Response times ms

Soldato
Joined
6 May 2009
Posts
20,083
Is there any standardisation for stated response times of monitors in ms?

E.g. One im looking at has 20ms response time. But this might be gray to gray, black to black or something else

I think a black-white-black (BtB) response time of 25ms is close to a gray-to-gray (GtG) response time of 5ms.


All this means 16 or 20ms might be terrible or really good.
 
Not really. And if a screen is being quoted with an ISO black to white response time, I wouldn’t make any assumptions about it having overdrive and therefore a lowers g2g. In fact it probably doesn’t if it’s quoting a large figure like that!

What screen is it you’re looking at? And for what uses?
Im looking for a small 4:3 screen for PCem Windows 9X emulation - programs and games.

The screen can be anything, 9" total in hieght. The better ones seem to be Lilliput, Iiyama and Eizo, the Iiyama is probably a little too big.




Failing these there are loads of cheap Chinese screens such as Eyoyo and many other screens that look very similar (and very cheap quality wise) Id rather spend a bit more on something better. The lilliput for £167 seems the best so far
 
Unfortunately a lot of it doesn't mean much anyhow - a screen with slightly higher average times but with more consistent response without some transitions being very slow, etc. can be a vastly better experience than something which has low average times but very poor worst case response, etc. etc.
Balls. So really there is no way of knowing how good (or bad) a screen will be.

I've had confirmation that the LILLIPUT FA1000-NP/C/T is 20ms black-to-black. Is that the same as black-white-black? 20ms BtB should equate to a low gray-to-gray, but guess if worst case response is bad then it means nothing
 
Back
Top Bottom