# Asus VG248QE 24-inch 144Hz, 1ms, 1080p LED TN panel (still worth it?)



## RodoGodo19 (Mar 4, 2016)

Ultra smooth action with 144Hz rapid refresh rate and 1ms (GTG) response time
Full HD 1920x1080 for brilliant HD-quality visuals in both 2D and 3D. 80,000,000:1 ASUS Smart Contrast Ratio and 350cd/m² of brightness delivers true-to-life images
A comfortable viewing experience with ergonomic tilt, swivel pivot, and height adjustment
Built-in 2W stereo speakers for an immersive home entertainment experience
Featuring DisplayPort, Dual-link DVI-D, and HDMI ports for multi device connections
 
Amazon:  $249.00 & *FREE Shipping*
http://www.amazon.com/Asus-VG248QE-24-inch-Ergonomic-Back-lit/dp/B00B2HH7G0/ref=sr_1_1?s=pc&ie=UTF8&qid=1457121333&sr=1-1&keywords=Asus+VG248QE
 
My PC:

I7-6700
16GB
Asus B150I Mini ITX
EVGA GTX980ti Hybrid (G-SYNC)
Dell 24-inch P2414H 1080p, 60hz, 8ms (http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=us&l=en&cs=19&sku=320-9794)
 
There are IPS monitors with 1ms-4ms, 144hz-165hz from Asus, but they are very expensive and i can't afford it right now.
There is a guy who is selling 4 of this monitors in my country.

This monitor is TN, is not an IPS and doesn't have G-SYNC because it's an old model from Asus. Remember that my GPU has G-SYNC.

I can sell my current monitor to a friend today to buy the other one of above.

What do you think, is good?, or is better to wait until i can buy an IPS monitor with G-SYNC?.


----------



## sttubs (Mar 4, 2016)

I have one of these and absolutely love it. I plan on buying a second for the kids gaming computer.


----------



## RodoGodo19 (Mar 4, 2016)

sttubs said:


> I have one of these and absolutely love it. I plan on buying a second for the kids gaming computer.



what about the g synk, is it worth it?.


----------



## GhostRyder (Mar 4, 2016)

RGT said:


> Ultra smooth action with 144Hz rapid refresh rate and 1ms (GTG) response time
> Full HD 1920x1080 for brilliant HD-quality visuals in both 2D and 3D. 80,000,000:1 ASUS Smart Contrast Ratio and 350cd/m² of brightness delivers true-to-life images
> A comfortable viewing experience with ergonomic tilt, swivel pivot, and height adjustment
> Built-in 2W stereo speakers for an immersive home entertainment experience
> ...


For the IPS part, I would say just save the money and get a TN because most of the TN's on these monitors are very good.  Yea color reproduction is going to be a little bit better on the IPS but personally its not enough that I see them as night and day (Plus you get the better response time on the TN panels if that matters to you).  I would also if your looking at 144hz to get G-Sync as it really does improve the quality of the performance in games IMHO.  Most games don't hold 144hz very well even with OP GPU setups so having that extra makes the games feel constantly smooth which is why I personally like both Freesync and G-Sync.

This is all just my opinion of course.

Edit 1:Wait, I think this monitor is upgradeable to have G-Sync in it by buying the kit.  Not sure if you can get the kits separately anymore but this one is one of the ones advertised as being able to be upgraded with it.

Edit 2: NVM, This is the one but you can no longer get those kits anymore so forget I mentioned it.


----------



## sttubs (Mar 4, 2016)

I don't have G-Sync on mine but games are pretty consistent as far frame rates. My specs are listed to check out my hardware. Fill out your system specs. What video card do you have?


----------



## RodoGodo19 (Mar 4, 2016)

i7-6700
16gb
gtx980ti hybrid

i don't know if i should buy this asus or save money to buy a gsync one


----------



## dont worth it (Mar 4, 2016)

dont worth it


----------



## Kanan (Mar 5, 2016)

It's a good panel for that price. Only downside I see is that it misses a IPS or VA panel, but in exchange it's cheap (for a Asus monitor).


----------



## Vayra86 (Mar 5, 2016)

I would stay clear of TN if you are into a good image quality. Even good TN still suffers from viewing angle issues and that means colors/contrast will shift. TN also has edge backlight bleeding, however little it may be, and static contrast isn't great.

1ms versus 6-8ms of a simple IPS really won't be noticeable unless you game competitively. Are you really looking for a 120-144hz panel per se? Because if you are happy with 60 or 75 you have a far greater range of options. Also in graphically intensive games you will probably never hold stable 100+ fps, which kind of defeats the point.

