bit-tech.net

BenQ XL2410T Zowie Special Edition Review

Comments 26 to 42 of 42

Reply
neonlights 10th February 2011, 03:56 Quote
i myself have this as a monitor and i picked the zowie up for £300. the screen is quite in my opinion. with 3d the brightness can be better but a really good screen.

120hz with benqs senseeye tech makes going really smooth. its a big difference to the 60hz 1920x1200 i use to have

comes with HDMI and side by side viewing meaning i can play ps3 while watching a film or have 2 pcs connected to the 1 screen.

2 cons of this screen is the its bulky for a led screen. i have another led screen and its 1cm thick. the benq is on par with a cathode size.

the other is the resolution. a 24inch screen should never have been 1080 i realli do miss a 1200 screen the size difference is alot to me.
Xir 10th February 2011, 08:24 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by ripmax
Monitor reviews seems to be one of Bit-Techs weaknesses, and I'm just left with a bunch of questions. Why couldn't you review the normal BenQ XL2410T instead of the Zowie edition? Why are you not comparing it to other 120hz monitors? Why didn't you test it's 3d capability? Why are you comparing it to an IPS?
+1 ;)
Because for some reason, any monitor that's not fit for correcting offset-print is just not good enough for Bit-Tech :D
Monitors below a certain pricepoint just don't get tested (anywhere, not just Bit-Tech).
Player-x 10th February 2011, 08:55 Quote
Ok nice monitor specs, but 1080p screen = FAIL!!!!

And then they also say this screen was geared towards Eyefinity/Surround Vision.
Then 1080 pixel height is even a bigger fail, I have a triple monitor setup, and the only thing i don't like about it is the screen height.

I there was a 1920x1440 (3:4 )screen i would go for it, i would even prefere a 1920x1600 screen if it was there, but till then 1920x1200 (16:10) has to do.
Xir 10th February 2011, 12:18 Quote
1920x1080 is the new 1280x1024 baby! :D

in other words, it's standard, cope with it.
(and no, I don't like it either...my new 24" looks smaller than the old 19")
ripmax 10th February 2011, 14:22 Quote
In all fairness, the reason all proper 120hz screens are only up to 1920x1080 is because of Nvidias reluctance to use displayport for it's graphics cards and 3d vision, as DVI doesn't have enough bandwidth.
CowBlazed 10th February 2011, 20:35 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by ripmax
Monitor reviews seems to be one of Bit-Techs weaknesses, and I'm just left with a bunch of questions. Why couldn't you review the normal BenQ XL2410T instead of the Zowie edition? Why are you not comparing it to other 120hz monitors? Why didn't you test it's 3d capability? Why are you comparing it to an IPS?

This. One of the worst and least informative reviews I've ever read on any LCD.

You can compare it to whatever you want, but for a gaming LCD with 2ms 120hz and 5-10ms input lag max, that Viewsonic IPS with 14ms 60hz and 20-40ms input lag isn't going to cut it. I'm sure the colours and viewing angles look great though.

That Viewsonic IPS doesn't even have any RTC what so ever, at least the BenQ VA LED screens are starting to use some to get down to the 8ms level for GtG.
3nncn 22nd March 2011, 22:57 Quote
I have Dell U2711 and i bet that colours and image quality are "different" than BenQ. However, for fast gaming Dell and ips-monitors are too slow, (input lag) colours and image quality doesn't change it. It's only good for movies, graphics and slow games. I just ordered BenQ XL2410T and I'm sure that will be much better for gaming. It's for fast games like warsow, quake, counter strike, CoD...
GoodBytes 23rd March 2011, 13:47 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3nncn
I have Dell U2711 and i bet that colours and image quality are "different" than BenQ. However, for fast gaming Dell and ips-monitors are too slow, (input lag) colours and image quality doesn't change it. It's only good for movies, graphics and slow games. I just ordered BenQ XL2410T and I'm sure that will be much better for gaming. It's for fast games like warsow, quake, counter strike, CoD...

Did you try "video" mode on the monitor.
Menu > Color Settings > Mode Selection > Change from Graphic to Video.
This (and game color profile) turns off the color processors to reduce input lag.

I can see here you are a super FPS crazy nuts, with reflexes beyond normal. Hence why you see the problem. Normally you don't see 30ms, even if you try, and it hasn't affected my FPS gaming.
THAT, you aren't good, and you need to blame it on something.
3nncn 23rd March 2011, 19:01 Quote
No I didn't, but I will try it later. I play warsow and I could say I'm good at it. With crt and fast tn-panel game is so much easier than with U2711. I don't have interest to play it on this screen, it just feels so weird to aim and I can't move properly. Maybe its just 30ms but I really can notice it. =)
3nncn 23rd March 2011, 23:50 Quote
I tried that "video" mode and game color profile. It's a little better but not enough. Thanks anyway, I can use that before I get BenQ. :P

I remember when I got my first lcd-monitor (samsung 215TW) and before that I had crt. I was very confused when my skills dropped down dramatically. I didn't notice anything before I tried crt again. Well, after that I used crt for gaming. You make so much aiming unconsciously/reflexively after you've played a lot. That is much faster than your normal awareness. If there is that little lag between your movement and picture, you make much more mistakes. It is really frustrating. You can be good with lag but you are much better without it. (^^)

I'm also a photographer so I really need IPS or PVA screen. That's why I made same "mistake" again. ;)
Gambler FEX online 17th June 2011, 00:18 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by general22
Every slightly serious FPS gamer I know will profess the benefits of 120Hz so I don't think you guys have really commented enough on the main feature here which is the refresh rate. An image quality comparison would make sense between 120Hz screens, not with a 60Hz IPS unit.

120hz refresh rate also makes the cursor in winows and rts games much more precise. Competitive Starcraft players should get better with 120hz. Even C&C 3, which is capped at 30fps, still update the cursor overlay at screen refresh rate.
Gambler FEX online 17th June 2011, 00:27 Quote
There's obviously a market for 120hz, 16-10, ips, rtc and zero input-lag monitors. Maybe we should team up and form a movement promoting this. Wake up at least on of the manufacturers.
PelleK 21st June 2011, 10:52 Quote
120 hz is a must have for fps gamers - i personally love that about my samsung 2233 screen.
vampalan 1st January 2012, 14:23 Quote
Was researching this monitor, its now about 250 quid without the junk if you Google it. And what they say above, 120hz for gaming.
firstandlastcommen 9th April 2012, 08:09 Quote
You guys suck at reviewing monitors. You should seriously consider not reviewing any monitors at all.
GoodBytes 10th April 2012, 09:18 Quote
That's what they are doing. Thanks
Please do not revive old thread.

Hey! Wait a minute. I smell something fishy here.
2x new users: firstandlastcommen, and peoplenamed posting on old threads? Both account created the same day, and less than 3 hours apart.
Can a mod check the IP for a match. Despite valid post, This kind of particular event raises me some red flags. I recall my forum had a similar situation, and then BANG every thread without exception was deeply spammed. Lucky my forum of my website is dead, and only have a few posts. In my case the 2 IP's while different came from the same region in Russia. Also the posts had no formatting.

Maybe I am paranoid.
dvapour 19th June 2012, 17:59 Quote
This is by far the worst monitor review I have ever read by some distance. In fact it is so bad that I took the time to register in order to explain why.

This monitor is specifically for competitive FPS gamers. The 3D is not a selling point. The image quality is not a selling point. How rich shadows are is not a selling point. The colour balance and gamma is designed for games and not watching your my little pony videos. None of these things really matter, if they do matter then you can spend £500 on a nice IPS monitor instead.

I will tell you why this monitor (and the 2420T) and such a big for serious gamers, the lack of input lag and 120Hz. That is why people want this monitor, and the reviewer didn't even mention input lag once. It's like road testing a Ferrari and not mentioning the acceleration - ridiculous. This monitor has the lowest input lag of ANY lcd/led monitor and is the closest thing to a CRT which is still superior for gaming to even the best flat panel monitors. Pretty much every other flat panel has unplayable levels of input lag and mean a huge disadvantage for a gamer who doesn't use an old CRT. 120Hz in conjuction with 0-5ms input lag in instant mode means mouse tracking is much smoother and the mouse is where your hand wants it to be, rather than always a few pixels lagged as is the case with other lcd monitors.

Get someone competent to do your reviews in future.
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums