Yeah but I’m not sure how many people want 27 inch monitors hung up. Bit small for that, don’t you think?
This whole thread:
“Hey guys I’m asking a question.”
“Well here’s an answer with reasonable evidence.”
“I don’t agree with that evidence even though all I have are nebulous, qualitative means of measurement in anecdotal contexts.”
“It’s solid evidence and has been tested. Look at the results.”
“I’m going to argue just to prove I’m right and you’re wrong. All I wanted was answers that stroke my confirmation bias. It’s not about actual facts or scientific procedures. It’s all about protecting my fragile ego and inherently limited sense of perspective.”
Yet another tragic but educational insight into human ego, hubris, and conceit. The thread is almost poetic even. If this was an intentional troll thread, it was well played out and written. Augmenting our dreary reality with needless drama in order for us to learn about the intricacies of life. Thank you.
Not a troll thread, Parryall has a special way of… lets call it debate.
I must be partially brain dead for having read this entire thread. Good day.
I really do wanna discuss a hypothetical big cheap basic low lag monitor/TV though. I feel like it’s a legit niche in the market.
I’m with you.
From what I remember hearing, large displays that are meant for information display (fast-food restaurant menus, airport flight schedules, etc) rather than for full entertainment purposes are potential candidates to fit most of the criteria, save for the “cheap” aspect. Easy-availability is also an issue, obviously.
Is there anything technical preventing huge displays from having low input lag or does the market work in such a way that big also means tons of useless features that drive up the price and/or lag?
Kind of figured that out. That said if he goes with the setup that he’s been talking about (wi-fi + giant TV + signal conversion) he’s going to have a hell of a time parrying anything.
His name is ParryAll, I know he can parry all the motherfuckin bullshit. Even if his setup is pure trash and no one wants to play with him online.
The only game I play right now is 3rd Strike Online Edition on 360. I use a CRT and have a direct connection to the modem with 10 MB down 5 MB up. It doesn’t get much better than that.
Based on the feedback I’ve recieved I will probably end up getting a BenQ for SFV. We’ll see, but frankly that’s my decision and nobody elses business.
It’s extremely small.
You don’t need to worry about getting the most extremely high input response set, because anything under 16.67ms is lagless as far as 60FPS gaming is concerned. So it’d be pointless to get say a set with 10ms over one with 15ms, it’s all the same for 60FPS gaming. If you’re one of the few who games at 120FPS on PC, then it would matter, because at 120Hz suddenly a frame = 8.335ms, and I don’t even know of LCD monitors that quick, even the BenQ fails there, but you’re also talking about frames displaying at twice the speed of 60. Now you’re in human perception territory, 20 cans of redbull and 5 lines of high grade coke territory. If your perception is that quick then you’re going to be too busy traveling through dimensions than to worry about gaming.
My guess is that the TV’s rated at 17ms are just rounding up, and the designers perhaps had 60FPS gaming in mind when developing them.
I would love to know more technical aspects of displays, why some lag worse than others all other things equal (all post processing off). Our resident, ahem, “expert” however thinks that size matters when clearly that chart trumps his misguided assumptions. The fact 17ms displays exist at 70" inches and above throws that out the window. And for all we know those weren’t designed with input lag in mind but through quality or whatever just happened to be that fast. Since that information isn’t on Wikipedia I doubt our “expert” has any insights there.
You said your TV has 10MS on top of BenQ, which is 10ms correct? 20ms is 3ms over 17, that’s ‘virtually’ lagless, that’s pretty damned good, if someone could detect 3MS of lag then they in fact would have Flash or QuickSilver like super powers. Then again if my TV actually rates at 21 then perhaps not, because I certainly feel something, but what I feel is under a frame. That’s not super powers that’s called having a reference point. I can pop in Ultra SF4 and compare 360 to PS3, that allows you to know exactly what 1.3 frames feels like. My TV feels like half or a quarter of that, so 21-25ms is my guess. If the equipment is reasonable I’ll buy it just so I can further clown my haters and trolls with exact numbers.
You and me both.
I do have two questions that perhaps some of the nice/cool/honest/kind/smart members of the board can help me with:
How much input lag does the game Megaman Legacy Collection, the recently released 1-6 MM set, by Digital oh god no Foundry, have? And what is the name of the equipment used to test input lag on monitors?
double
The way large displays are built, they are geared for Bluray/Movie viewing first. Gaming is a after thought.
