Samsung monitors response time - 2ms versus 5ms - any practical difference?

[TheDarkKnight]

Well, I have finally found a worthy replacement for my 3 1/2 year old 21.5" Samsung monitor:

http://www.samsung.com/us/computer/monitors/LS24D390HL/ZA

I have already placed my order for the above monitor but being that its the weekend it hasn't shipped yet so I have the power to cancel or change my order for just a little while longer. But I am considering purchasing the bigger brother because it's on sale:

It's a 27" monitor with 50 more cd/m2 than there is on the 24" monitor.

My question is, though, being that at the "current" moment the 27" inch monitor is only a few dollars more than what I ordered the 24" for(on sale). Would I be better off spending that extra money for the 27" inch based upon 2 specific numbers which, at first glance, appear to be better numbers. The numbers on paper(or screen) are better but what's the practical differences?

So, first off I am talking about the difference in response times. 5ms versus 2ms. So, on the rare occasion that I might wanna play a video game I have come to the mathematical conclusion that 5ms versus 2ms has no real practical difference. But I am hoping somebody can validate my math on this.

1 second = 1000 milliseconds which would translate into a 2ms response time refreshing the screen 500x/second. But if the monitor itself only runs at a maximum of 60HZ does a response time of 5ms even matter? Let alone 2ms? Samsung tries to lure me into purchasing the more expensive monitor by listing the "elimination of motion blur" as a bullet point. But I don't understand how that is possible if, by my math, the screen only ever gets updates at 60hz on both monitors anyway.

Samsung conspiculously does not report the refresh rate on their specifications page for either of these two monitors I am looking at.

Second question,
The 24" has a cd/m2 = 250 where as the equivalent larger monitor has a cd/m2 of 300. I know, generally, that has to do with the overall brightness but would that extra brightness of 50 translate into an overall brighter experience or is it simply the bare minimum requirement to give a similar experience one would get on a smaller screen because of the increased size. In other words, is the added 50 brightness going to give an overall more enjoyable experience or is just because a bigger monitor requires more brightness?

So those are my two questions. Thanks for reading.

 

[Rio Rebel]

This forum is probably not the best place for your question, since you don't seem to be using your PC for a home theater. You might ask the question in PC gaming, or general hardware.

I can tell you that even for my desktop PC, I wouldn't think twice about the difference between 5ms and 2ms, because I don't play very many games.

 

[TheDarkKnight]

This forum is probably not the best place for your question, since you don't seem to be using your PC for a home theater. You might ask the question in PC gaming, or general hardware.

I can tell you that even for my desktop PC, I wouldn't think twice about the difference between 5ms and 2ms, because I don't play very many games.

You seem to know what I use my PC for better than I do. What do I seem to be using it for?

 

[DesiPower]

I don't think the difference is detectable by naked eyes, I wouldn't worry about it and stick with 5ms. But on the other hand, I don't change monitors that often, I typically keep them for 4-5 years so I wouldn't mind sending extra $$ to get the latest and greatest within reasonable limits.

 

[Rio Rebel]

You seem to know what I use my PC for better than I do. What do I seem to be using it for?

Well, trying to be helpful, I tried to understand what you are doing. Since you posted a question about a 27" vs 24" monitor in an htpc forum, one of the following must be true:

1. You consider a 24" screen to constitute a "home theater".
2. You don't understand what a "Home Theater PC" means.
3. You assume that people in a Home Theater PC forum are the best to advise you on desktop monitors.

Since I assumed that "1" was pretty outrageous, I let you know that "3" is not the case - there are better forums to get input.

If "2" is the case, then feel free to ask questions.

 

[TheDarkKnight]

Well, trying to be helpful, I tried to understand what you are doing. Since you posted a question about a 27" vs 24" monitor in an htpc forum, one of the following must be true:

1. You consider a 24" screen to constitute a "home theater".
2. You don't understand what a "Home Theater PC" means.
3. You assume that people in a Home Theater PC forum are the best to advise you on desktop monitors.

Since I assumed that "1" was pretty outrageous, I let you know that "3" is not the case - there are better forums to get input.

If "2" is the case, then feel free to ask questions.

I use my PC for anything and everything. The fact that I play games on it once in a great while doesn't restrict me from watching movies on it once in awhile. Nor does it restrict me from doing anything else I can theoretically do with a PC.

Actually, I didn't find #3 to be all that outrageous. I would have thought people who are into using their PC as a home theater device would be more sensitive to all the subtle qualities or differences in a monitor that a gamer might lack. I think gamers are highly(maybe overly) concerned about frame rates where an HTPC enthusiast would be examining and comparing a greater number of features in a given piece of equipment for their setup. Therefore, assuming a gamer automatically knows more than a HTPC enthusiast seems to be making a pretty bold assumption. But that's just my opinion I guess.

You would not believe how anal some HTPC enthusiasts are about frame rates in movies. I've seen discussions go on and on about 24fps movies versus 48fps. So, I think you insult the HTPC crowd of folks when you insinuate that a 'gamer' is more qualified to educate me about response times or brightness of a given monitor.

 

[Rio Rebel]

Nobody is trying to restrict you from anything. I was simply pointing out that this is a forum for home theater pc's, which means most of us have our htpc's hooked up to large screens.

Do your thing. I won't bother you in this thread any further.

 

[smitbret]

I think it is safe to assume that if OP considers a 24" monitor to be a suitable Home Theater, then a 5ms refresh rate isn't going to make a bit of difference to him, anyway.

Refresh rate isn't even an objective measurement. Different manufacturers take different liberties in measuring it.

 

[piasabird]

I don't know about other people but I use my Home Theater PC with an HDTV. I don't have any monitors that large. A lot of people might want to know what resolution you plan on using. It might make a big difference. The larger the screen, the harder it is to use high resolutions due to the cost.