Summary: this is a CS:Go panel.


----------



## RodoGodo19 (Mar 5, 2016)

Vayra86 said:


> I would stay clear of TN if you are into a good image quality. Even good TN still suffers from viewing angle issues and that means colors/contrast will shift. TN also has edge backlight bleeding, however little it may be, and static contrast isn't great.
> 
> 1ms versus 6-8ms of a simple IPS really won't be noticeable unless you game competitively. Are you really looking for a 120-144hz panel per se? Because if you are happy with 60 or 75 you have a far greater range of options. Also in graphically intensive games you will probably never hold stable 100+ fps, which kind of defeats the point.
> 
> Summary: this is a CS:Go panel.


thanks, then i will save money for an IPS gaming monitor with g sync


----------



## Vayra86 (Mar 5, 2016)

I wouldn't go blindly for Gsync, but that's me. It's a pretty serious price premium. You could easily get 1440p60 at that price, and a very good one too.

Consider this: do you tweak your ingame options to get a constant 60/synced fps? If you do, it makes Gsync matter very little. Most Gsync panels also deny the use of backlight strobing (Lightboost, or some other variation of it) which means you have motion blur.


----------



## Kanan (Mar 5, 2016)

Go for a monitor with 144Hz+ though, you should not miss out on high frequencies. It's more important than Gsync.


----------



## Vayra86 (Mar 5, 2016)

^ seconded. Above 100fps you will have a VERY difficult time detecting screen tear even if its there.


----------



## RodoGodo19 (Mar 5, 2016)

Vayra86 said:


> I wouldn't go blindly for Gsync, but that's me. It's a pretty serious price premium. You could easily get 1440p60 at that price, and a very good one too.
> 
> Consider this: do you tweak your ingame options to get a constant 60/synced fps? If you do, it makes Gsync matter very little. Most Gsync panels also deny the use of backlight strobing (Lightboost, or some other variation of it) which means you have motion blur.





Kanan said:


> Go for a monitor with 144Hz+ though, you should not miss out on high frequencies. It's more important than Gsync.



i have a gtx980ti hybrid
i7-6700
16gb

i don't know what to do really...

1. Asus VG248QE 24"
2. ASUS ROG SWIFT PG279Q 27"


----------



## Kanan (Mar 5, 2016)

1. if you want a good enough monitor and save money.
2. if you want the "best" and pay for it too.



PS. I'd simply take a 27" IPS / 144 Hz and not care much about brand and how it looks. These ROG monitors are pretty expensive. I think Acer have some more affordable ones.


----------



## trog100 (Mar 5, 2016)

i have a 24 inch acer 144 TN 1080 panel.. i dont use it any more but it was a nice panel for gaming.. if you have the gpu power to keep the frame rates up i dont think you need g-sync..

i moved to a rog swift ips panel because i do photographic work.. the colors are nice enough on the TN panel just not exactly accurate.. having said that the colours on my rog panel aint accurate ether when set in a gaming mode.. but it does have the sRGB option which i use..

trog


----------



## RodoGodo19 (Mar 5, 2016)

trog100 said:


> i have a 24 inch acer 144 TN 1080 panel.. i dont use it any more but it was a nice panel for gaming.. if you have the gpu power to keep the frame rates up i dont think you need g-sync..
> 
> i moved to a rog swift ips panel because i do photographic work.. the colors are nice enough on the TN panel just not exactly accurate.. having said that the colours on my rog panel aint accurate ether when set in a gaming mode.. but it does have the sRGB option which i use..
> 
> trog


i have a gtx980ti hybrid, i think that i can game 144hz 1080p without any problem at all..
so what do you recommend me.... save money and buy the 24" or save more money to buy the rog ips 165hg?

i7-6700
16gb
gtx980ti hybrid
mini itx build


----------



## GhostRyder (Mar 5, 2016)

RGT said:


> i have a gtx980ti hybrid
> i7-6700
> 16gb
> 
> ...


Based on my experience, I still say you should get G-Sync (Or Freesync) if you are gaming beyond 60hz (Well 75hz is still fine).  The reason being even if you have a system that should be able to run at 144hz (1080p or 1440p) its still not going to be stable because games are not optimized to handle that area and each game reacts differently.  Games like LoL are fine but for instance BF4 has dips and at 144hz having it skip to say 70 is very noticeable without it versus having it on.  As for the IPS argument, again while I see the benefit I personally didn't care when gaming as the difference in color is not very noticeable most of the time in games (At least to me).  That's mostly why I end up just buying the cheaper TN panel monitors instead of the IPS variants.

