons), I am happy.
My unit is working fine with no stuck/dead/bright pixels. It does not seem to have backlight bleeding, only the usual IPS glow which is worsened by not having the anti-glare coating. This particular model: Q270 does not come with the AG coating nor the tempered glass. So, it is glossy which is a good thing considering the dull look the AG on Dell U2312HM gives.
The color looks great as expected from an LG IPS panel. I also use a custom color profile (created by DTP94). When compared to Dell U2312HM (also an IPS panel), the Catleap does give a more vibrant color reproduction.
The refresh rate of these late model catleaps is limited, so don't hope for 120Hz like the 2B rev. I have managed to get it to 65Hz.
Yamakasi Catleap Q270:
+ Price (shipping incl)
+ 2560x1440 Resolution
+ LG IPS Panel
+ Plug and Play
- Housing (material quality)
- Stand (swivel and tilt only)
- Limited Input/Support on non-multi model (DVI-D only)
- No local warranty
- Chance of getting a defective unit (both major and minor)
--- End quote ---
Personally, I wouldn't take the risk (they're still not that cheap, this guy paid pretty much as much as one of those Dell U2412's.... a big risk for 3 'free' inches).
Realistically, any decent brand at that size will give you 'beautiful' graphics.... IPS will just make them more beautiful!
--Edit--
I should really add, these are sortof what I look for in a screen (in order of importance) as some people might have diffrent priorities (eg. don't care about anything other than it being big..... despite it having a lower resolution than a cell phone screen):
* Resolution/Aspect Ratio - I wouldn't buy a screen with less than 1920*1200, it also has to be 16:10 (Better than 16:9 for a computer, IMO)
* Size - Really, for widescreen anything under 22" is getting a bit too small.
* Price - Yeah this is fairly important
* Technology - The main two are TN & IPS, these days IPS is cheap enough that it's really not worth getting TN
* Brand - I've had screens from Samsung, Dell, HP so far.... but most well known brands are okay
* 3D Capability - Not that important to me, I change my screens every 2-3 years and I don't think that 3D will be that popular until I replace my current set....
Reece:
Hey JC, appreciate all the advice and help mate! Once i get closer to buying the desktop I'll take notes of all the out of stock advice with the other parts as well as keeping myself up to date from now until then with the new tech as it's always changing :fp:
PS. Dell was at a nice price so I figured i'd snatch it up for 299, it's currently on its way since xl2420t is just a major bitch to get in australia even though BenQ is AUS based... i think?
RobbieThe1st:
--- Quote from: JC on August 07, 2012, 10:04:25 am ---It's also important to keep in mind that any FPS over 60 is really irrelevant (unless you're running 3D) as it's widely accepted as that's the highest frame rate an eye detects.
--- End quote ---
Bull. Shit. The rate is somewhere over 120FPS, and it all depends on the distance moved per frame. 30fps can appear perfectly smooth if you're only moving 1 pixel per frame. On the other hand, if you whip around in a FPS and half the screen moves between frames, even at 120fps, it'll appear jerky.
This is why they add motion blur to games and movies; to reduce the number of FPS needed to appear smooth.
That being said, you're /right/ overall - Most* LCD monitors today cannot display more than 60fps/hz, so anything above that is basically wasted. What you need is a system able to display 60fps at the most graphically intense scenes in your games.
* The others are either small monitors(17-19") which can often display up to 85hz, or Nvidia 3D Vision monitors which can display 120.