[Manuel Calavera]

Autor slavonac90

Iskreno ja ne znam vidi li se uopće razlika u praksi, ali čitao sam o tome i svi kažu da je bolje na što manjem response time-u pa reko s obzirom da monitor kupujem isključivo zbog igara zato sam to spomenuo.

Not even the remaining 5% notice it. Nobody is going to notice it on a 60 Hz panel because it's limit is 16.67 ms. Everything slower is going to create ghosting, this effect known as ghosting hasn't shown itself for years. Not to mention that a cheap display, no matter which panel type it uses (TN or IPS) can have far slower response times than manufacturers listed due to cheaper components inside. This also means that a cheap TN can be slower than a IPS regardless of what response time the manufacturers list... 16.67 ms-- that is when it refreshes, there is no argument to be made. On a 60 Hz display, 5 ms and 1 ms are exactly the same. It's a myth, and too many people spread this wrong information.

There is a reason gamers (hardcore alike) prefer a higher refresh rate, especially in the competetive scene... Now why is that? Because a higher refresh rate allows for a FASTER response time to actually be USEFUL, thus minimizing and in most cases eliminating this effect. Don't trust anyone that says otherwise. There are no "gaming" monitors either. You could argue that a TN displays poor black levels is being used to market "gaming" monitors, but that's nothing you can't achieve yourself using an IPS... IPS panels today are currently down to 10 ms of input delay, and what about TN? Also 10 ms. Do the manufacturers list this spec anywhere? No, because they know that people think a lower response time is going to give people an advantage over others, because it 'reacts' quicker... Except that's not at all what this spec means.

Make no mistake, buy an IPS monitor.