5ms vs 1ms

[IAR117]

Hi. I'm no pro and am looking for a monitor. One is 24 inches and is 1ms and the other is 27 and 5ms response time. Other than that, they're both VA, 144hz and curved. Will I notice the difference between 1ms and 5ms? TIA

[Pr1zeee]

Simple, yes.

[IAR117]

Just now, Pr1zeee said:

Simple, yes.

I'm used to my IPS 5MS Craptop display. Will I really benefit from a 1ms monitor?

[Mira Yurizaki]

3 minutes ago, IAR117 said:

I'm used to my IPS 5MS Craptop display. Will I really benefit from a 1ms monitor?

No. The upper limit of human imperceptibility is 10ms, and even then that's a stretch for most people.

[Dackzy]

The delay from frame to frame on a 144Hz screen is 6,94ms (it is simple math 1000ms=1sec, so 1000/144), so using that no, but I would just look up reviews to check what they say about the screens, the 5ms might be bad in some other way, same with the 1ms one.

Though I would personally not go above 24" for a 1080p screen

[3rrant]

6 minutes ago, IAR117 said:

Hi. I'm no pro and am looking for a monitor. One is 24 inches and is 1ms and the other is 27 and 5ms response time. Other than that, they're both VA, 144hz and curved. Will I notice the difference between 1ms and 5ms? TIA

Not really.

 

On a TN panel, it's easier to notice a 1-5ms difference, while on a IPS/PLS it's hard to notice differences (even IF you can find a 1ms IPS monitor).

I'd go for the 27".

[IAR117]

2 minutes ago, Dackzy said:

The delay from frame to frame on a 144Hz screen is 6,94ms (it is simple math 1000ms=1sec, so 1000/144), so using that no, but I would just look up reviews to check what they say about the screens, the 5ms might be bad in some other way, same with the 1ms one.

Though I would personally not go above 24" for a 1080p screen

I'll be sitting quite far from the screen, around 75-80cm away

[Oshino Shinobu]

Response times are mostly marketing BS. At the very least, they're invalid statistics that cannot be used to determine anything meaningful. 

 

You won't notice the difference between a 5ms and a 1ms monitor. It's an extraordinarily small amount of time, (0.004 seconds difference). If you're wanting to know the input delay/lag (which is different from response time) you can try looking them up here https://displaylag.com/

[Coaxialgamer]

meh , not on a VA panel . Though to be honest , my PC is conencted to a TV , so i'm not the pickiest when it comes to display response time.

[Dackzy]

Just now, IAR117 said:

I'll be sitting quite far from the screen, around 75-80cm away

I personally sit 85-90cm away from my 27"(1440p), but at that range, I guess 1080p at 27" is fine. My secondary 24" 1920 x 1200 looks okay from a 75-80cm range, but ofc that is a nasty old TN screen.

[Swealteek]

Simple ansar is now you wont see it. If you dont go pro or try hard you dont realy need 1. I play cs go on a high level. White a 144 1MS screen. Yes i can feel the diverens but that's because of the144Hz and not the 1MS. Thare is a reason those 144 HRz aren't 1ms. It looks nice on a spec sheet noting more. Go for the screen that has a better panel and batter colers not the best MS

 

I went form 144HRz 1ms to 75HRz 5ms now im on 75HRz 3ms.

[IAR117]

So in short most of you are saying that it doesn't really matter. Also, @Oshino Shinobu how do I find out the input lag of the Acer XZ 271? That's the 5ms one.

[Oshino Shinobu]

37 minutes ago, IAR117 said:

So in short most of you are saying that it doesn't really matter. Also, @Oshino Shinobu how do I find out the input lag of the Acer XZ 271? That's the 5ms one.

Basically, wait until it's tested. It's generally not something that manufacturers measure or quote and even when they do, the methodologies vary so they're unreliable and incomparable anyway. 

 

The majority of monitors seem to sit between 10 and 15ms input lag/delay if you look at the Displaylag database. Considering the best result they have is 9ms and everything up to 20ms is considered "excellent", it shows how much people overestimate how much time a ms actually is. If you do it in fractions of a second, people become much more aware of how little time it really is. (20ms is 0.02 seconds, for example). If you benchmark yourself, you'll find your reaction times are (most likely, based on the average) around 220-300ms, or 0.22 - 0.3 seconds. Basically 250 times slower than a good monitor. 

 

https://www.humanbenchmark.com/tests/reactiontime

[System Error Message]

30 minutes ago, Oshino Shinobu said:

Basically, wait until it's tested. It's generally not something that manufacturers measure or quote and even when they do, the methodologies vary so they're unreliable and incomparable anyway. 

 

The majority of monitors seem to sit between 10 and 15ms input lag/delay if you look at the Displaylag database. Considering the best result they have is 9ms and everything up to 20ms is considered "excellent", it shows how much people overestimate how much time a ms actually is. If you do it in fractions of a second, people become much more aware of how little time it really is. (20ms is 0.02 seconds, for example). If you benchmark yourself, you'll find your reaction times are (most likely, based on the average) around 220-300ms, or 0.22 - 0.3 seconds. Basically 250 times slower than a good monitor. 

 

https://www.humanbenchmark.com/tests/reactiontime

the input lag adds up. take your 20ms input lag from monitor, add the rendering frame time lag, add the input lag from your input device, it all adds up. You then end with something noticeable. You can easily see a lag of 100ms as thats a tenth of a second if it is continous.

[IAR117]

I think I'll do fine with 5ms, I'm used to it after all. Thanks to all those who replied

[Delicieuxz]

8 hours ago, Swealteek said:

Simple ansar is now you wont see it. If you dont go pro or try hard you dont realy need 1. I play cs go on a high level. White a 144 1MS screen. Yes i can feel the diverens but that's because of the144Hz and not the 1MS. Thare is a reason those 144 HRz aren't 1ms. It looks nice on a spec sheet noting more. Go for the screen that has a better panel and batter colers not the best MS

 

I went form 144HRz 1ms to 75HRz 5ms now im on 75HRz 3ms.

How noticeable was the 144hz 1ms to 75hz 5ms change, and how much did that impact your gaming performance?

[IAR117]

5 hours ago, Delicieuxz said:

How noticeable was the 144hz 1ms to 75hz 5ms change, and how much did that impact your gaming performance?

I've tested 144hz 1ms before. It was with GSync and at the time I was used to my 60hz laptop. I went to the shop with my friends, but they didn't notice the difference. Only when I did the same actions, IE scrolling and opening applications, did they notice a difference. I saw it immediately and it's just as the internet describes it- extremely smooth and easy on the eyes. Looking at a 60hz laptop afterwards made it seem choppy and sluggish. So in short 60hz is perfectly fine until you've tried 144hz a few times.