Just how over rated is response time?

[Anomaly1964]

So I played Borderlands and Deadspace 2 over 5 hours today on my new 42" monitor that by factory specs has a 9ms response time...

No ghosting, the mouse went right where I wanted it to, when I wanted it to...

It responded no worse than my 28" monitor did with a 2ms response time at 1920x1200...

Now I was playing at 1920x1080 but every option in both games was as HIGH as you could set them...

So.......just how OVER RATED is response time, what is the REAL number where you will start noticing issues like ghosting or mouse lag, cause for me it ain't at 9ms...?

 

[hawtdawg]

My monitor has 3 response time settings, and i honestly can't tell a difference between any of them. In fact, having the response set to "fastest" lowers the quality of videos.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

ghosting hasn't gone away, the problem is people are used to it and/or didn't even know what to look for to begin with to realize what they were seeing wasn't normal relative to a high end CRT

that being said, response time is not overrated, the problem is that its almost always misleadingly advertised as just about all the manufacturers now advertise the fastest possible response time transition instead of the average or worst case scenario

 

[SHAQ]

I had a 15ms response TV and it was definitely noticeable. My new monitor is below 10ms and I don't notice it.

 

[shangshang]

Anything around 8ms is plenty good.

As a matter of fact, if your eyes don't notice the lag, then that's all that matter.

Let all the other hardcore gamer guys chase after the 2-3ms monitor and even high end CRTs (*giggle*).

 

[BFG10K]

Response times have no standard method of measure among manufactures so lower is not always better.

 

[alcoholbob]

LCDs have saturated the market for close to a decade now, I don't think most people even remember or know what ghosting is, it's simply a observational concept from CRT owners.

 

[novasatori]

to go along with what BFG10K said, it depends entirely on the way response time is measured

there were top of the line LCDs from ~2003 that were the first with 16ms and had practically no perceptible ghosting. (I still use one that was reviewed on anandtech)

you may say but lower is better! but the theoretical amount you need is enough response to match the speed of the monitor (typically 60hz) so 1000ms/60hz = 16.67ms or less should in theory have little to no ghosting.

but then it comes down to how it was measured, G2G, BWB etc

so it does matter, and it shouldn't really hurt to have faster response time, but its not the end all be all where you will suffer from a 10ms display as opposed to a 2ms display.

a more important spec now a days would be the delay on input lag, but you wont usually find that listed anywhere except by tests/reviews from people who own it

 

[Anomaly1964]

Great replies guys...thanks!

I love this place cause I am always learning...thanks!

 

[Dribble]

Input lag is much more important imo, and that's not rated with most monitors.

 

[Cerb]

Crap. I finally get over to this tab, and Dribble said exactly what I was going to, right down to noting that it's not an advertised spec!

 

[Anomaly1964]

Input lag is much more important imo, and that's not rated with most monitors.

Agreed, I don't go by benchmarks, I go by what my HUMAN EYE can see. As stated earlier, graphics don't stutter and mouse moves wit precision...

 

[Avalon]

Manufacturers love to find an extreme example that makes their response time look good, and slap that as the de facto response time in general on a box. Like others have said, there are different measurements for response, such as gray to gray, black to white to black, etc. I'd imagine wiki probably has a good page on response time, I'd give it a check.

 

[Rhezuss]

I have the LG W2353V-PF, a 23" 1080p with 2ms response time. MY bro has a Samsung 23.6" 1680x1050 with a 8ms response time. He brought the monitor at my place a couple months ago to see if it has really a difference in 2ms and 8ms...and there was absolutely nothing perceptible between the 2 monitors.

But that's just one example amongst hundreds of monitors out there.

EDIT: BTW we tested the 2 monitors with BFBC2 for 10-15 minutes each. Apart for the 2 different resolutions, there was nothing our eyes could detect. It does not mean that others with more sensitive eyes won't see anything too...

 

[Anomaly1964]

I have the LG W2353V-PF, a 23" 1080p with 2ms response time. MY bro has a Samsung 23.6" 1680x1050 with a 8ms response time. He brought the monitor at my place a couple months ago to see if it has really a difference in 2ms and 8ms...and there was absolutely nothing perceptible between the 2 monitors.

But that's just one example amongst hundreds of monitors out there.

Nice info...

 

[Skurge]

Well I went from a CRt o a cheapo 19" acer and I noticed the difference imediatly, much more ghosting, then I moved on to a 2ms 22" LG, a world of difference. NO ghosting, my brother has a 5ms Samsung, I can definatly see ghosting in games like CSS and Street Figher 4.

 

[Anomaly1964]

Well I went from a CRt o a cheapo 19" acer and I noticed the difference imediatly, much more ghosting, then I moved on to a 2ms 22" LG, a world of difference. NO ghosting, my brother has a 5ms Samsung, I can definatly see ghosting in games like CSS and Street Figher 4.

I wonder if there are any youtube videos for ghosting...

 

[veri745]

I wonder if there are any youtube videos for ghosting...

There are definitely YouTube videos for "ghost riding", but I think that's different...

 

[bryanW1995]

Response times have no standard method of measure among manufactures so lower is not always better.

yeah, and not only that but most TV's aren't going to aggressively advertise their aggressive response time for computer gaming, leading them to be much more likely to give you a real number instead of just marketing fluff.

 

[Farmer]

Response time sensitivity varies from person to person. I gamed fine on a 2004-era 25ms Samsung MVA panel.

 

[cusideabelincoln]

Compared to CRTs, every LCD (monitor or TV) I've seen has blurring (during motion). Some blur more than others, but it's there. I have to try a 120 Hz monitor for myself, but I would think they reduce the blurring quite a bit.

 

[Ross Ridge]

Agreed, I don't go by benchmarks, I go by what my HUMAN EYE can see. As stated earlier, graphics don't stutter and mouse moves wit precision...

Response time doesn't affect those issues. No monitor is going to cause stuttering and a laggy mouse would be caused by input lag (or other issues not the fault of the monitor), which computer monitors don't normally suffer from.

The biggest negative effective of poor response time is ghosting. It's most noticable when you quickly pan or scroll the camera in a game and everything looks smeared as it goes by. However as everything is moving quickly you're not necessarily going to notice it, and given the ubiquity of LCD panels these days you might even think it's normal or an intended effect.

 

[Anomaly1964]

Response time doesn't affect those issues. No monitor is going to cause stuttering and a laggy mouse would be caused by input lag (or other issues not the fault of the monitor), which computer monitors don't normally suffer from.

The biggest negative effective of poor response time is ghosting. It's most noticable when you quickly pan or scroll the camera in a game and everything looks smeared as it goes by. However as everything is moving quickly you're not necessarily going to notice it, and given the ubiquity of LCD panels these days you might even think it's normal or an intended effect.

I'm VERY picky, if I was noticing what you described, it would go back...

 

[bryanW1995]

if you start noticing it now then maybe you can get him to reimburse you for the upgrade charges?

 

[NoQuarter]

ghosting hasn't gone away, the problem is people are used to it and/or didn't even know what to look for to begin with to realize what they were seeing wasn't normal relative to a high end CRT

Exactly this, LCD's are good enough now so the obvious ghosting issue where you could see traces of images are gone. Now people just don't realize the clarity that is missing during movement which is caused by the ghosting that is still there. You will only notice it when you are turning the camera though, just moving forward looks fine.

I've linked this a couple times now but:
http://www.prad.de/en/monitore/testsoftware/pixperan.html

This helps demonstrate the response time issues on LCD. For example on the readability test a CRT or Plasma can max out at 30, LCD you are lucky to get 8. It's not a failure of your eye tracking that makes movement blurry, on a monitor images should retain clarity in motion.

In games I especially notice it when playing FPS's, when you realize you need to stop turning the camera a split second to refocus.