I think it would be better to save up and buy the G-Sync monitor, but that's my opinion based on my testing at 144hz.  If you decide to just get a 1440p 60hz monitor, you don't need it.


----------



## RodoGodo19 (Mar 5, 2016)

GhostRyder said:


> Based on my experience, I still say you should get G-Sync (Or Freesync) if you are gaming beyond 60hz (Well 75hz is still fine).  The reason being even if you have a system that should be able to run at 144hz (1080p or 1440p) its still not going to be stable because games are not optimized to handle that area and each game reacts differently.  Games like LoL are fine but for instance BF4 has dips and at 144hz having it skip to say 70 is very noticeable without it versus having it on.  As for the IPS argument, again while I see the benefit I personally didn't care when gaming as the difference in color is not very noticeable most of the time in games (At least to me).  That's mostly why I end up just buying the cheaper TN panel monitors instead of the IPS variants.
> 
> I think it would be better to save up and buy the G-Sync monitor, but that's my opinion based on my testing at 144hz.  If you decide to just get a 1440p 60hz monitor, you don't need it.



what about this:
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0149QBOF0/?tag=tec06d-20


----------



## RejZoR (Mar 5, 2016)

I have it and it's by far the best monitor I've ever used. And with NVIDIA graphic cards, if you use Adaptive V-Sync you have no performance penalty.
And I really like the "On-Screen" additional features like virtual crosshair. Super useful in games that don't have it, like Killing Floor. It's kinda cheat so you can accurately shoot from a hip without actually aiming. Or just to have a better perception where the center is because it's visible more than in-game crosshairs. Good connectivity with 3 ports (DVI, HDMI and DisplayPort), DAC converter, 3,5 jack audio out and surprisingly decent speakers considering how shite integrated speakers usually are so I can use it as a TV with my ISP TV communicator. And for me, one of most important factors, VESA wall mount points. If monitor doesn't have that, I'll never buy it no matter how good it is.

G-Sync is imo pointless unless you're NVIDIA fanboy and you don't mind being stuck on one brand for the sake of this functionality. I had AMD card when I bought it so I didn't care back then.

And for crying out loud, stop the uh oh TN has bad image quality nonsense. This is top of the line TN panel in a gaming monitor. It's not 2005 anymore, TN panels have moved on. And this one is a very good screen.


----------



## trog100 (Mar 5, 2016)

"And for crying out loud, stop the uh oh TN has bad image quality nonsense. This is top of the line TN panel in a gaming monitor. It's not 2005 anymore, TN panels have moved on. And this one is a very good screen."

###

i had/have a recent  acer 24 inch TN panel.. bought about five months ago.. its now sat on the shelf doing nothing.. the acer TN panel cost me £200 quid and is a nice gaming panel but its not a patch on my asus rog ips panel.. having said that the asus panel did cost me £700 quid..

having spent the money i did try hard to be happy with my 144 hrz acer panel but i have a large photo collection and try as hard as i could.. none my pics looked right.. kind of like the white balance being off.. he he

the TN panel has an over bright back light  (good contrast but its blacks aint very black) its viewing angles are poor and its colours are just not accurate..

for sat directly in front of the panel straight forward gaming the acer TN panel was perfect.. for shared viewing the poor viewing angles let it down.. however much TN panels have improved they are still not as good as an IPS style panel in some ways..

it does all come down to what is required from a monitor.. and oddly enough the shiny screen acer TN panel i bought a few years ago looked far better to me than the much newer acer TN gaming panel..

but my asus rog swift ips style panel just has "better" image quality and compared side by side with the acer TN panel the difference is very obvious..

but the price difference makes any side by side comparison unfair.. all i am gonna say is a fast TN panel is plenty good enough for gaming but for other things not so good..

a buyer needs to decide what it is they prioritize and buy accordingly.. i found i wanted the best of both worlds but the cost of getting it wasnt cheap.. 

trog


----------



## Vayra86 (Mar 5, 2016)

RejZoR said:


> And for crying out loud, stop the uh oh TN has bad image quality nonsense. This is top of the line TN panel in a gaming monitor. It's not 2005 anymore, TN panels have moved on. And this one is a very good screen.