They are designed to give the Nicest, Prettiest Picture Possible, but that also means ALOTS of image post processing. More Image Post Processing = More input Lag.
For movies this is not an issue at all, even if there a 7 frame delay. For gaming, its counter productive.
Newer Large format HDTV sets seem to have a faster processor, or streamline the process rather than build a large display with gaming in mind.
Notice the Input Lag on monitors and TVs are never given for official Stats. You have to go out your way to sites likedisplaylag.com , www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/input-lag , http://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/by-test-results/input-lag and the www.avsforum.com forums
Also
REFRESH RATE IS NOT INPUT LAG
REFRESH RATE IS NOT INPUT LAG
REFRESH RATE IS NOT INPUT LAG
REFRESH RATE IS NOT INPUT LAG
REFRESH RATE IS NOT INPUT LAG
REFRESH RATE IS NOT INPUT LAG
I’m looking for a BenQ monitor myself. The primary reason is for SFV, plus other fighting games, with some Call of Duty mixed in. I’m hooking it to a PS4.
They make a lot of different models and I’m unsure what each one brings to the table or how necessary each feature is. Can someone throw out a recommendation or two?
If you want something for gaming just buy a damn BenQ. If you have a TV with VGA it ignores the post processing that causes a lot of the lag.
But literally all they would need then is an option to turn all of that shit off.
A “raw” option, with basic scaling is all we need really.
I wish I had the capital to make these, with the right marketing campaign the whole gaming community would buy these in droves.
“Gameplay on the big TV feels weird”
4 people huddled around a monitor squinting “I can’t see a thing on this” one player proclaims.
HEY KIDS! I’M HERE TO TELL YOU ABOUT GAMER TVS!
I hope someone at least steals the idea and lets me do their ad campaign.
I like your enthusiasm but very much disagree on the “the whole gaming community would buy these in droves” part. Firstly I’m not sure you understand how broke a large portion of the FGC is which makes the idea of a niche high end TV seem like a suspect idea off the bat. Secondly there’s the issue of portability. No one is going to haul a giant ass TV with them to their locals. Lastly and building off of the first two issues but if the majority of people can’t afford what you’re selling and/or don’t want to haul your product around it’s unlikely to be widely adapted by communities that prize and prioritize standardization. The Asus VH236H (think that’s the correct model) was widely used because it did what it needed to do (low lag), was cheap-ish (~$150), was portable and everyone else was using it.
If they didn’t cheap out and use industry/ commercial grade displays? They cost thousands of dollars, they are the up-todate versions of Sony PVM monitors.
They also most likely have video connectors to standards not available to the public (as HDMI does not do will with long runs).
BenQ RL2455HM 24" Gaming Monitor http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B007HSKSMI
The New Ben Q Evo Monitor and MLG Monitor is $100 more from the RL2455HM normal price.
The new Ben Q Evo display is really good for streaming as it has a HDMI Out port for your capture devices.
Never will happen. What you are asking for is a very niche, very niche market. Sony tried this once and it backfired on them (their 3D enabled PlayStation TV that supposed to be used in conjurer with the PS3)
There is a PC or Gaming mode on many of these monitors, but this does not turn off everything.
You still have to deal with (when applicable) deinterlacing, scalling, cropping and centering. You can’t turn it all off, just bypass alot of the junk.
With more modern systems Deinterlacing isn’t an issue but it is the source for at least 2 frames of lag in many, many setups, even in the universally accepted good equipment.
Also most gamers like to sit close to the screen, at that point a 24" or 26" works fine.
At the most you only see 1 large screen at tournaments, this is not to game off of, but only to allow any spectators to see.
Up close anything bigger than 32" becomes hard to see everything.
Nobody ever said Refresh Rate was Input Lag Darth Vader.
Still, it needs to be said. As both specs are given in milliseconds.
In the topic of Display Lag it’s a message that can’t be hammered into everyone’s skulls enough.
Quote from the first page, first post, first paragraph of the THE NEW DEFINITIVE HDTV LAG FAQ thread
Where is the thread I can’t find it.