27" 2560x1440 IPS / Input Lag

ghostsky7

ghostsky7

ghostsky7

Associate
Joined
11 Jun 2013
Posts
6
I will be buying a new 27" IPS 2560x1440 monitor very soon...

My ideal monitor would be a Hazro HZ27WC (gorgeous picture, glossy, no noticeable input lag @ 8.8ms "class1") if the build quality was better (mine broke and there don't seem to be anymore about...).

At the moment I'm considering the Dell U2713HM, the DGM IPS 2701 WPH or the Samsung S27B970D
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/dell_u2713hm.htm
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/dgm_ips-2701wph.htm
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/samsung_s27b970d.htm

The Dell looks like the best option at the moment, downsides vs Hazro:
> Not glossy but TFTC say the AG coating is much less aggressive than many
> Input lag is "class 2" at 22.2 ms

The DGM is not in stock right now (soon !?), looks good aside from:
> Input lag is "class 2" at 28.0ms

The Samsung looks gorgeous on paper aside from:
> Very expensive, I would still consider it at the £750 mark if "perfect"
> Input lag is "class 2" at 28.0ms

So, should I be concerned about "class 2" input lag ?
...all of my previous monitors were what TFTC would deem "class1" @ around the 10ms mark and I do love fps games.

Any advice would be appreciated, at the moment I'm probably gonna go for the Dell since it's the lowest input lag of the three and looks to be a good all-rounder (but I still long to have a working Hazro HZ27WC).

Thanks.
 
HP ZR2740W
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/hp_zr2740w_v2.htm

- 2560x1440
- standard gamut
- 3.6ms input lag (class 1)
- light matte
- non-PWM backlight
- pivot

I was about to buy one of these, but the 2560x1440 is too high for me (even 1920x1080 is too much in that size for me) and local non-availability were deal breakers for me.

Downside: OCUK doesn't actually stock *any* HP monitors for some reason... Oh, and this model doesn't have HDMI, so it's pretty much limited for computer usage.

But, there's also the OcUK QH300-IPSM, for £640 (this week only offer, normally £800). That's a very nice price for a 30", 2560x1600. Though no reviews available. Still, I might take a chance with that, if I were you. Actually, with that price I would highly recommend to take a plunge. And if you're not satisfied with it, you can still return it.

With regards to input lag:
20ms is probably not that critical yet. Closer to 30ms might be, but unless you're a "professional" or hardcore gamer, then it's most likely still good enough. (And if you were pro or hc, then you should probably take a look at 120/144Hz TN monitors, in any case.)

Here's also a nice read (the link is for the last page, but it might interesting to read the whole article), regarding input lag and how to put it in perspective:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/2803/7

As in, if you're using this much energy and attention to monitor's input lag, make sure the rest of your hardware and software does the same. Also keep in mind that average human reaction time is around 200ms.

Regarding reaction time, you can check how yours stacks up against the average (though keep in mind, your own system can still affect this reading):
http://www.humanbenchmark.com/tests/reactiontime/
 
I went from the HZ27WD to the Dell U2711 and was worried about the extra reported input lag (since I do play BF3 etc.) however the difference wasn't at all noticeable. Despite the Dell's response time being over twice that of the Hazro, it is unlikely to be a difference you'll ever notice.

Also the build quality on the Dell monitors goes so far beyond the Hazro it isn't even funny (the actual reason I went from Hazro -> Dell is because the glass fell off on my Hazro monitor - I know they don't sell the glass versions anymore, but still. The glass was actually stuck to the monitor with what seemed like double sided sticky tape).
 
I am still rocking the Hazro 27WC and loving it. Didn't get the Glass Panel, and not had any issues, although the single DVI Input can be a bit galling. For gaming, nothing has come close since it was released, in terms of Input Lag. This is because the Hazro doesn't perform any processing on the Image it is being fed, unlike other Models in the Range (like the 27WB I think).

I supect the HP linked to above, as well as the Dell U2711, are your current best choices for IPS :)
 
ghostsky7 said:
I will be buying a new 27" IPS 2560x1440 monitor very soon...

My ideal monitor would be a Hazro HZ27WC (gorgeous picture, glossy, no noticeable input lag @ 8.8ms "class1") if the build quality was better (mine broke and there don't seem to be anymore about...).

