120Hz monitor

[EthanNixon]

Originally Posted by Dangerous Theory

You can stay competitively gaming all your life irrespective of the fact you don't appear to understand even quite straightforward mathematics. The fact that you even think that a monitors refresh rate speeds up your brain is worrying enough to me. Or perhaps you're some frankenstein experiment, with electrodes sticking out of your head into the TV...

I feel sorry for everyone commenting about things they have never experienced or used before.

There are a WHOLE lot more to monitors than refresh rate and response time. GAMING monitors handle input latency a whole lot better than normal monitors. A typical LCD has an input latency of 20-100ms. Gaming LCDs typically are overdriven and have a input latency of 2-10ms. If 18-90ms isn't a difference to you, then your brain is slow, and you are handicapped.

----------

If only Apple made a 120Hz monitor, you sheep would wait outside the store for opening day, just to purchase it blindly, not knowing anything about it.

To the OP, I would suggest going to a gaming forum to ask gaming questions. Clearly these people have absolutely no idea what they are talking about. I would recommend ESEA.net, HLTV.org, or my site FRAGBOSS.com. You can email me anytime with any questions as well, ethan@fragboss.com.

[Giuly]

Originally Posted by EthanNixon

I feel sorry for everyone commenting about things they have never experienced or used before.

There are a WHOLE lot more to monitors than refresh rate and response time. GAMING monitors handle input latency a whole lot better than normal monitors. A typical LCD has an input latency of 20-100ms. Gaming LCDs typically are overdriven and have a input latency of 2-10ms. If 18-90ms isn't a difference to you, then your brain is slow, and you are handicapped.

Like you said: Input latency has nothing to do with refresh rate. But still, human visual response time ranges from 150ms to several seconds. You wouldn't even notice.
I don't know how teh competitive gaming trains reaction time, though.

To give you a comparison on WTF you're talking: The neurons in your brain are typically firing at a rate of 15ms. Compared to SOI chips, our brain is slow, ergo we're all handicapped. Bummer.

Originally Posted by EthanNixon

If only Apple made a 120Hz monitor, you sheep would wait outside the store for opening day, just to purchase it blindly, not knowing anything about it.

If the latest update of iTunes would've introduced 3D movies, sure.

Originally Posted by EthanNixon

To the OP, I would suggest going to a gaming forum to ask gaming questions.

As the question of 'Can a Mac output 120Hz' has been answered already with a 'yes': ACK.

[Elijahg]

Originally Posted by EthanNixon

A typical LCD has an input latency of 20-100ms. Gaming LCDs typically are overdriven and have a input latency of 2-10ms. If 18-90ms isn't a difference to you, then your brain is slow, and you are handicapped.

I can't see things that appear for 0.018 seconds, I must be disabled

I wonder what the doctor would say if I went with the complaint that I can't see things occurring in 0.018 seconds, I bet he'd laugh almost as much as I am now!

[heisenberg123]

Originally Posted by Elijahg

I can't see things that appear for 0.018 seconds, I must be disabled

I wonder what the doctor would say if I went with the complaint that I can't see things occurring in 0.018 seconds, I bet he'd laugh almost as much as I am now!

thats because the doctors has no clue about competitive gaming

[bogatyr]

Originally Posted by EthanNixon

If only Apple made a 120Hz monitor, you sheep would wait outside the store for opening day, just to purchase it blindly, not knowing anything about it.

I guess some might, but I buy what I need, nothing more and I can't understand the mentality behind waiting for days in a line for anything.

Also, speaking of which, I seem to remember seeing many stories about gamers waiting in long lines for the latest and greatest video game with midnight releases. Usually just because it was made by X developer or was the next in Y series.

[heisenberg123]

Originally Posted by bogatyr

I guess some might, but I buy what I need, nothing more and I can't understand the mentality behind waiting for days in a line for anything.

