7ms or 14ms response time for console gaming

[name66]

Hello, i am looking for new 32" 4k ips screen to use for photo editing and gaming on ps4 pro. I bought lg 32UD99 which i will return due to terrible white uniformity. Right now i am looking at Viewsonic vp3268 that has amazing reviews (uniformity, color accuracy) but has response time 14ms ( 7ms throu overdrive), do you think that it is fine for ps4 pro ? I game a lot so i do care about it. (coming from pc gaming i am used to numbers like 2ms :D). I tried gaming on lg 32UD99 which should be 5ms and it was completely fine. thank you

[5x5]

Considering its a console, it won't be an issue at all. Even 20ms would be fine

[dizmo]

Should be fine, TVs which are usually used with consoles have considerably more input lag.

[Sakkura]

Response time has little to do with input lag, it's more about ghosting. Unfortunately the manufacturers do all kinds of shenanigans with these numbers, so they're impossible to compare or to reliably judge a screen on. 14ms may or may not be fine. Notably, it will be just as fine or not fine in video content as in games.

[name66]

Thanks for the reply. Input lag should be very good(low) according to reviews

[CTR640]

Yep, just what Sakkura said, manufacturers never tell anything about the latency. Only about ms in gtg.

I had a OLED monitor that has 0.1ms pixel response, so ghosting is non-existent on that monitor but the latency was very noticeable.

[SolarNova]

5 hours ago, name66 said:

Hello, i am looking for new 32" 4k ips screen to use for photo editing and gaming on ps4 pro. I bought lg 32UD99 which i will return due to terrible white uniformity. Right now i am looking at Viewsonic vp3268 that has amazing reviews (uniformity, color accuracy) but has response time 14ms ( 7ms throu overdrive), do you think that it is fine for ps4 pro ? I game a lot so i do care about it. (coming from pc gaming i am used to numbers like 2ms :D). I tried gaming on lg 32UD99 which should be 5ms and it was completely fine. thank you

Understand that response time figures are in relation to pixel transition speed. This affects how much ghosting/blur u see.

 

As such, while its most certainly helpful to see a clearer moving image for gaming and becomes important when looking at high refresh rate panels , its more so an issue in regards to picture quality.

 

So that means that for console gaming it really doesnt matter.

 

Now Input Latency is another story all together as that would be noticeable regardless of the input device, be it console or PC. For that, for a TV anything below 25ms is good. 15ms is great. bare in mind even top of the line gaming Monitors are usually around 5ms. Your average monitor is around 10ms. That difference honestly isnt that noticeable. It isnt until u start looking at input lag figures of 50ms that its very noticeable.

[Viper98]

So long as the response time is under 17ms you'll be fine. Your monitor will only refresh once every 16.7 ms

[Sakkura]

12 hours ago, Viper98 said:

So long as the response time is under 17ms you'll be fine. Your monitor will only refresh once every 16.7 ms

No, that's not how it works. LCDs normally use sample-and-hold, so you see an average over most of that 16.7ms. So if the pixel spends, say, 15ms changing colors, 90% of the light you see is of the wrong color. That would be noticeable as ghosting.

 

There are techniques to reduce this issue though, such as ULMB and LightBoost. So to get the full picture, you'd need both an independently verified pixel response time, and any features like ULMB or LightBoost, to tell whether the screen would suffer from ghosting (and to what degree). At that point it's easier to just read reviews instead of trying to figure it out from first principles.