[Adz]

Hello Adam, I see that there is another thread about this monitor but my issue differs a bit.

I recently got this AOC monitor a couple of days ago and had no real idea of what to expect, coming from an older 60Hz LCD. It’s a great step up but unfortunately I also notice the interlace artifacts which you touch upon in the review. To me the pattern is kind of annoying since I have a hard time not noticing it and I now understand what you meant in the review more clearly. Being static in a game (CS:GO) shows a clear picture but when strafing and moving the crosshair these dark lines appear on walls and other surroundings and have a kind of dimming effect.

It is annoying although I can live with it. But since I have very little experience of monitors I just wonder if there is any point in returning the G2590PX and look for a monitor with less obvious, or no, interlace pattern artifacts? Maybe it’s common.

The AOC C24G1 is an alternative and while it may ghost a bit more and be a bit less responsive than a TN-panel I understood it doesn’t have the same obvious artifact patterns?
There are also other TN-panels but I’m assuming all the new monitors with the thinner bezels use the same panel type and would likely suffer from the same issue? I’m thinking of monitors like the Lenovo Y25f-10 (144Hz) and the Acer KG251QD (240 hz, likely a different panel) which both are newer with thinner bezels.

I’d appreciate any input!

I’ve also donated via paypal since I think this site does a great job with thorough reviewing which, really great work.

[PCM2]

Hi Adz and welcome,

The interlace pattern artifacts were really the key reason I don’t recommend the AOC G2590PX over models like the ViewSonic XG2402 using an older and otherwise less capable panel. I too found the interlace pattern artifacts on the G25 just too noticeable, they kept on catching my eye. Not everyone notices them or finds them bothersome, but if you do they can really spoil the experience. They’re quite common on high refresh rate models, particularly TN models, but generally I don’t find them too bothersome. With the G2590PX I did. Generally it is something that would affect all models using the same panel, although that isn’t guaranteed to be the case. It does mean I can’t advise trying another model with a similar panel as you’re likely to reach the same hurdle

I’m afraid I’ve observed the same thing on the 240Hz models I’ve tested as well, so if it’s something you’re bothered by then the AOC C24G1 would make more sense. And of course there are trade-offs when going that route, but there are also significant benefits (including no dynamic interlace pattern artifacts). And I appreciate your kind words and donation, it is much appreciated. 🙂

[Adz]

I see, thank you for your answer. I understand that the increased refresh rate has this effect on other monitors as well but coming from a close to ten year old 1080p 60Hz LCD I could immediately notice the artifacts. Since the panel is supposed to be from a new generation it’s a bit disappointing that manufacturers and brands proceed with launching a product which suffer from this issue. On the other hand it might not be completely avoidable and I might be particularly sensitive to it.

I also considered the C24G1 and read the review thoroughly but the G2590PX seemed to fair better regarding the perceived blur, due to it being a TN-panel I assume. I reasoned that I’d rather have the performance of a TN-panel and a worse image quality over the improved image quality and not so desirable features, like the pixel responsiveness and perceived blur. Also I didn’t really know of what to expect from the artifacts.

I play a mix of games from Battlefield and Arma to Witcher, but mostly more competitive games such as Dota 2 and CS:GO. With this in mind a TN-panel should probably suit someone like me better. There are a wide number of older models to choose from (Acer, AOC, ASUS), but I take it they also show some form of dynamic interlace pattern artifacts.

I understand that there is no perfect monitor and unfortunately there is no way of comparing the trade-offs unless comparing them live. Would you say there are decent TN-panels where the interlace pattern artifacts aren’t noticeable?

[PCM2]

The models using the older 144Hz panel (i.e. pretty any much 24″ but not 24.5″ 144Hz TN model on the market) don’t typically have such dynamic interlace patterns. I’ve never seen them exhibited on those models in a way that’s as obvious as on the 24.5″ models. But they’re still there I’m afraid (and I’ve tested dozens of models using that older 24″ panel). So you could consider the ViewSonic XG2402 as a possible alternative.

But you shouldn’t necessarily discount the AOC C24G1 for competitive gaming. As per the review the ‘Strong’ overdrive setting actually offers very fast pixel responses overall (if you can stomach the overshoot). And then there’s the MBR strobe backlight setting which works well if you can keep your frame rate matching the refresh rate and don’t mind the flickering.