TN is a technology and it simply has its limits. There is really no denying it. The most important flaw it has, still exists, and that is contrast/tone shift at an angle. If you move your head in front of TN, you notice it.


----------



## RodoGodo19 (Mar 5, 2016)

RejZoR said:


> I have it and it's by far the best monitor I've ever used. And with NVIDIA graphic cards, if you use Adaptive V-Sync you have no performance penalty.
> And I really like the "On-Screen" additional features like virtual crosshair. Super useful in games that don't have it, like Killing Floor. It's kinda cheat so you can accurately shoot from a hip without actually aiming. Or just to have a better perception where the center is because it's visible more than in-game crosshairs. Good connectivity with 3 ports (DVI, HDMI and DisplayPort), DAC converter, 3,5 jack audio out and surprisingly decent speakers considering how shite integrated speakers usually are so I can use it as a TV with my ISP TV communicator. And for me, one of most important factors, VESA wall mount points. If monitor doesn't have that, I'll never buy it no matter how good it is.
> 
> G-Sync is imo pointless unless you're NVIDIA fanboy and you don't mind being stuck on one brand for the sake of this functionality. I had AMD card when I bought it so I didn't care back then.
> ...





trog100 said:


> "And for crying out loud, stop the uh oh TN has bad image quality nonsense. This is top of the line TN panel in a gaming monitor. It's not 2005 anymore, TN panels have moved on. And this one is a very good screen."
> 
> ###
> 
> ...





Vayra86 said:


> TN is a technology and it simply has its limits. There is really no denying it. The most important flaw it has, still exists, and that is contrast/tone shift at an angle. If you move your head in front of TN, you notice it.



do you think guys that i am good with my IPS 60hz 1080p 6mb DELL so far until i can save money then?


----------



## trog100 (Mar 5, 2016)

yes.. he he..

dont just think you need better because of all the sales hype.. 

trog


----------



## wolar (Mar 6, 2016)

I use a dell u2414h and im happy with it but i didn't use any 144hz so i don't know the difference. I wouldn't get any TN panel now as i find the color reproduction more important in games. 
There are though monitors like acer predator that are ips 1440p 144hz gsync but not in my price range(800$)


----------



## RodoGodo19 (Mar 6, 2016)

wolar said:


> I use a dell u2414h and im happy with it but i didn't use any 144hz so i don't know the difference. I wouldn't get any TN panel now as i find the color reproduction more important in games.
> There are though monitors like acer predator that are ips 1440p 144hz gsync but not in my price range(800$)


i have the same situation
main is P2414H IPS 60hz but now i have a gtx980ti and i want to play better with 144hz or 120hz or somethning, i don't know....


----------



## GhostRyder (Mar 6, 2016)

RGT said:


> what about this:
> http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0149QBOF0/?tag=tec06d-20


Seems fine to me, never used that one before but based on reviews and specs I would have no problem with buying it/using it.



RGT said:


> i have the same situation
> main is P2414H IPS 60hz but now i have a gtx980ti and i want to play better with 144hz or 120hz or somethning, i don't know....


Well your current monitor is decent and I don't see anything wrong with it.  The GTX 980ti is overkill for it but your going to be guaranteed excellent performance so there is that.

Again, your going to hear different things back and fourth regarding TN vs IPS.  Its going to be up to you whether in the end you want to pay more or less.  Personally, I still say its not a great enough difference in games to warrant the extra cost of the IPS panels but I am one person.  As far as quality of the picture goes I can safely tell you the picture quality is there and its very smooth, the only really downside to these TN panels in the gaming monitors is that the colors are not as bright and as accurate in some situations.  For me, Battlefield 4 looks just as good at 144hz 1440p on my TN panel monitor as it does using my friends IPS 144hz 1440p monitor but I am just one person.

In the end, I still say the G-Sync is worth it if your at 144hz because its smoother and it gives you a bit more peace of mind in longevity because as games require more power and you start to lose FPS its going to still feel very smooth.  As for the IPS vs TN, I like my TN panels and think it would be wiser to save the extra money and just get the TN variant but that's just me.


----------



## Kanan (Mar 6, 2016)

RGT said:


> i have the same situation
> main is P2414H IPS 60hz but now i have a gtx980ti and i want to play better with 144hz or 120hz or somethning, i don't know....


My opinion is:

Get a 144(+) Hz 1440p TN or IPS. TN if you are okay with normal color reproduction, IPS if you want the best. And it should be 1440p because, more flexibility compared to a 1080p monitor. In the end it depends how much money you want to spent, if money is irrelevant just get a 144+ Hz 1440p IPS. Thats it


----------



## trog100 (Mar 6, 2016)

colour accuracy matters not one jot in games.. games look far better in high contrast over the top colours.. its only in photography work that colour accuracy matters and then it matters big time..

as for high refresh rates.. i have an asus rog swift 165 hrz gaming panel.. do i run it up there.. no f-cking way.. its set at 120 hrz and whilst gaming i run a frame rate cap set at around 75 fps..

with a g-sync monitor even though its set at 120 hrz or whatever.. running a frame rate cap of 75 fps means the monitor is refreshing at the same speed..

i run a frame rate cap because it saves me a few hundred watts of wall power i get less fan noise and less system heat generation..

but i also cant tell the f-cking difference between 70 fps and 140 fps.. which is a good thing because even on my system some games wont manage much more than 75 fps anyway..

i am gonna make an out and out solid statement here.. a good TN panel is ideal for gaming and so is 1080.. anything more aint really necessary.. not unless you think it is.. 

having a hardware fetish (guilty) aint quite the same thing as good gaming..

trog


----------



## Niteblooded (Mar 6, 2016)

The reason the guy above doesn't see a difference between 70fps and 144 is because that is how smooth G-Sync makes gameplay.   Even 30 fps gameplay won't look bad (well compared to non-G-Sync/FreeSync 30fps). As someone with a G-Sync monitor and a friend with one, G-Sync is definitely worth it.   It's not placebo, its noticeable and its a gamechanger.

I also think IPS is worth it but I'm a picture quality snob and better picture quality along with richer colors immerse me in a game.   Though TN panels rule on response time so if you're a hardcore FPS competitor than TN makes the most sense.    Just like a photo editor most likely wouldn't choose anything other than IPS, a pro gamer probably wouldn't choose anything but TN.   Up to you and your priorities if its worth it to save or not.


----------



## trog100 (Mar 6, 2016)

Niteblooded said:


> The reason the guy above doesn't see a difference between 70fps and 144 is because that is how smooth G-Sync makes gameplay.   Even 30 fps gameplay won't look bad (well compared to non-G-Sync/FreeSync 30fps). As someone with a G-Sync monitor and a friend with one, G-Sync is definitely worth it.   It's not placebo, its noticeable and its a gamechanger.
> 
> I also think IPS is worth it but I'm a picture quality snob and better picture quality along with richer colors immerse me in a game.   Though TN panels rule on response time so if you're a hardcore FPS competitor than TN makes the most sense.    Just like a photo editor most likely wouldn't choose anything other than IPS, a pro gamer probably wouldn't choose anything but TN.   Up to you and your priorities if its worth it to save or not.



i agree with your g-sync making lower frame rates smooth.. i think that is its main advantage..  but it also negates the need for super high refresh rates.. 

as for the the slower IPS response time.. lets say 1ms TN as opposed to 4ms for a good IPS gaming panel.. all i can say there is i dont notice it.. i have just changed from a 1ms TN panel to a 4ms IPS panel..

but in truth all these things play off against each other.. one feature even negates the need for another feature..

at the top is plenty of gpu power.. without that bugger all else matters.. given enough gpu power to keep the frame rates very high a game will look smooth enough without any of the fancy features.. i aint a twitch pro gamer but i would guess that super high frame rates with a 1ms response time is what they target.. as far as i know they even turn off all the detail to see the enemy better..

i do edit photos as well as playing games which is why i have the panel i have.. IPS also has  better viewing angles.. better viewing angles only really matter for group viewing.. sat directly in front of the monitor they dont matter much..

i do admit to having a hardware fetish.. which does mean i end up with hardware i dont really need.. i just like buying and trying stuff.. tis an expensive habit but you do get to find out what matters and what dosnt..

it is very confusing scene and about to get more so with VR arriving.. a small set of goggles could be a major game changer.. lounge back on the sofa and "immerse" away.. he he..

i aint gonna rush into VR but i can see the possibilities for some.. i do fly FPV airplanes and prefer a monitor to goggles but PC gaming might be different.. less need to see what is going on around you..

trog

ps.. i will say i was quite happy with my previous 144 hrz 1080 TN gaming panel along with very high frame rates for gaming.. i swapped to IPS for photo editing and its better viewing angles.. no other reason.. so far i see no downsides.. except the price..


----------



## Vayra86 (Mar 6, 2016)

RGT said:


> i have the same situation
> main is P2414H IPS 60hz but now i have a gtx980ti and i want to play better with 144hz or 120hz or somethning, i don't know....



If you are just planning on stepping up to 144hz and stay at 1080p, then I would say its not worth it. Even more so because you have an IPS panel right now, and 6ms IPS is very decent IPS. There really aren't much faster versions of IPS (they may say so on the box, but IPS pixel response is simply limited, best panels get 6/8-10ms G2G and that is being optimistic, they use overdrive to get there in many cases, which can produce side effects).

Consider your gameplay. Are you competitive, look at fast TN or high refresh IPS. Do you like gazing at in-game vistas and are you a sucker for eye candy, consider IPS/VA at higher resolutions @ 60-75hz. Do you really want to maintain high FPS and motion resolution, but don't play much competitively, look at 1080p or 1440p/120hz or better IPS/VA.

I belong to that last category, and I bought an Eizo FG2421, no regrets. If you are looking into high refresh 1080p VA and highest possible static contrast/deep blacks, this is the one. And even this panel isn't perfect; it has a warm up time in which dark/light transitions 'smear' a bit which is visible if you look for it, and it has a very slight tone shift off-center. However it has an unmatched strobing functionality (much better than Lightboost) and very deep blacks.

My personal checklist of must-haves when buying gaming monitors right now is this, may also help you:

- backlight uniformity must be above average / good, little to no backlight bleeding or IPS glow (this is where cheap IPS has issues, and this is a quirk you cannot get past. IPS glow will show in dimly lit rooms and it is super annoying, I'd say more so than a good TN's contrast shift)

- must have strobing backlight (one of the things 'you can't get back from' once you know what it is, basically it gives you the fluid CRT monitor feel back and eliminates blur)

- must have decent static contrast, at the very least 1000:1 (dynamic contrast = shit) Most modern IPS has 1000:1 and it ends there. If you want better, you need VA.

- native(!) 8 bit (+FRC optional) panel with good sRGB coverage

- preferably at least 75hz (if 100+hz panels are out of reach)

Hope this helps, because I really don't want to choose for you. Take your time in choice of monitor, because these things can last you many builds. Also don't let marketing decide for you, keep it to technical, hardware specific arguments and stay clear of falling for the '80 gazillion to 1 contrast ratio' bullshit. Also think hard on Gsync, if you get high refresh panels, because in most cases its not required and it is a bit of a vendor lock in.

If you want really solid reviews on monitors, check www.tftcentral.co.uk


----------



## wolar (Mar 6, 2016)

trog100 said:


> i agree with your g-sync making lower frame rates smooth.. i think that is its main advantage..  but it also negates the need for super high refresh rates..
> 
> as for the the slower IPS response time.. lets say 1ms TN as opposed to 4ms for a good IPS gaming panel.. all i can say there is i dont notice it.. i have just changed from a 1ms TN panel to a 4ms IPS panel..
> 
> ...




The response is not exactly what is listen on their product page , my u2414h is great for gaming and have faster response than most of the other ips even though it is listed as 8ms

*Lag Classification*

To help in this section we will also introduce a broader classification system for these results to help categorise each screen as one of the following levels:

[FONT=Verdana,sans-serif]*Class 1)* Less than 16ms / 1 frame lag - should be fine for gamers, even at high levels[/FONT]
*Class 2)* A lag of 16 - 32ms / One to two frames - moderate lag but should be fine for many gamers. Caution advised for serious gaming and FPS
*Class 3)* A lag of more than 32ms / more than 2 frames - Some noticeable lag in daily usage, not suitable for high end gaming







(from http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/dell_u2414h.htm)​


----------



## GorbazTheDragon (Mar 10, 2016)

Sorry I'm late on this... I'd avoid the VG248QE. The colour reproduction in two different samples I got was horrible. I bought 1 from amazon, requested a return because it was absolutely impossible to get it anywhere close to decent, they sent me another, which was almost exactly the same. So I sent that back and got a XL2430T, which took about 1 minute to calibrate to a point where it was better than the IPS panel in my laptop.

As for other standard 144Hz monitors, I'd say yes. It's a huge improvement over 60Hz. I have not used any G sync/Free sync products yet, so I can't confirm any of the qualms I have about using one (most notably smoothness when running at higher framerate than display refresh rate). I have never been too bothered about screen tearing, and the only game I've seen it noticeably was in BF3 when I ran it at 60-65 FPS on a 60Hz panel, tweaking the settings/OCs to get 70-75 completely eliminated this.


----------