At the moment I'm considering the Dell U2713HM, the DGM IPS 2701 WPH or the Samsung S27B970D
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/dell_u2713hm.htm
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/dgm_ips-2701wph.htm
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/samsung_s27b970d.htm

The Dell looks like the best option at the moment, downsides vs Hazro:
> Not glossy but TFTC say the AG coating is much less aggressive than many
> Input lag is "class 2" at 22.2 ms

The DGM is not in stock right now (soon !?), looks good aside from:
> Input lag is "class 2" at 28.0ms

The Samsung looks gorgeous on paper aside from:
> Very expensive, I would still consider it at the £750 mark if "perfect"
> Input lag is "class 2" at 28.0ms

So, should I be concerned about "class 2" input lag ?
...all of my previous monitors were what TFTC would deem "class1" @ around the 10ms mark and I do love fps games.

Any advice would be appreciated, at the moment I'm probably gonna go for the Dell since it's the lowest input lag of the three and looks to be a good all-rounder (but I still long to have a working Hazro HZ27WC).

Thanks.
Click to expand...

also in this same situation, been browsing and researching panels for last few days and still not made a solid decision, the Dell seems a good choice but it looks so plain, I like style :( other choices look better but have poor build quality, all models seem to boast reports of good quality pictures! cant decide..
 
I've got the DGM and if there is high input lag I've never noticed it - the review copy at TFTCentral could have just been a bad one...
:)
 
Thanks to all who posted on this thread.

Just to let anyone know who might be interested, I waited for the optimum time (about a week and a half a go) and bought the DGM for £300...I LOVE IT !!!

The image quality is excellent, if there's input lag then I don't notice it...for the money I think it's an absolute bargain !

Very happy with my purchase...if you like glossy monitors then I would recommend this 100%.
 
Have you not considered the Asus PB278Q? 16.6ms response time which is lower than the Samsung and Dell 2713H/HM. Infact it only just missed out on a class 1 rating which is 16ms on TFTCentral!

I had this monitor to replace my Hazro after it died. The Hazro was a good monitor but the Asus is in the different league imo.

I play race sims and BF3 etc.

The higher input lag put me off the new Dell 2713's etc. I was in the same situation after the above unit failed. I've been more than happy so far with the Asus.

That HP looks impressive at 3.6ms
 
Berno said:
Have you not considered the Asus PB278Q? 16.6ms response time which is lower than the Samsung and Dell 2713H/HM. Infact it only just missed out on a class 1 rating which is 16ms on TFTCentral!

I had this monitor to replace my Hazro after it died. The Hazro was a good monitor but the Asus is in the different league imo.

I play race sims and BF3 etc.

The higher input lag put me off the new Dell 2713's etc. I was in the same situation after the above unit failed. I've been more than happy so far with the Asus.

That HP looks impressive at 3.6ms
Click to expand...

Hi Berno, yes, I had considered the Asus PB278Q, in the end there were about five monitors I was considering...unfortunately, unless you have samples of all the monitors you are considering and get a chance to test them out side by side you have to just weigh up all the "pros and cons" from various reviews and go with what you think best...

I'm sure the Asus is an excellent monitor and I'm glad you're happy with it, perhaps if I had one I would also be singing it's praises and perhaps if I had one to directly compare to the DGM I have now then I might be saying that the Asus was the better monitor...but perhaps not ;-)

When it came down to my final choice there were a few things that put me off the Asus:
1) It's not truly glossy like the DGM...without seeing one myself I cannot say if that would be a problem since I know the Asus will be a far less aggressive AG coating than my old Dell but as I absolutely love glossy monitors, going for a "non-glossy" would be a risk unless I could demo it for myself.
2) The Asus uses PWM lighting...and I've seen more than review that has commented on this being a potential problem if you are sensitive to such things...again, without a direct demo I wouldn't know if this affected me but I suspect it might.
3) The Asus is £500...I only paid £300 for the DGM ! Now if the Asus was perfect, if the image quality was as good as the DGM (or Hazro), the screen coating and PWM were not problems then I would happily pay the extra because the Asus does have certain other things in it's favour (input lag being one of them) but with the unknowns about this then £200 is a lot of dough when you are "taking a punt"

To me the DGM looked like the closest equivalent to the HZ27WC and for £300 I really thought it was worth a shot...my only strong reservation was that the tftcentral quoted input lag was a worry...but I'm happy to report that for me I just don't see/feel it...either I'm not as sensitive to it as I thought I'd be, tftcentral is a bit over cautious with such things or my sample is somehow superior to the tftcentral review sample...I can't say for sure, but at the end of the day I'm very happy I have a monitor which for me is a match for the HZ27WC and meets all my requirements...and for £300 ! (£90 less than I paid for my Hazro) it's a real bargain !

