[rabb1t]

While 120 Mz screens have been out for 1080p LCDs for a while (I'd guess about a year) it looks like the tech is finally filtering down to PC use (typically things go the opposite direction).

Viewsonic is the first to announce such a screen at Nvision '08. I expect others will follow with their announcements.

Cnet report
Engadget report

Specs:
22"
1680 x1050
1000:1 contrast ratio
300 cd/m2
stereoscopic 3D support <-- I guess this is a new tech also shown at Nvision '08. I'm sure we'll hear/see more on it later.
and 4-watt speakers

[Fozzik]

Exactly what are we talking about here? I've seen the commercials on TV and figured it was just another way to rope in confused consumers with techno-babble.

We're talking about LCD monitors here, right? So what are they saying when they say it's 120Hz? Are they saying it can buffer 120 frames per second from the source, or are they saying it can flip 120 frames to the display every second? Or both?

The next question would be... why? There isn't any flicker associated with an LCD display since the pixels stay lit until they are changed... and 60 frames a second is plenty to look smooth to the human eye. Besides marketing... what exactly are we talking about?

[rabb1t]

[GuyJantica]

Originally Posted by Fozzik

Exactly what are we talking about here? I've seen the commercials on TV and figured it was just another way to rope in confused consumers with techno-babble.

We're talking about LCD monitors here, right? So what are they saying when they say it's 120Hz? Are they saying it can buffer 120 frames per second from the source, or are they saying it can flip 120 frames to the display every second? Or both?

The next question would be... why? There isn't any flicker associated with an LCD display since the pixels stay lit until they are changed... and 60 frames a second is plenty to look smooth to the human eye. Besides marketing... what exactly are we talking about?

Hadouken!

Sorry...

[peppy13]

Originally Posted by rabb1t

While 120 Mz screens have been out for 1080p LCDs for a while (I'd guess about a year) it looks like the tech is finally filtering down to PC use (typically things go the opposite direction).

Viewsonic is the first to announce such a screen at Nvision '08. I expect others will follow with their announcements.

Cnet report
Engadget report

Specs:
22"
1680 x1050
1000:1 contrast ratio
300 cd/m2
stereoscopic 3D support <-- I guess this is a new tech also shown at Nvision '08. I'm sure we'll hear/see more on it later.
and 4-watt speakers

Just to note, after purchasing a LCD monitor from Viewsonic, and watching it die within a month of purchase, then RMA'ing it, waiting for over a month to get a replacement (the warranty says it will takes up to two weeks and is not true), and then having the 2nd monitor die in the same way the first one did, I need to mention this. I urge you all to stay the HELL away from anything Viewsonic. Their customer service is shitty, I have spent hours and hours on the phone with them trying to get my LCD issue resolved. They have NOT done a satisfactory job so far.

I have seen someone buy a 40 something inch plasma from Viewsonic that died within six months.

They are the single worst experience I've had when it came to monitors.

Okay now that is done, honestly why would you need a 120 Mz screen anyway? 60FPS isn't good enough? Sounds like another marketing scam to hype up monitors nobody really needs and trying to sucker in people to buy this stuff.

[Renekal]

While I don't have anywhere to verify the accuracy/honesty of the set up... I saw two tv's (one 60 the other 120mhz) side by side, playing from the same source, in a Best Buy or somewhere, and there was a noticeable difference in overall picture quality/clarity/sharpness.

[Fozzik]

I wasn't trying to bust anyone's chops... least of all you, rabb1t.

I was honestly asking if anyone knows what the deal is... because I don't really understand. My guess (from my limited understanding of how LCDs work) is that it's probably marketing hype... but who knows. If it does actually provide a benefit, I'd love to know how it works (I'm the kid who takes the toaster apart just to see what it does inside).

I'm guessing that side-by-side demo was probably rigged. They almost always are.

[rabb1t]

Originally Posted by Fozzik

I was honestly asking if anyone knows what the deal is... because I don't really understand.

There is some bla bla at an article I read about 120Hz being devided evenly by 24, so it smooths out video, which doesn't really matter for gaming. (60Hz devides into something like 2.5 instead of even frames.)

I'm asuming that it would alow for higher framerates, as well as smoother transitions when framerate changes (since it has the potential to display twice as many).

It likely won't matter much in anything but FPS gaming, but it wouldn't surprise me if they were rapidly adopted by LAN tourney players.

I'm guessing that side-by-side demo was probably rigged. They almost always are.

I'd doubt it. What the demo shows is the effect of 120Hz on motion blur. Since it's displaying more frames there is less blur, and each individual frame looks like a still picture.

That being said (and this has come up on several boards) I don't think it's something you really need for the cost increase on some monitors.

Example:
Samsung LN40A650 ~1400
Samsung LN40A550 ~1075

The difference? 120Hz cert on the A650. (Also, higher contrast, more HDMI and a hair better speakers.) Is it worth the ~40% cost increase? I'd say if you don't have the $ to spend most certainly not. But, if you do, it could be a noteworthy difference in video (movies, sport shows) and probably not so much in gaming.

[EQ Companion]

Originally Posted by rabb1t

There is some bla bla at an article I read about 120Hz being devided evenly by 24, so it smooths out video, which doesn't really matter for gaming. (60Hz devides into something like 2.5 instead of even frames.)

As far as I know, that's about it. The magic-number 120Hz benefits only TV's, not computer monitors.

Movie cameras film at 24 frames per second and TV broadcast is 30 frames per second. 60Hz monitor can show each frame of TV picture evenly (60/30= even 2) but when they show movies which are shot at 24 frames per second, they have to show some frames longer than others to make the 24 physical film frames fit into 60 slots in each second. This supposedly makes the motion not as fluid as it could be.

Since 120/30 = even 4 and 120/24 = even 5, there is no need to do any of this adjusting with 120Hz monitors.

I myself have not noticed any choppines when watching movies, but evidently is does help.

With computers you never get a steady FPS while gaming so there is no magic 120Hz advantage. The only advantage would be if your video card is able to show more than 60 frames per second, and your eye can see the difference above 60 FPS.

Of course if you use your computer monitor for watching TV and DVD's then the 120Hz advantage would apply.

[Renekal]

I don't think it's something you really need for the cost increase on some monitors.

Well that rarely stops many of us

[rabb1t]

Originally Posted by EQ Companion

I myself have not noticed any choppines when watching movies, but evidently is does help.

Those who reference a difference in reviews often site sporting events, like high-def football.

and your eye can see the difference above 60 FPS.

I can see up to about 90 FPS, but yeah, most peeps can't notice a difference beyond 60 FPS.

Originally Posted by Renekal

Well that rarely stops many of us

Yeah, I'm going to try for it when I get a new monitor (had to sell the old-school crt 1080i) due to Blu-ray and other future things that may take greater advantage of it. Got about half a dozen Samsung HDTVs on a not-shared list. hehe