Also, speaking of which, I seem to remember seeing many stories about gamers waiting in long lines for the latest and greatest video game with midnight releases. Usually just because it was made by X developer or was the next in Y series.

remember Mortal Monday

[Dangerous Theory]

Originally Posted by EthanNixon

I feel sorry for everyone commenting about things they have never experienced or used before.

There are a WHOLE lot more to monitors than refresh rate and response time. GAMING monitors handle input latency a whole lot better than normal monitors. A typical LCD has an input latency of 20-100ms. Gaming LCDs typically are overdriven and have a input latency of 2-10ms. If 18-90ms isn't a difference to you, then your brain is slow, and you are handicapped.

----------

If only Apple made a 120Hz monitor, you sheep would wait outside the store for opening day, just to purchase it blindly, not knowing anything about it.

To the OP, I would suggest going to a gaming forum to ask gaming questions. Clearly these people have absolutely no idea what they are talking about. I would recommend ESEA.net, HLTV.org, or my site FRAGBOSS.com. You can email me anytime with any questions as well, ethan@fragboss.com.

LOL, you make me smile. Thank you for repeatedly telling us that we don't know anything. You're such a cool guy

If you'd bothered to read one of my previous posts, I'm pretty sure I covered the TV latency topic, but thanks for lecturing me on what I know. You probably have loooooaaaddds of friends!

[heisenberg123]

Originally Posted by Dangerous Theory

LOL, you make me smile. Thank you for repeatedly telling us that we don't know anything. You're such a cool guy

If you'd bothered to read one of my previous posts, I'm pretty sure I covered the TV latency topic, but thanks for lecturing me on what I know. You probably have loooooaaaddds of friends!

do people i play Dr. Mario Online count as friends

[KhrisGarcia]

I think our buddy EthanNixon has succumbed to the dark side of competitive gaming... there is a point in time where a lot of these competitive gamers become very bitter and condescending. It's been like this even before steam... remember the WONID? lol ;-)

In any case, he's actually right. 120hz in 2d will display twice as much information and when you're highly competitive it makes a difference in aiming and hitting moving objects. The high hz rate makes aiming with the mouse feel a lot smoother (lower or higher sensitvity, no matter the dpi). The net code is more important (interpolation vs extrapolation). Just because it's smoother at 120hz doesn't mean you're going to actually hit what you're aiming at (maybe you missed? random spray? fully strafe stopped?). I haven't gamed competitively in a long time.. talking before LCDs were the norm. Typically I would use 160hz at 640x480 or 120hz at 800x600 on a 19" NEC FE950+. I really didn't like 100hz or less. I've played DOD Source here and there over the last few years and 60hz LCD's REALLY ARE awful. Screen tearing with vysnc off, limited FPS with it on... aiming is not so smooth. It just wasn't how I remembered it... that was until I tried a vx2265wm 120hz viewsonic. Finally gaming was fun again... granted it's been sitting in a box in my basement. Just not into gaming these days.

The discussion around the reaction times isn't exactly relevant IMO. Most of the top gamers have an average reaction time of around 18-20ms. I used to play with one of the best awpers in the US and we both had around the same reaction time and we also had the same hardware. The difference was that his game play was much more consistant then mine as was his aiming, reaction, snapshots.

For casual gaming I think it's all irrelevant. But if you do want 120hz on your shinny new LCD then you should get either the Apple dual-link dvi adapter or the cheaper monoprice.com dual-link adapter. It'll work just fine under windows (bootcamp) coming out of your macbook pro's thunberbolt/mini dp port. :-)

[Elijahg]

Originally Posted by KhrisGarcia

The discussion around the reaction times isn't exactly relevant IMO. Most of the top gamers have an average reaction time of around 18-20ms.

5 times faster than the 100ms an athlete takes to react to the starting gun? I think not.

[KhrisGarcia]

Originally Posted by Elijahg

5 times faster than the 100ms an athlete takes to react to the starting gun? I think not.

We're talking simple detection tasks... Red light, green light, mouse click.

