Seems like a good deal for a 240hz 1440p IPS panel.
I'd buy it if I didn't get my Dell one a few months ago.
There's also the 27s 1080p 240hz - $293 which can be reduced by 20 bucks with coupon.
cheers
EDIT expired price raised to $719
Price in title please
Interesting
Can people tell the difference between 144 and 240 in blind tests?
Yeah but for the vast majority that's not playing twitch FPS games, you're better off getting a cheaper 144hz screen
As someone with a 240Hz and 360Hz monitor, yeah I can even tell the difference between those two just by using them. People are different though, some don't sense ANY difference, some people do. Age also is a bit of a factor. But yeah 144Hz to 240Hz is definitely noticeable to most people, like 9.5/10 people.
Don't know where u get that 9.5/10 number, but 144 to 240 Hz is not that noticeable in a blind test. A person who used to 240Hz monitor will surely see the difference when downgrade to 144Hz, but the other way around take a lot more time to adjust from 144Hz to 240Hz. To notice it in the first try? Maybe but not 9.5/10 for sure
Considering this chick who's not a gamer at all can get it 6/8 times. I'd say any person who uses a computer often enough at 144hz would be able to tell between 144hz and 240hz, which is most people these days. Definitely any FPS gamer would be able to get it accurately, especially if everything was given the right test conditions, i.e same exact scenario, high enough fps, everything controlled. 9.5/10 people for sure.
@KARMAAA: 9.5/10 people for sure as u said, but the woman from your example get it 6/8 times which is 7.5/10 lmao. And statistic need a lot more than just a random youtube video to prove that.
"Definitely any FPS gamer would be able to get it accurately" ok sure, let's just said this is right. So what's the next number, 9.5/10 people play FPS in the survey?
9.5/10 people for sure as u said, but the woman from your example get it 6/8 times which is 7.5/10 lmao
I know you're a very smart guy because you can do math. But your english is not so great. I said 9.5/10 people, not guesses.
And statistic need a lot more than just a random youtube video to prove that.
I will conduct a professional study just for you.
"Definitely any FPS gamer would be able to get it accurately" ok sure, let's just said this is right. So what's the next number, 9.5/10 people play FPS in the survey?
No. But any FPS gamer would definitely be able to tell. You, with your big brain, maybe not so much.
Don't know where you get this idea you're an authority on anything, while the display industry targets 1000Hz for natural motion resolution outside the central fovea, which is fairly small so a monitor at a normal seating distance covers more of our field of vision, and a full FoV VR headset will cover much more.
The reason for varied results tends to be people not knowing how to check, and for years it was the lack of fast response times to match the increased refresh rates.
As an example, we've had 360Hz panels for 2 years, but response times only just started being good enough this year, and optimal response times will only happen via OLED technology until QNED and microLED are commercially viable.
But sure, you've got this! Thanks for saving everyone from wasting their money on bogus products.
All of this being said this is a budget QHD 240Hz monitor and I'll have to scrounge the internet for measurement data to see if it's a competitive 240Hz panel implementation.
How do you get 9.5/10 people? Has the 10th person been sawn in half?
What's 95/100 simplified to?
certainly! I had laptops with 144, 165, 240, 300, 360 refresh panels, and while let's say 300 to 365 is a little step that's hard to notice, 144 to 165 or 144 to 240 is a very sensible difference in games where you're able to pump out the frames to match
The smallest gaps you're mentioning likely have noticeable differences because of jumps in response time with newer generation panels, or at least much better tuned.
Even in today's market you can still see average response times at 165Hz vary from 8ms though to 4 on the exact same panel technology, which is a big difference when you're targeting at least a 6ms panel refresh timing, ideally delivering response times that are half that.
I think the bigger question if you're spending the extra money on it is whether your computer can run the games you play at over 144 FPS
I can't see any info on lag?
Based on previous HP models it's going to be around 2.5-3ms, which is good for a 240Hz monitor, but don't take this as a guarantee.
Bigger concern would be average response times, and out of the box tuning of colours and gamma.
Yeah I decided to wait for a better deal on something else, appreciate the extra solidification on that idea tho
Looked up some user provided results, and it's a pretty basic panel implementation. Not worth the time.
Was looking at this before I got me a dell 3223q 4k 144hz for the same price.
that was a deal of the century. love mine
This or Lenovo Legion $597 one at Officeworks?
Unfortunate both are not reviewed yet on rtings
I would just grab the 1080p if you playing competitive
Otherwise I would be looking for a 4k monitor/tv
1080p too ugly and 4k too expensive + massive loss in fps
QHD is a good medium.
Just wondering which of the 2 monitors would be better since they are similarly priced
You’ll have to wait for a good deal for 4k
did you check out rtings hp the review it shows excellent response times already…
Tell em the price, son!