[Adz]

Right. I think I’ll order the C24G1 to try it in person with the G2590PX side by side. If none of them are pleasing I guess I’ll have to get one of those TN-monitors from 2015 🙂 I thought I would be better off buying a new generation of TN-panels, but I guess not..

This is a bit like buying shoes online, or gaming mice. Fumbling in the dark. At least I now have some more first hand experience and can understand the reviews in a better context.

I’ll return with my verdict once I’ve tested both monitors!

[PCM2]

That sounds like a good plan, I wish you luck in your quest.

[Adz]

Update:

I’ve tried the C24G1 out now for a couple of hours and I have to say I’m content.

There are no visible interlace pattern artifacts, at least no eye catching ones and if I saw any they are extremely minor and I have to be looking unnaturally close at the screen.

Otherwise, compared to the G2590PX, the contrast seems a bit better and the panel feels fast and responsive. It has some minor ghosting, even when using strong OD. But nothing too noticeable and only where dark surfaces contrast lighter backgrounds. There might also be a bit less clarity compared to the TN, not sure why but could possibly be because of the sub-pixel layout?

Regarding the sub-pixel layout, it does suffer from some smearyness or unclarity regarding text and fonts. From what I understand this is due to the sub-pixel layout for VA panels include two parts of the pixel, like this: https://i.imgur.com/m2Fz6yL.png.
Not sure why the panel is constructed this way, maybe someone knows why?

Either way, it actually doesn’t bother me as the smearyness seems to disappear some distance from the screen.

I would also like to ask about the strobe backlighting. I can clearly notice the decreased blur during the ghosting test at testufo.com, and I notice the screen getting progressively more dim as your raise the MBR value. But I don’t notice any flickering. How is this flickering supposed to show itself?

All in all I would probably choose a TN-panel for purely competitive gaming (like CS:GO) but I think this panel does a fine job overall, if you can stomach the font issues. Which some people have issues with.

[PCM2]

Excellent. I’m glad to hear you’re happier with the VA model and I agree with your assessment. The text clarity issues are indeed subpixel related. The reason that the subpixels are split in that way (and I’m no engineer or an expert on this) is apparently because it allows for faster pixel transitions. Perhaps there is some sort of weight saving coming into effect which means it takes less effort/energy to transition the pixels. I’m glad to hear you find the sharpness tolerable anyway.

If you don’t notice the flickering that’s fine. Not everyone is sensitive to it. Although that doesn’t mean it won’t accelerate eye fatigue. If you hold a smarphone camera or other camera up to the screen, you’ll undoubtedly see a strobing effect on the camera/phone screen or depending on settings used if a video is taken. You might also find the flickering can be observed if you use your peripheral vision as it is more sensitive to flickering, so try moving your eye from the edge of the monitor away from it and see if you notice it. You definitely should notice flickering in this way at 100Hz if not a higher refresh rate. There are other methods to “see” this flickering as well:

[Adz]

Thanks for the clarification. That’s really interesting. I can’t make myself see any flickering at all but as you say it’s noticeable through the camera of my phone, the test at testufo, as well as the pen test.

I guess I’m very sensitive to interlace pattern artifacts and completely oblivious to flickering.. 🙂
The downside of using the MBR-mode is that the screen gets way too dim for me. Maybe it’s a matter of habit since I’ve been using the G2590PX which was insanely bright.

Anyways, I can’t thank you enough for the help and information you provide here and in the videos. I also hope this thread can at least provide some further insight in the difficult process in finding a decent and suitable monitor. Hopefully one day there will be a jack of all trades to rule them all.

[PCM2]

Just as an interesting addition to this thread… I’ve just been sent an Acer XN253QP (completely by accident – instead of the XN253QX 240Hz version) which uses a newer version of the 24.5″ panel in the G2590PX and others using a similar or slightly newer variant of the panel. The interlace pattern artifacts are certainly still there and I found them quite noticeable at times even from my preferred viewing distance (>60cm). From memory they’re perhaps not quite as distracting as on the G2590PX, but if you find them noticeable on one you’re likely to notice them on the other.

[Author]

Posts