Now a runner coming off the blocks will never be that fast. If you could start forward motion that fast you'd be DQed in most sports. ;-)

[albertyouwrong]

Originally Posted by bogatyr

Sorry but the difference gained between a 60Hz and 120Hz monitor is snake oil. You can keep thinking that you're getting an edge in competitive gaming for some old games, but it's just marketing.

And yes, I've seen 120Hz monitors next to 60Hz monitors.

The 120hz monitor you saw, did you make sure the refresh rate was set to 120hz? My local Fry's has 120hz monitors on display but they're all set to 60hz.

Being an owner of a 60hz LCD monitor(Samsung 2333) and a 120hz LCD monitor(ASUS VG236H), let me say there is a noticeable difference between the two. Just dragging a window around the desktop is the easiest way to see how much more smooth and clear 120hz can be.

I play Battlefield 3 pretty heavily and honestly when I play on a 60hz screen it feels choppy, blurry(motion), and fast moving objects are harder to see. We may not be able to distinguish a single frame out of 60 per second, but the difference is there, and it's huge. I hope this helps people that are looking for information on 120hz monitors.

[sean barry]

Not a gamer. I just got 2012 Mini, i7 quad, 1t hdd 16g ram. I have a 32" 720 Samsung 60Hz for a monitor. Would getting a 120hz mon improve my computing experience? Would a 1080P mon do the same? Would both be a noticeable improvement? Would these specs be easier on my eyes? Thanks.

[KhrisGarcia]

Originally Posted by sean barry

Not a gamer. I just got 2012 Mini, i7 quad, 1t hdd 16g ram. I have a 32" 720 Samsung 60Hz for a monitor. Would getting a 120hz mon improve my computing experience? Would a 1080P mon do the same? Would both be a noticeable improvement? Would these specs be easier on my eyes? Thanks.

Sean,

If you're not gaming then I don't see a point in switching to 120hz for computer use. I use 60hz screens daily and they're much better then my 120hz gaming computer screen because they're IPS 8-bit panels and have much better viewing angles with far more accurate color. For gaming I'm not worried as much about viewing angle or color accuracy so I prefer the 120hz for smoothness. If you plan on hooking up a 3D blu-ray player to the TV anytime in the future then you would need a 3D 120hz tv/monitor. If not, save the cash.

As for switching to 1080p... It really depends on how far you sit from your tv and what size tv you use. If your 32" 720p tv has perfect font size then switching to a 32" 1080p tv may make the fonts smaller then you'd like. This is something to consider when using a TV as a computer monitor. If you're only watching movies then it's not an issue but based on your mini's specs I'm sure you're using it as a computer and not just as home theater pc.

[sean barry]

Thanks MR KhrisGarcia. Very helpful, I shall stay pat for now as the Samsung is working well for TV and Computing. I just wanted to make sure an updated TV/mon was worth the $$$. Thanks again

[mightypen]

Originally Posted by Elijahg

5 times faster than the 100ms an athlete takes to react to the starting gun? I think not.

I know ethan may be being a bit nasty, but on this point he is absolutely right. It's not about whether or not the latency time is below you reaction time. You always add the latency time to your reaction time. That's why having the lowest latency in your device always gives you more of a competitive edge. Many successes and failures in gaming hinge on this small fraction of a second and, if you can shave off that little bit extra, it can be the difference between win or lose.
That being said, I'm pretty sure a competitive gamer's reaction time is much more trained than a runner's, who would only need to react a few times per day at most. I myself, going from a CRT to a flat screen, can notice an input latency even when it is well below my reaction time, and it very much affects my play. There will be those instances where even 5 m/s difference would change an outcome

[Mr Dobey]

Since Mountain Lion has anyone seen 120Hz out in Display System Preferences on any mac?

[KhrisGarcia]

Originally Posted by Mr Dobey

Since Mountain Lion has anyone seen 120Hz out in Display System Preferences on any mac?

Wish I could test it for you but I sold the dual-link DVI adapter and now have a separate PC for gaming.

