Response Times?

[Impignorate]

I was wondering if you can actually see the difference between a 2ms response time and a 6ms? (for example). Is it as noticeable as they show in those promotional images?

[Lukiose]

Depends on how accustomed you are to seeing a difference in framerates, personally, i say that it does make a difference as you 'lose' less frames but it is nowhere as noticeable like in those images. Not in real time usage anyway, our brain doesn't perceive moving frames THAT well, the only difference you MIGHT feel would be a smoother experience on the 2ms compared to that on a 6ms.

[Lyons]

If anyone can look at 2 identical looking monitors, one being 2ms response and the other 8ms response, and pass a double blind test identifying each one, I'll buy you a beer.

Spoilers: response time below 10ms is just bragging rights for marketing.

No, response time isn't noticeable and you should be more concerned about colour accuracy and monitor features. 4 or 6 milliseconds is such a minute amount of time that there is no way they human brain could even process or notice it. It is absolutely not as noticeable as advertising will try to convey.

[eshbop]

Quoted response times aren't very accurate anyway. Different manufactures measure response time in different ways, so you can't necessarily compare them. You might notice a difference comparing an IPS panel to a 120hz TN panel, but anything else and I don't think the difference is going to be that noticeable.

[GoodBytes]

The attached image is laughably wrong.

Slow response time doesn't "skip" frames.

 

Slow response time simply creates a ghosting effect. Example:

 

Now, response time is complete B.S value. Why?

It's because it has no standard way of testing, and to tell you that how much it's bull crap, the manufacture specs sheet mentions: "gray-to-gray", or "g-t-g".

This means, "we have picked 2 gray colors, of our choosing, including and not limited to the same one".

 

Here is an example on how useless these numbers. The following pictures (and the one on top) are from TFTCentral, an in depth monitor review site.

 

Dell U2410 - 6ms - IPS panel - 1920x1200 (note: LCD monitors refresh from top to bottom, so height the vertical resolution, the slower the response is automatically. Usually manufactures uses faster components and panels, raising the price, but needed to compensate)

 

Now let's look at ViewSonic - TN panel - 1ms response time - 1920x1080. So it's suppose to be faster? RIght?

 

Nope it's not, it's a hint slower even.

 

So, the best way to know if a monitor has fast response time, in real life, is to checkout in depth reviews of monitor where they have equipment to test the true response time.

[Humbug]

Is input lag the same thing as response time?

[GoodBytes]

Is input lag the same thing as response time?

 

No it isn't.

-> High Input lag: You move your mouse... you wait a few seconds... and then you see the image move on the screen.

-> High Response time: As an object moves, you see a blurr effect where the object used to be.. like motion blur.

 

The above are exageration for explaning teh difference between the two. In reality we are talking about miliseconds delays.

 

Thanks for the WiiU gaming console, and a high speed camera, we can see input lag in action on TVs:

[Impignorate]

Thanks guys, company's sure do make it hard to choose between two products with all this misleading advertising making you think the more expensive on is exponentially better.

[SteepGnomeKing]

Thanks guys, company's sure do make it hard to choose between two products with all this misleading advertising making you think the more expensive on is exponentially better.

 

Company's spend tens to hundreds of millions of dollars to convince people there product is better. How many people do you know think the retina is a one of a kind product developed by apple and is above any other screen? Less now but the first year everyone thought it was a brand new thing invented by apple. And it seems to work. 2 companies usually have the same thing with different names in the product and the best sounding one usually wins.

[GoodBytes]

Company's spend tens to hundreds of millions of dollars to convince people there product is better. How many people do you know think the retina is a one of a kind product developed by apple and is above any other screen? Less now but the first year everyone thought it was a brand new thing invented by apple. And it seems to work. 2 companies usually have the same thing with different names in the product and the best sounding one usually wins.

 

Apple LED Cinema Display :rolleyes:

LED! Future! Oouuu Cinema! StarTrek like! Must Buy!

[Syakir33]

Correct me if I'm wrong, so lower response times means better smoothness of the image? 1ms>2ms response time?

[eshbop]

Syakir33, on 08 Jun 2013 - 8:48 PM, said:

Correct me if I'm wrong, so lower response times means better smoothness of the image? 1ms>2ms response time?

I wouldn't call it smoothness as such. Lower response times means less blurring of objects moving across the monitor. Each pixel on a monitor has to change from one colour to another, the faster it does this the slower the response time. Faster response times essentially makes objects appear more clear (ie not blurred).

Go to the images of the red cars posted above. A fast response time is the left image (the pixels have switched colour fast enough that no trailing occurs), whereas the images on the right are examples of a slow response time (trailing pixels that haven't yet fully switched colour, the end user perceives this as motion blur)

.

[Syakir33]

I wouldn't call it smoothness as such. Lower response times means less blurring of objects moving across the monitor. Each pixel on a monitor has to change from one colour to another, the faster it does this the slower the response time. Faster response times essentially makes objects appear more clear (ie not blurred).

Go to the images of the red cars posted above. A fast response time is the left image (the pixels have switched colour fast enough that no trailing occurs), whereas the images on the right are examples of a slow response time (trailing pixels that haven't yet fully switched colour, the end user perceives this as motion blur)

 

Ahh I see. Thanks a bunch! At least now i have a better picture on monitor frame response times

[SteepGnomeKing]

Correct me if I'm wrong, so lower response times means better smoothness of the image? 1ms>2ms response time?

 

 If you can tell the difference between 5ms (.05 seconds) of a screen transition from a 10ms display I would be surprised. Go with a better picture over response time.