Thanks again to all who posted on this.
 
You should all be aware that TFT's input lag tests (and a considerable number of PRAD's, until they started using an oscilloscope) are flawed and should not constitute the basis of your purchasing decision.

There's a good thread about this on [H] but I'm on my phone right now and can't be bothered looking it up.


Posted from Overclockers.co.uk App for Android
 
blackoctagon said:
You should all be aware that TFT's input lag tests (and a considerable number of PRAD's, until they started using an oscilloscope) are flawed and should not constitute the basis of your purchasing decision.

There's a good thread about this on [H] but I'm on my phone right now and can't be bothered looking it up.


Posted from Overclockers.co.uk App for Android
Click to expand...

anything pre- SMTT on TFTCentral and anything pre-SMTT from Prad should be taken with a pinch of salt for reasons explained in this article. Plus anything from any other source using any basic stopwatch method or older technique really, although sometimes they can give a rough comparison between screens overall.

TFTCentral have been using SMTT for as while now and all the recent reviews and input lag comparison tables in them only compare SMTT results. An additional oscilloscope based method has recently been added allowing an accurate measurement of the response time, and therefore an estimation of the signal processing lag as well. Prad stopped using SMTT a while back and use an unspecified oscilloscope based method now, one which isn't explained or really tested to be fair but is often referenced.

It's important to understand there is no defined standard for input lag measurement, and a lot of different terms used. this sums it up quite well:

TFTCentral said:
[ Input Lag vs. Display Lag vs. Signal Processing

To avoid confusion with different terminology we will refer to this section of our reviews as just "lag" from now on, as there are a few different aspects to consider, and different interpretations of the term "input lag". We will consider the following points here as much as possible. The overall "display lag" is the first, that being the delay between the image being shown on the TFT display and that being shown on a CRT. This is what many people will know as input lag and originally was the measure made to explain why the image is a little behind when using a CRT. The older stopwatch based methods were the common way to measure this in the past, but through advanced studies have been shown to be quite inaccurate. As a result, more advanced tools like SMTT provide a method to measure that delay between a TFT and CRT while removing the inaccuracies of older stopwatch methods.

In reality that lag / delay is caused by a combination of two things - the signal processing delay caused by the TFT electronics / scaler, and the response time of the pixels themselves. Most "input lag" measurements over the years have always been based on the overall display lag (signal processing + response time) and indeed the SMTT tool is based on this visual difference between a CRT and TFT and so measures the overall display lag. In practice the signal processing is the element which gives the feel of lag to the user, and the response time of course can impact blurring, and overall image quality in moving scenes. As people become more aware of lag as a possible issue, we are of course keen to try and understand the split between the two as much as possible to give a complete picture.

The signal processing element within that is quite hard to identify without extremely high end equipment and very complicated methods. In fact the studies by Thomas Thiemann which really kicked this whole thing off were based on equipment worth >100,1000 Euro, requiring extremely high bandwidths and very complicated methods to trigger the correct behaviour and accurately measure the signal processing on its own. Other techniques which are being used since are not conducted by Thomas (he is a freelance writer) or based on this equipment or technique, and may also be subject to other errors or inaccuracies based on our conversations with him since. It's very hard as a result to produce a technique which will measure just the signal processing on its own unfortunately. Many measurement techniques are also not explained and so it is important to try and get a picture from various sources if possible to make an informed judgement about a display overall.

For our tests we will continue to use the SMTT tool to measure the overall "display lag". From there we can use our oscilloscope system to measure the response time across a wide range of grey to grey (G2G) transitions as recorded in our response time tests. Since SMTT will not include the full response time within its measurements, after speaking with Thomas further about the situation we will subtract half of the average G2G response time from the total display lag. This should allow us to give a good estimation of how much of the overall lag is attributable to the signal processing element on its own.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom