5ms vs 8ms response time

[xnoobftw]

Anyone with experience could you tell me whether a 8ms response time monitor would be very drastic as compared to a 5ms monitor when it comes to fast paced shooters like CSGO or issit okay?

[9ballfreak]

Anyone with experience could you tell me whether a 8ms response time monitor would be very drastic as compared to a 5ms monitor when it comes to fast paced shooters like CSGO or issit okay?

No you will never notice the difference in the 2 however with either you will notice a difference from a normal monitor. When i did my build i got a 1ms  144hz and my g/f's is a 8 ms and hers looks as good as mine in and out of games in certain scenario's i actually think hers looks better but from my research its because mine is a tn panel and hers is ips .

[smjpl]

Anyone with experience could you tell me whether a 8ms response time monitor would be very drastic as compared to a 5ms monitor when it comes to fast paced shooters like CSGO or issit okay?

 

Your are worried about the delay input between your keyboard and monitor? That isn't what response time measures. It measures how quickly pixels can change (and it is a bullshit spec in general).

[9ballfreak]

Your are worried about the delay input between your keyboard and monitor? That isn't what response time measures. It measures how quickly pixels can change (and it is a bullshit spec in general).

Actually its the time between the graphics card and the monitor. (how fast it refreshes the pixels.)

[smjpl]

Actually its the time between the graphics card and the monitor. (how fast it refreshes the pixels.)

 

You sure about that?

 

Understanding the importance of response times

"Response time" is known to be the most easily understandable indicator amongst the LCD specifications influencing video display quality. The response time indicates the speed with which a pixel (dot) on the screen changes from one color to another. Strictly speaking, "speed" is measured in units such as "kilometers per hour" but LCD response time is shown in "ms" (milliseconds).

http://www.eizoglobal.com/library/basics/response_time_figures/

 

The formal definition characterizes response time as the time it takes for an LCD pixel to change from completely active black to inactive white then back again. However, manufactures often report their gray-to-gray speed (or color to color).

http://computers.toptenreviews.com/monitors/response-time-explained.htm

 

 

Display technologies

Response time is the amount of time a pixel in a display takes to change. It is measured in Milliseconds(ms). Lower numbers mean faster transitions and therefore fewer visible image artifacts. Older monitors with long response times would create Display motion blur around moving objects, making them unacceptable for rapidly moving images. Typically response times are usually measured from grey-to-grey transitions, but there is no industry standard.^[3]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Response_time_%28technology%29

[Megahurt]

Actually its the time between the graphics card and the monitor. (how fast it refreshes the pixels.)

No, it is grey to grey response time of the pixel : the time it takes to go from light grey to dark grey. Input lag is what measures the time between gpu and monitor, and it is almost never listed in the specs. A high response time can lead to ghosting, that is the only area where it matters.

[9ballfreak]

You sure about that?

 

http://www.eizoglobal.com/library/basics/response_time_figures/

 

http://computers.toptenreviews.com/monitors/response-time-explained.htm

 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Response_time_%28technology%29

Kind of funny all your links say basically the same thing i did the time it takes to refresh a pixel where does that pixel come from they keyboard????

smjpl, on 30 Mar 2015 - 12:25 PM, said:

Your are worried about the delay input between your keyboard and monitor?

[GoodBytes]

@9ballfreak, sorry you are wrong. You are confusing input lag with response time.

Input lag is the time the monitor PROCESSES the signal to output it.

Response time is the speed that the monitor switching a pixel from 1 color to another. This is meaningless figures on the monitor specs sheet, as it is the speed from gray color to another gray color (hence why you have g-t-g next to the figure, it stands for "gray-to-gray"). Each manufacture uses a different set of gray colors. Manufacture defense is that the colors they pick represents on average the most common switch of colors for the target the monitor is used for. So for gaming, they pick them close together as it is rare to have a black object passing through white background, and business class they'll pick further apart, as while background and black text is common grounds. That is their view. I call mostly B.S on this. But I'll let you make your own conclusion. To me what maters, is white to black or black to white performance as it really shows the performance of the panel. Sadly that figure is not given.

That is why you also have 1ms response time monitor that have more ghosting compared to another manufacture 1ms monitor of the same specs also 1ms.

[smjpl]

Kind of funny all your links say basically the same thing i did; the time it takes to refresh a pixel. Where does that pixel come from, the keyboard????

smjpl, on 30 Mar 2015 - 12:25 PM, said:

 

Wow! I am not sure if you're a troll or you simply misunderstood the material. I know this stuff can be confusing but three people have now corrected you on the subject. You should probably do some more research before you go around correcting people on stuff that you have clearly misunderstood yourself. I don't mean that you shouldn't correct and question people if you think something different. Just don't be so adamant that you are correct when you have gathered no proof to make your point.

 

I gathered three different sources yet you still failed to believe you were incorrect. Even worse, you took those sources and then interpreted them incorrectly by ammeding your own thoughts at the end. You understood "the time it takes to refresh a pixel", yet you suddenly started implying extra parameters; "where does that pixel come from, the keyboard????". These factors were never mentioned in any of the sources I gave. You added them yourself.

[xnoobftw]

No you will never notice the difference in the 2 however with either you will notice a difference from a normal monitor. When i did my build i got a 1ms  144hz and my g/f's is a 8 ms and hers looks as good as mine in and out of games in certain scenario's i actually think hers looks better but from my research its because mine is a tn panel and hers is ips .

 

 

Your are worried about the delay input between your keyboard and monitor? That isn't what response time measures. It measures how quickly pixels can change (and it is a bullshit spec in general).

 

 

No, it is grey to grey response time of the pixel : the time it takes to go from light grey to dark grey. Input lag is what measures the time between gpu and monitor, and it is almost never listed in the specs. A high response time can lead to ghosting, that is the only area where it matters.

 

 

@9ballfreak, sorry you are wrong. You are confusing input lag with response time.

Input lag is the time the monitor PROCESSES the signal to output it.

Response time is the speed that the monitor switching a pixel from 1 color to another. This is meaningless figures on the monitor specs sheet, as it is the speed from gray color to another gray color (hence why you have g-t-g next to the figure, it stands for "gray-to-gray"). Each manufacture uses a different set of gray colors. Manufacture defense is that the colors they pick represents on average the most common switch of colors for the target the monitor is used for. So for gaming, they pick them close together as it is rare to have a black object passing through white background, and business class they'll pick further apart, as while background and black text is common grounds. That is their view. I call mostly B.S on this. But I'll let you make your own conclusion. To me what maters, is white to black or black to white performance as it really shows the performance of the panel. Sadly that figure is not given.

That is why you also have 1ms response time monitor that have more ghosting compared to another manufacture 1ms monitor of the same specs also 1ms.

I actually plan on buying the s2440l And it has a response time above 5ms

My question would be should i be worried for it when it comes to gaming?

[GoodBytes]

That is a low end monitor, budget class, and also discontinued.

While it does use an IPS panel (AMVA panel), it is a budget class.

Usually, budget class monitors are rarely reviewed by in depth monitor sites, so it is hard to say what is the ACTUAL performance of the monitor.

I would highly recommend to continue to use what you have until you save up more for a better monitor, let alone have a DVI or/and DisplayPort plug.

[xnoobftw]

That is a low end monitor, budget class, and also discontinued.

While it does use an IPS panel (AMVA panel), it is a budget class.

Usually, budget class monitors are rarely reviewed by in depth monitor sites, so it is hard to say what is the ACTUAL performance of the monitor.

I would highly recommend to continue to use what you have until you save up more for a better monitor, let alone have a DVI or/and DisplayPort plug.

I have the money to get a higher end one

But the availibility of the monitors in my country is rubbish D:

Any other IPS panels would you recommend that isnt too expensive? (My budget is around 400USD hopefully lower)

[GoodBytes]

If you do work on your system, you'll appreciate a lot 16:10 aspect ratio. You have the Dell U2415: http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/dell_u2415.htm

If not, or over your budget, you then you have the well reviewed Dell U2414H: http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/dell_u2414h.htm

It must noted for many DisplayPort based monitors, implementation on graphics cards is not perfect. Many sees the monitor as a TV for some odd reason. It is not the end of the world or really problematic. All it means is that you need to go on the Nvidia or AMD control panel, and tell the graphics card that the display supports all colors. You do it once and you are set.

Say you have an Nvidia GPU:

You want to select RBG 0-255, from the drop down menu. A bit of an annoyance. I am not affected by this, so I don't know if the latest Nvida and AMD drivers have this fixed, OR my monitor/GPU combination has no problem. Anyway, just a heads up, if you use DisplayPort on any monitor.

[xnoobftw]

If you do work on your system, you'll appreciate a lot 16:10 aspect ratio. You have the Dell U2415: http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/dell_u2415.htm

If not, or over your budget, you then you have the well reviewed Dell U2414H: http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/dell_u2414h.htm

It must noted for many DisplayPort based monitors, implementation on graphics cards is not perfect. Many sees the monitor as a TV for some odd reason. It is not the end of the world or really problematic. All it means is that you need to go on the Nvidia or AMD control panel, and tell the graphics card that the display supports all colors. You do it once and you are set.

Say you have an Nvidia GPU:

You want to select RBG 0-255, from the drop down menu. A bit of an annoyance. I am not affected by this, so I don't know if the latest Nvida and AMD drivers have this fixed, OR my monitor/GPU combination has no problem. Anyway, just a heads up, if you use DisplayPort on any monitor.

Hmmm what is the difference btwn these 2 models and the s2440l?

The price difference is

s2440l = $249SGD

u2415 = $409SGD

u2414h = $359SGD

 

I can afford all of em! But which one would you go with? I am planning to use my current monitor (s22d300) as my secondary so bezel size doesnt matter to me!