I wish laws come in where they had to post the actual average response time. A 120hrz monitor needs to have a response time of 8ms or less and I doubt this one does.

It says right in the description that its has a 1ms GTG

Will this monitor be reviewed on this site? **crosses my fingers**

So what's the input lag? Refresh rate and response time mean jack **** if the display spends 50 milliseconds processing the incoming signal before displaying it on screen.

So what's the input lag? Refresh rate and response time mean jack **** if the display spends 50 milliseconds processing the incoming signal before displaying it on screen.

The 2410T has 5.6ms, the 2420T only has 4.9ms @ 120hz. So I imagine it would be around there as well.

yup input lag is the most important thing tbh 😀

I was expecting 144Hz as the new Asus VG278HE. 🙁

I found the monitor on their global site.. http://www.benq.com/product/monitor/xl2411t/

Will this monitor be reviewed on this site? **crosses my fingers**

This site doesn't do reviews of monitors.

The original was godlike for FPS, input lag was non-existent; best monitor I ever tried for FPS, period. Shame that for anything else (even forum browsing) it was terribad, and had a horizontal viewing angle of about 5 degrees. If I had to have one monitor for gaming FPS, this would be it, but it would be a 2nd monitor, not a 1st monitor.

Why don't they make 16:10 120Hz monitors? 🙁

Why don't they make 16:10 120Hz monitors with s-IPS or s-PVA? 🙁

fixed :]

fixed :]

I think it's because TN panels are faster than others?

I think it's because TN panels are faster than others?

Yes, but still its almost 2013 for God sake lol, im quite sure there is a way to make s-PVA and S-IPS matrix faster.

Even with that addition, they don't even make 120Hz 16:10 monitors in the first place, right? At least, I can't find anything 🙁

I wish laws come in where they had to post the actual average response time. A 120hrz monitor needs to have a response time of 8ms or less and I doubt this one does.

with 1ms Grey to Grey, i believe it is between 3 and 5ms Black to Black.. certainly around 3 when the max acceleration is enabled.

This should be an awesome gaming monitor for those who don't care for the extra 2420 features and just want the speed.

I wish laws come in where they had to post the actual average response time. A 120hrz monitor needs to have a response time of 8ms or less and I doubt this one does.

Really. Laws. Really. Come on man. Have you even tried contacting the manufacturer to ask? They have all the information you want here, on their freaking product page. http://www.benq.com/product/monitor/xl2411t/specifications 1 ms GtG 5 ms otherwise. What the hell man. Should be laws that you have to check the product page before demanding the slaves bring you the information you seek. EDIT: Messed up the link first time

Why don't they make 16:10 120Hz monitors? 🙁

Because televisions use TN panels, and this lesser technology is 16:9. If televisions were 16:10, and used quality tech like IPS, then the panel manufacturers would have good cause to build it. We need new tech, because the LCD market is gonna collapse under the weight of it's extremely low profit margins. Blame average joe for listening to saturday staff who make them believe that 16:9 is acceptable and 'is just like the movies' (which are 2.75:1) And, there are only a few panel manufacturers out there (AU Optronics, Samsung, LG/Philips) so every monitor/tv uses their stuff, and then the reseller slaps a badge on it and gives it bezels. So, they got the market sewn up nicely and patented, and you'd have to be a genius to get around the patents - even Apple can't get around the patents! Which is why every Apple product with a screen is not actually produced or designed by them...the software might be, but not the panel/screen. It's an uphill struggle to fight against the sheer volume of panels being made that conform to 16:9 - and even when O-LED hits @ 4-5K res in 2015, I'll bet that they will be 16:9, purely so the upscaling technology doesn't have to deal with complex math. As for 120 Hz...60 is fine and dandy for me, but do like something that would have zero input lag, like a CRT or O-LED when it hits.

Because televisions use TN panels, and this lesser technology is 16:9. If televisions were 16:10, and used quality tech like IPS, then the panel manufacturers would have good cause to build it. We need new tech, because the LCD market is gonna collapse under the weight of it's extremely low profit margins. Blame average joe for listening to saturday staff who make them believe that 16:9 is acceptable and 'is just like the movies' (which are 2.75:1) And, there are only a few panel manufacturers out there (AU Optronics, Samsung, LG/Philips) so every monitor/tv uses their stuff, and then the reseller slaps a badge on it and gives it bezels. So, they got the market sewn up nicely and patented, and you'd have to be a genius to get around the patents - even Apple can't get around the patents! Which is why every Apple product with a screen is not actually produced or designed by them...the software might be, but not the panel/screen. It's an uphill struggle to fight against the sheer volume of panels being made that conform to 16:9 - and even when O-LED hits @ 4-5K res in 2015, I'll bet that they will be 16:9, purely so the upscaling technology doesn't have to deal with complex math. As for 120 Hz...60 is fine and dandy for me, but do like something that would have zero input lag, like a CRT or O-LED when it hits.

I'm calling bull**** on that. No way TVs use TN panels, nor is the shape of the panel defined by its type.