Sub 1 frame HDTV/Monitor Input Lag Database

Tech Talk
1081

Here is the same guy in a video in English without any of the game show BS.

Isao Machii who holds a number of Guinness World Records for his sword skills
According to medical doctors, Isao still does not see the pellet, that he is anticipating the shot and reacting to the sound of the shot.
And both videos it takes Isao multiple times to get this trick right.

And even then Isao Machii as proven by science can’t see a single frame drop. Debuked by your own claims. Even then Isao Machii is a unique case.
Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/28/isao-machii-modern-day-samurai-cuts-pellet-half_n_2377386.html

Yeah I am not beating Brock Lesner, a young Mohamed Ali or even Jean Claude Van Damme in a match. Then again Wresling, Boxing, Martial Arts matches even MMA have rules including a list of things you aren’t allowed to do.
In a real fight, Brock Lesner taking a Baseball bat to the knee a from a guy coming out the shadows and taking him down with a cheap shot.

Stop mixing up fantasy with reality.

@Sixfortyfive
I never said 1/30th of a second isn’t a big deal
I just said its not humanly possible to notice a event that takes only 1/30th of a second.
You maybe notice the aftereffects of such lags, as the animation didn’t seem so fluid for a moment

Here is another thing to prove my point,

out of Disney’s 12 principals of animation, the most “fun” is Squash and stretch
The change of shape of a object to facilitate motion in animation.

here are some real world examples taken out of single frames of Disney animation (because motion tweens are for scrubs)

I bet you never saw these stills before, how you can not notice them, because you can’t no human can notice a 1/30th of a second especially once animated.

Here the article that explains it further

Here more squash and stretch with Queen Bee.

1082

Response time =/= Input lag:

"1) Reponse Time is the time taken for a pixel to change value and back again (effectively in an LCD display, how quickly the pixels shift to allow different amounts of light to pass through).

  • In simple terms, the lower this number the better as it means the pixels will shift quicker; therefore displaying fast-paced motion with less visual artefacts than a display with a higher pixel response time.
    ==> Response Times tend to decrease with advances in display technology
  1. Input Lag is the delay in time between a signal being input to a display and that same signal being displayed on-screen."

I’m pretty confident to say 35ms is the response time of the TV since that’s listed as response time in it’s manual, which I have in my hands at this moment. Input lag wasn’t measured anywhere and yes, 32" and 42" models can be different.

This TV has less than one frame of delay, probably around 13-14ms (my 2006 LCD set had 8-9ms…), has no hardcore processing to talk about or anything (which is disabled anyway by customization, better than choosing Game mode) and is a low end model. That is why I chose it, since I knew the more processing there is, the more delay. Low end models are perfect. Since you have no access to such models, you have no idea how it is and I do, since I use it everyday and am typing this with stuff appearing 1 frame later. Actually I think it might be close to 1 frame, less or more. Enjoy playing on a 22" soul-less PC monitor. In the worst case that the site you mention had actually conducted a test and measured 35ms, I’d say that’s without the trick I just mentioned. If you disconnect both or all HDMI cables on your TV, and then reconnect all the last one you connected will give you less input delay. When I play without doing this I feel like a 2 and a half input delay frames. It’s a trick like the PC label thing…

“If people were able to notice 1 frame they wouldn’t be able to watch motion and some other blah blah blah”

I said I can notice the difference in response time, not watch letters and numbers ala Matrix in slow motion, literal, elitist, arrogant pricks.

It’s similar to this… concentrating on the effect instead of the movement itself: in the third experiment in that video posted above, I could notice that in the second try the guy actually cut the ‘bullet’, how? because I could see the bullet didn’t fly past the sword. I can see the bullet if it has a long enough trajectory, not frame by frame (but almost…). You can concentrate on comparing the difference of time between instant reaction and any amount of time additional to that in stuff appearing on screen on a TV, that difference tells you how much delay there is.

1083

How are you testing your input lag? That is the important thing.

1084

Went into this thread hoping for some new valuable information. Instead I get a shitty TV drama. Thanks. Happy New Years everyone!

1085

@MarkMan Displaylag.com seems to be the best bet for recent information on input latency. :tup:

1086

Or you know, you can head to a physical store like a normal human being would and look for low end TV sets and test a bit by yourself, ultimately a webpage is only theorical information. I actually took my PS3 one year ago to stores and tested it on every TV set I could arguing I wanted to buy it but I had to test input latency first and that that was important to me. There’s nothing like making sure by yourself and feeling yourself the delay the TV gives you.

1087

@Pablofsi

You missed my question. (Or avoided?)

Also, I’m not so sure that a “normal human being” would walk around with a PS3 to somewhere selling low-end sets to complete lag-testing.

There are multiple scientific ways to test. None of them so far include connecting a PS3 to anything.

http://smtt.thomasthiemann.com/index_en.html
http://www.leobodnar.com/shop/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=89&products_id=212

1088

I didn’t have the specific Guitar Hero version that had the tester and which I think was infamous for being innacurate, and I won’t buy $80 hardware to test either. I didn’t at the time, so all I had was my sensitivity and awareness, which were enough. Now I’m happily gaming and PS4 works wonderfully.

I’m just living a heads up about low end sets for whoever decides to get up from his lazy ass, go to a store and test himself.

1089

I’m not trying to be an asshole, but you pretty much just invalidated your opinions in this thread.

You’re giving hard numbers that you are literally just making up. Muscle memory allows me to hit 1-frame link on TVs with 3+ frames of lag. That doesn’t mean that those TVs are sub-16ms input latency.

I think that you’re a little in over your head here with some legitimately technical guys who aren’t interested in hearing your opinion on what latency you “feel” the TV may or may not have. I mean that in the nicest, most civil way possible - I just want to explain why people in here aren’t jumping all over your info and thanking you for it. In the scheme of this thread, it is not pertinent, because there are no actual hard numbers that you can prove. That’s what this thread is for.

