Input lag on lcd's, when will that be resolved?

fish99 said:
On a side note, it's interesting to look at the reponse time photos, for the people who think a 2ms LCD responds just like a CRT ;) Select 'game rendering, best results' and 'game rendering, worst results' -

http://www.digitalversus.com/duels.php?ty=6&ma1=41&mo1=74&p1=794&ma2=36&mo2=224&p2=2104&ph=1
Click to expand...

It's made even worse when you see it side by side with the one CRT they have in their database - http://www.digitalversus.com/duels.php?ty=6&ma1=120&ma2=36&mo2=224&p2=2104&ph=1 :eek:

Oh and Perfect Chaos. Why would the Samsung 226bw be worse at showing video than the VX922 (since they are both TN panels)? Other than that, the references I find for pixel size show:

Samsung 226bw - 0.282mm
Viewsonic VX922 - 0.294mm

So it's the opposite to what you're saying. If you made a compromise of sorts and got a Samsung 206bw the pixel size would drop even further to 0.258mm.

EDIT - Did anyone else notice how poorly the LG models do in that delay test? The '2ms' LG L226wtq got an average of 33.4ms...
 
Last edited:
fish99 said:
Why? The A panel still performs very well. No one on earth could tell the difference between 1.6 ms and 3.9 ms average lag. 3.9 ms is less than 1/250th of a second and it's still better than any other 22" TN screen I could find on there. Also the colours after calibration look very similar, although the A panel definitely needs calibrating. Response time photos look pretty similar too.
Click to expand...
Well for a start, i dont know what version ill get if i order on OCUK

how can i tell if its an S panel though?, ive found one elsewhere that has 3000:1 contrast ratio, however it doesnt say what panel type it is.. but i assume the 3000:1 is the S panel? or not?
 
You won't know what panel you are buying now if you go for the 226BW. It's been removed from the labelling on the back of the monitor and even from the built-in service menu people were using to check. You could find out by cracking open the case and physically checking the panel but then I suspect you might have a hard time returning it if it turned out to be A or C :p
 
Nullvoid said:
It's made even worse when you see it side by side with the one CRT they have in their database - http://www.digitalversus.com/duels.php?ty=6&ma1=120&ma2=36&mo2=224&p2=2104&ph=1 :eek:

Oh and Perfect Chaos. Why would the Samsung 226bw be worse at showing video than the VX922 (since they are both TN panels)? Other than that, the references I find for pixel size show:

So it's the opposite to what you're saying. If you made a compromise of sorts and got a Samsung 206bw the pixel size would drop even further to 0.258mm.
Click to expand...

I read on a french site that was really hard to understand even after using babelfish, saying it wasnt too good for video and gave it 1 or 2 out of 5 stars.

I dunno about the pixel size, i thought 22" was the same res as 20" so i thought 20" would be better picture :confused:
 
Nullvoid said:
You won't know what panel you are buying now if you go for the 226BW. It's been removed from the labelling on the back of the monitor and even from the built-in service menu people were using to check. You could find out by cracking open the case and physically checking the panel but then I suspect you might have a hard time returning it if it turned out to be A or C :p
Click to expand...
That puts me off, i can still buy it.. thing is, i heard that one of the panels was crap.. for some reason that im not even sure of lol
 
It's your money, it's your decision.

I personally think something like a Dell 2007WFP is a better screen, but that's just my opinion, and I've never even used a SM226BW so I'm not basing that opinion on much :) Plus the Dell is out of stock at OcUK anyway.

Everyone has different priorities though. I put viewing angles at the top of my list having owned two TNs that had really poor viewing angles. Actually I would put black depth even higher than viewing angles, but all LCDs seem to have equally poor black depth from what I've seen. The bit of lag my 2007WFP might have when measured isn't perceivable at all to me (even in UT2004 instagib), so personally I wouldn't worry about trying to get the least lag possible, although I would steer clear of anything with over 30 ms lag.

That's just me though, someone else could have entirely different priorities.
 
Perfect_Chaos said:
Just ordered the 22" 226bw

ill see if i like it or not soon enough.. should be fine i hope.
Click to expand...

Heh good man! I think you'll come to realise the fuss over the switch from CRT is often overstated in most cases. I'm using a Samsung 931bw which is the little 19" brother of the 226bw and I've been more than happy with its performance. I did have a CRT up until about 1.5 months ago but after seeing a few LCDs in a local store I was convinced to make the jump.
 
Perfect_Chaos said:
Just ordered the 22" 226bw

ill see if i like it or not soon enough.. should be fine i hope.
Click to expand...
Enjoy :D

I agree with Nullvoid, whatever the areas where LCDs are inferior, I still wouldn't want a CRT back on my desk. Too big, too heavy, take up too much desk space and use too much power.

It might take a while to adjust though. The brightness in particular can be a bit overwhelming at first, so turn that down if necessary for the first few weeks.
 
ive looked into this issue quite a lot and if i understand rightly it seems,

the TN panels are the best for response times altho its hampered by the viewing angle move your chair a little and everything looks different.

the s-pva and mpva are the middle range screens have a better viewing angle but worse response times than the fast TN and suffer ghostinng and input lag (especially dells)

the ips panels are best but expensive although some still display a mixture of both.

this is only knowledge ive gained through searching the web and reading till 5am :eek:

its a bit of a headache when trying to decide ive just RMA'd the LG 226wtq, this is a great monitor suffers no noticable ghosting or inpu lag from what i could see its just a shame i couldnt get the colours to look right, the white was blinding turning the brightness down only made it hard to distinguish shades in photoshop, its great for a gaming monitor tho imo

now looking at the dell 2407wfp HC, the HC standing for high colour, these are meant to be cool from what ive heard, the only problem being talked about is that blacks can look crushed so detail in shadowy areas may lose some detail, input lag seems to be about 22ms and the viewing angle is a lot better, ghosting can be fixed ive heard by messing with brightness and contrast.

it all boils down to personal preference if you are only playing games and dont shift around much in your chair id say the LG is a fine first LCD, the response time leaves no artefacts on screen etc

as for input lag it seems only a small percentage are able to notice it anyways, still it should be printed on the box along with the response times etc, manufacturers are very sneaky and try to confuse you, besides if you order and dont like there is always a possibility of an RMA ;)

hope this helps you out

fonzio
 
I wouldn't say input lag on Dell PVAs is particularly bad, if anything it's better than the Samsung screens with similar PVA panels, which seem to have the most input lag of all screens (screen like the 245T, 215TW etc).

Btw was the LG your first LCD? The brightness is usually overwhelming for the first few weeks when you make the switch to LCD. The 2407WFP-HC is actually 33% brighter than the LG.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom