ViewSonic Showcases First 120Hz 22-inch LCD Display at NVISION 2008

[malware]

ViewSonic, best known for its iPod loving LCD monitors, has demonstrated its first 120Hz desktop LCD technology today at NVIDIA's NVISION 08 event in San Jose, California. The 22-inch ViewSonic VX2265wm prototype delivers exactly twice the refresh rate of most current LCDs (60Hz) and eliminates the blurring, ghosting, and other side effects that usually occur during fast-moving scenes. The 120Hz VX2265wm claims to have a response time of 3ms Motion Picture Response Time (MPRT), a 1,000:1 contrast ratio, 300 nits of brightness and 2x2W stereo speakers. "ViewSonic continues to deliver innovative technology that leads and supports the growing trends and demands in digital entertainment," said Jeff Volpe, vice president of Global Brand and Emerging Technologies, ViewSonic. "The 120Hz technology will deliver superb front-of-screen performance and will drive new standards in desktop entertainment igniting the next evolution in digital viewing capabilities." The first displays with ViewSonic's 120Hz technology are expected later in the year at select resellers, retailers and etailers. Pricing is not yet available.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site

 

[chron]

gaming with vsync at 120fps makes my mouth water

 

[Homeless]

I really hope they have one without integrated speakers so that i can save a little money

 

[jbunch07]

might be looking at my new monitor right there. this is very appealing.

 

[alexp999]

I wonder what the rez is? I'm assuming it will be at least 16x10?

 

[qamulek]

variable refresh rate <yes please>.

IMHO LCD's shouldn't have a defined refresh rate, and instead should update the screen whenever the gpu wants to update the screen. Depending on if this 120hz has a noticeable difference to reviewers I might consider buying one just for the higher refresh rate.

 

[petepete]

thats pretty ballin

 

[Darkrealms]

They made a good CTR back when I bought mine.
. . .Actually, I still have that monitor, lol.

 

[IcrushitI]

great I just bought a 24in but I'd consider it. Im sensitive to any refresh lower then 70 ,My eyes get very tired after a short while. Didn't have that problem with CRT, but I wanted to have a larger screen.

 

[Mussels]

IMHO LCD's shouldn't have a defined refresh rate, and instead should update the screen whenever the gpu wants to update the screen.

you really need to research this. this sentence shows you dont know anything about how screens work or what refresh rates are, i suggest you go google it and read up on wiki or something. Its impossible to have infinite refresh rate screens.

 

[WhiteLotus]

Looks very much like a Samsung.

 

[Wile E]

120Hz is nice and all, but what type of panel are they using? 120Hz means squat if the picture looks like crap.

 

[PVTCaboose1337]

I like the idea of 120hz. But I have some issues:

Price!
Quality?
Price?
Noticeable Difference between 60hz, etc.
Resolution?

 

[Mussels]

120Hz would be noticeable.

Some logical assumptions that can be made:

At 120Hz, you are no longer locked to 60FPS with V-sync on. This has a few benefits.
With V-sync off, you got tearing if your FPS went above 60FPS on a 60Hz screen - this will negate that until you pass 120FPS (unlikely on modern games)

 

[newtekie1]

120Hz doesn't appeal to modern gamers, or at least it shouldn't. How many of you actually manage to keep a constant 60FPS in modern games as it is? I'm guessing very few, and if you are managing a constant 60FPS, you need to turn the graphical settings up higher to improve the image.

Most people, with V-Sync on are usually sitting at 30FPS, and that is smooth, upping the refresh rate to 120Hz isn't going to give you more FPS, with V-Sync on you are still going to be sitting at 30FPS.

Even if you are managing 60FPS, you probably aren't getting much higher, which means again with V-Sync you are still going to be stuck at 60FPS.

Where this technology really helps is the HD Video field, that is where this is meant to be a benefit, not in gaming.

 

[Mussels]

newtekie: i definately dont agree with you. I hate gaming BELOW 60FPS, and i maintain the 60-100 range. What is smooth to you is not smooth to all.

Agreed that video will look pretty.

 

[newtekie1]

newtekie: i definately dont agree with you. I hate gaming BELOW 60FPS, and i maintain the 60-100 range. What is smooth to you is not smooth to all.

Agreed that video will look pretty.

And even for you, this will be a waste, you will still be stuck at 60FPS.

 

[Mussels]

no i wont. with a 120Hz refresh rate, Vsync would cap me at 120FPS.

not that i use Vsync anyway, heh.

 

[newtekie1]

no i wont. with a 120Hz refresh rate, Vsync would cap me at 120FPS.

not that i use Vsync anyway, heh.

Yes, it would cap you at 120FPS, but if you aren't getting 120FPS then you drop right back down to 60FPS. Your 8800GT can't do 120FPS in modern games, not without dropping the resolution and making the IQ look like ass.

 

[Mussels]

Yes, it would cap you at 120FPS, but if you aren't getting 120FPS then you drop right back down to 60FPS. Your 8800GT can't do 120FPS in modern games, not without dropping the resolution and making the IQ look like ass.

my 8800GT can manage 100FPS in quite a few games... and you've missed a step.

You're going by the assumption that

A. Vsync is on
B. Vsync is using double buffering, meaning the FPS has to be divisible from the refresh rate.

If i
A. ran with Vsync off, i would have the entire 0-120 range for my FPS - WITHOUT the typical tearing
B. i ran with triple buffering

then i would not have the problems you speak of.

 

[AphexDreamer]

Its not like having 120 FPS will be that much more smoother then anything over 60FPS. Movies don't even go as fast as 120FPS and yet the seem fluid enough to us.

"So what is "Enough fps"? I don't know, because nobody went there so far. Maybe 120fps is enough, maybe you will get headaches after 3 hours. Seeing framewise is simply not the way how the eye\brain system works. It works with a continuous flow of light\information. (Similar to the effects of cameras' flashlights ("red eyes"): flashing is simply not the way how we see)."

http://www.100fps.com/how_many_frames_can_humans_see.htm

 

[Mussels]

i say this every time... it all depends on the person.
my old CRT used to do 120Hz at 1024x768, and i certainly noticed the difference.

The difference you guys feel going from 30 to 60, is what i feel going from 60 to 120. The system feels laggy and unresponsive to me below that (and my high speed is why i'm such a bastard at micro management in RTS games )

This screen may not be for you, but god, please dont make silly assumptions that NO ONE will benefit. Assumptions like that would have kept as at 640x480 and 25Hz interlaced images on monochrome screens and PC's with 640KB of ram - all things i have seen people say were 'enough' and 'why go higher'

 

[Bjorn_Of_Iceland]

I doubt if 120hz can eliminate motion blur on LCDs. I have yet to see it with my eyes. Never again will I be fooled by marketting (heck I got a 60hz 2ms g2g LCD and motion blur still is evident on FPS games and the mouse cursor.) imho, motion blur will always be evident on LCDs not unless they make em render screen the way CRTs do.

 

[Mussels]

Bjorn_Of_Iceland: you're probably right that it will still have some blur and refresh rate has nothing to do with it.

Marketing on the response times is another thing, they can say its 2ms grey to grey, but means nothing for say... red to blue. its a little hard for them to lie about response times without getting sued, however.

 

[JC316]

I never notice motion blur with my 8ms 60hz refresh rate monitor, I don't see the justification of this. I do find it funny that gamers gripe about motion blur on their monitor in one breath, then sing the praises of it when a game like Crysis has a motion blur effect....