LCD Response time

[Athlongamer]

Alright I know what response time is but i've played CS:Source on an LCD with 25ms response time and it was ghosting kinda bad. I never knew to turn VSync on untill a few weeks ago (lol) but idk how much that would have helped anyway.

I guess my question is how much better is a 25ms RT compared to a 4 or 6ms RT? Is it actually a noticable difference for gaming? I was wondering if anyone has played on both and had knowledge to share, b/c i'm about to either buy a pretty nice CRT or a decent LCD probably 17 or 19 inch with (hopeing to find) 6 or maybe 10ms response time.

Any help would be great...

Thanks guys

Athlongamer

 

[Parkre]

I played HL2 on a Princeton 17in w/ 25 mil response. I never had any really bad ghosting. And now on my 2405fpw, i see ghosting even more rarely (some in FEAR, but only because of the dark screen)

 

[erwos]

16ms is generally considered the minimum for serious gaming. 8-12 is probably better, although manufacturers start taking liberties with how they report the numbers at or beyond 8ms. I would personally shoot for 12ms - the prices aren't insane, yet the 12ms figure is probably reasonably accurate. Caveat emptor, of course.

-Erwos

 

[Athlongamer]

Caveat emptor?

 

[erwos]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caveat_emptor

 

[Athlongamer]

lol oh alright

 

[Spacecomber]

I think it needs to be taken into account what sort of panel is being talked about when you describe an LCD as being a 25ms one. An IPS panel with a 25ms response time might still be ok for games. A TN panel probably won't be, and an MVA/PVA would likely be unplayable with a 25ms response time.

This is because the IPS panel tends to have a fairly flat profile for the smaller changes in shades, while the TN and the PVA/MVA panels tend to become much slower when the transitions between shades are closer together, especially the PVA/MVA panels. In other words, for an IPS panel the white-black response time is more representative of the response times that you'll see over the whole range of possible changes in shade, while for TN and PVA/MVA panels, the white-black response time is usually the condition under which the fastest response time will be found.

 

[mrkun]

Manufacturer's stated response times are meaningless in terms of actual performance. Read reviews before buying.

 

[Athlongamer]

umm then what do you call "ghosting"...:/

 

[fierydemise]

I'd recommend a CRT tell me how much you're willing to spend and I'll give you a few recommendations

 

[Cdubneeddeal]

Is there any utilities out there that can tell you the actual response time of your LCD? I have an Acer which the company states as having 8ms.

Edited to say response time, not refresh rate. Jose Quervo got the best of me

 

[Athlongamer]

Originally posted by: fierydemise
I'd recommend a CRT tell me how much you're willing to spend and I'll give you a few recommendations

around 300

Originally posted by: Cdubneeddeal
Is there any utilities out there that can tell you the actual refresh rate of your LCD? I have an Acer which the company states as having 8ms.

I'm pretty sure that the default refresh rate is like 60 but the refresh rate and the response time are not the same.

 

[xtknight]

Originally posted by: erwos
16ms is generally considered the minimum for serious gaming. 8-12 is probably better, although manufacturers start taking liberties with how they report the numbers at or beyond 8ms. I would personally shoot for 12ms - the prices aren't insane, yet the 12ms figure is probably reasonably accurate. Caveat emptor, of course.

-Erwos

I couldn't agree more here.

 

[fierydemise]

With a $300 budget getting a good CRT would be tough, its more then you need for a good 19" but not enough for a 21" I'd suggest that you get a Samsung 997DF or Viewsonic G90FB, both are 19" but quality moniters (although there have been some reports of poor quality control at viewsonic), if you'd be willing to gamble on a used moniter check azatek.com

 

[niggles]

Originally posted by: mrkun
Manufacturer's stated response times are meaningless in terms of actual performance. Read reviews before buying.

Originally posted by: Athlongamer
umm then what do you call "ghosting"...:/

He's right, you should check reputable review sites for their response times. They measure average repsonse times as opposed to the manufactureres measurements which are usually based on best case scenarios and often done in Black and white mode to ensure better than normal response times. Not all manufacturers do this, but most do. What mrkun is sayin is not that ghosting doesn't exist, simply that manufacturers fabricate the truth. list the size of monitor you want and the price you can afford to pay and I'll bet you'll get some really good choices from everyone on what you should be looking at.

 

[zephyrprime]

Originally posted by: Athlongamer
I guess my question is how much better is a 25ms RT compared to a 4 or 6ms RT? Is it actually a noticable difference for gaming? I was wondering if anyone has played on both and had knowledge to share, b/c i'm about to either buy a pretty nice CRT or a decent LCD probably 17 or 19 inch with (hopeing to find) 6 or maybe 10ms response time.

Any help would be great...

Thanks guys

Athlongamer

Lower response times are better; not higher ones. A lower response time lcd will make a big difference for you.

Is there any utilities out there that can tell you the actual response time of your LCD? I have an Acer which the company states as having 8ms.

No utility can do it. You need actual measurement tools. A simple oscilloscope and photo resister would do the trick.