[KhrisGarcia]

Originally Posted by mightypen

I know ethan may be being a bit nasty, but on this point he is absolutely right. It's not about whether or not the latency time is below you reaction time. You always add the latency time to your reaction time. That's why having the lowest latency in your device always gives you more of a competitive edge. Many successes and failures in gaming hinge on this small fraction of a second and, if you can shave off that little bit extra, it can be the difference between win or lose.
That being said, I'm pretty sure a competitive gamer's reaction time is much more trained than a runner's, who would only need to react a few times per day at most. I myself, going from a CRT to a flat screen, can notice an input latency even when it is well below my reaction time, and it very much affects my play. There will be those instances where even 5 m/s difference would change an outcome

Here's the deal... all true. Granted 5ms is an extreme example, considering there are so many other factors that affect the game at any given time. But true none the less.

If you want to compete with the best you need a monitor with fast response times, low input lag, and 120hz. Console players can skip on buying 120hz since the source is only 60hz and the conversion can add to the input lag. You'll still be limited by all those other factors. Your skill (wink wink), netcode, client/client xbox vs client/server PC, online vs LAN, interpolation, extrapolation, hitboxes, your internet connection, your opponents internet connection, etc...

The skinny...

Sub 1 frame HDTV/Monitor Input Lag Database

TFT Central Input Lag Testing

[mac65]

Man, this is a painful discussion with a lot of off-topic stuff. The worst is all those who question the intentions of the OP. He didn't ask if he should use 120Hz or not - he wanted to know how to get it working, and yet many of the comments questioned his decision.

Anyway. To all those who ask why one would need 120Hz. One answer can already be seen in the OP's post: 3D!

Sure, there exists no driver for OSX yet that does what NVidia's 3D driver for Windows does. But that doesn't mean we can't try to get there.

I, for instance, am a software developer and I am playing with the idea to drive shutter glasses for viewing 3D movies and pictures. As long as I write my own application that can control shutter glasses, I can update the image shown on the monitor at the matching frame rate. While won't work for 3D games, it'll be enough to view movies and images in 3D (and yes, I know of the alternatives not requiring shutters and 120Hz - but that's not what this thread is about).

Now, everyone should know that at 60 Hz a shutter will flicker terribly. To get this working well, the monitor needs to be able to show 120 images per second so that every eye gets an effective 60 Hz image, avoiding flicker.

But for this to work, the Mac needs to be able to drive a true 120 Hz monitor.

So, if we could just talk about verifying which configurations of Macs + Cables + Monitors can deal with 120 Hz output, we might eventually end up with a nice and sharp 3D experience on a Mac, perhaps.

So far, one (or two?) people have confirmed to have a true 120 Hz output with a Dual-Link DVI adapter. I wonder how this works with a mid-2011 iMac 27" and a MBP Retina (both Thunderbolt). Has someone tried that yet? What have others found out?

[KhrisGarcia]

It should work the same on the iMac and rMBP as it did on my 2011 17" MBP using the dual-link DVI adapter.

Even if you we're able to create a program for playing 3D movies, where would the media come from?

[mac65]

Originally Posted by KhrisGarcia

Even if you we're able to create a program for playing 3D movies, where would the media come from?

Self-made movies, for example. There's quite a 3D (hobbyist) filming community out there. I'm experimenting with that myself. Also note that there's now a few 3D capable consumer digital cams out there.

[LiveinRiot]

And today? What is top 5 120Hz monitors?

[KhrisGarcia]

Originally Posted by mac65

Self-made movies, for example. There's quite a 3D (hobbyist) filming community out there. I'm experimenting with that myself. Also note that there's now a few 3D capable consumer digital cams out there.

Fair enough. What would be nice for you guys is a 3D/120hz IPS screen. My 120hz Viewsonic is great for gaming but it doesn't compare to my Dell U2412m or my 17" MBP for video and photo work.

----------

Originally Posted by LiveinRiot

And today? What is top 5 120Hz monitors?

Take a look at http://www.tftcentral.co.uk. These guys have some good reviews. They also have a good method for testing input lag.