(Hopefully this doesn’t come across as “WHARRRRGARBL OMG NOOB GTFO”.)

1090

I’m not asking them to jump at all. It’s empyrical advice for those that read, not comment and want to trash those PC monitors that are dull and dumb devices, not to mention too small.

1091

You mean empirical and while your advice is based on observations it is certainly not verifiable at all. In fact, your advice is actually made invalid by commonly accepted theory, hard fact, and logic.

1092

I’m against relying on subjective error-prone human perception for evaluating input lag; there are more reliable methods. Leo Bodnar’s Input Lag Tester is practical and most of the time does the job… Also, I recently came across http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/input-lag for an additional list of TV/monitor models - I still use http://www.displaylag.com/display-database/ primarily.

1093

Are you serious? Do you honestly think I don’t know what the fuck response time is vs input lag? Your display is 35 ms of INPUT LAG, as measured by a Leo Bodnar device. This isn’t response time. I’m not some dumb fuck nitwit dude. Any display with 35 ms of response time is going to be a huge smear fest of shit that no one would look at. Maybe the first LCD screens that were available since ghosting was a common issue back in the mid 90’s. You obviously don’t know what you’re talking about. Don’t down-vote me because you don’t know your shit.

The differences in the TV models when it comes to size will only be the PCB’s that give voltage and information to the screen along the edges, they will be longer rather than shorter. The actual video processor chips will be the same, which means the same lag. I’ve taken TV’s apart and I’ve seen the differences, their motherboards will be the same.

You know how I know you can’t tell the difference between 1 and 2 frames of lag from no lag? Because you didn’t even know you were gaming on a 3 frame laggy TV. You’ve invalidated your own opinion and have no say in this conversation anymore, and have completely proven yourself wrong.

I can hit 1 and 2 frame links on display with 5 frames of lag. Other than 1 frame links being generally difficult in general, it’s not a visual and react thing it’s mostly muscle memory for me. Visual indicators are done earlier than usual, so you aren’t doing things as deep as you normally would, but it’s entirely possible to do. 4x Vega jab links isn’t easy but I can pull it off on my laggy display, because it’s a timing I adjust and learn as I do it.

Now, I don’t think a display with high lag is good, everyone should have sub 1 frame lag displays available, but that isn’t the reality we live in. 1 to 2 frames is ok to play mostly seriously on, no one is going to notice, 1 frame or less for anything tournament play just because. But for general gaming 3 frames should be ok and are much more common. 4 to 5 is pushing it (I tend to notice a slight delay in jumping easiest, lagless will jump immediately vs mostly imperceptable delayed jump) and anything more (6+) is simply not playable. It’s good to have a display with no lag to remove any outside variables, and I wish all TV’s were lagless.

1094

I found this website and i’m not sure if you guys heard about it. http://pcmonitors.info/ He does reviews on monitors and does test on the input lag, colors, and other stuff on them. I was looking for info on the AOC i2367fh, an AH-IPS Monitor, but I found info on the i2369Vm instead http://pcmonitors.info/reviews/aoc-i2369vm, I read somewhere that they are the same monitors, but with different features. This guy claims the i2369Vm has 4ms of input lag, which i believe should be about the same as the AOC i2367fh if they are the same monitors, but with just different features.

1095

a VERY simple way to detect the lag, pick you sf character and do your deepedt jump in at the latest moment possible. if it doesn’t come out try doing it 1 frame quicker (higher), still not kcking? try anotheer frame quicker.

will this tell you exactly how many frames of lag there is? no. will it tell you around ow many frames it could be and how to adapt your game accordingly, yes.

what really suck on these last gen and probably next gen consoles is input lag. even if it is minimal (what is it, 3 frames), it means you need to block in situations where you could do an srk or super or at least something before this usb crap. its the first thing that really struck me when i played sf4 for the first time.

1096

Nice site. I’m glad there are more of these sites and we’re not all in the dark like we were 10 years ago. This site seems to focus mostly on monitors which is good, because DisplayLag seems to focus mostly on TV.

1097

Just gonna drop in and say that the reaction times and Phi phenomenon claims aren’t quite true; the “skipping” of frames is but one way that the human brain fills in the gaps of our perception; it’s not entirely relevant to the latency discussion. It mostly has to do with the concept of a meta-perception that prevents our brains from treating certain perceived things (like individual frames) on their own, outside the context of things in their temporal proximity. Which, yes, is kinda why we don’t spot the aforementioned Aladdin frames.

That’s actually not even entirely accurate of a statement, either, but it’s too late to get it 100% correct (and honestly, I’m not an expert; I have, however, talked at length on the topic with a grad student friend of mine who is doing research about the brain, image perception, motion tracking, and gender).

I’m not trying to make a major definitive claim here, only that I’d submit that “the human brain can’t detect the difference between 0 and 2 frames” is a gross and inaccurate oversimplification. It absolutely can – screen capture a mouse with software that only lags by 1-2 frames and you’ll certainly perceive the lag in a preview window, next to the mouse that’s moving “in real time” (actually at the base delay of your graphics pipeline+display). Drawing tablets with sub-two-frames of latency? Not at all good enough – Microsoft had that crazy-low-latency theoretical drawing surface in their labs a couple years ago for a reason, the latest Wacoms are only a couple frames latent and every traditional artist I’ve talked to have complained about them.

“Perceiving” latency is a matter of our brain; it’s a relative thing that’s nearly impossible to make absolute statements about. If you had a 1 frame and a 2 frame monitor, mirrored and next to each other, and you watched closely (say, moved a mouse quickly), your periphery would be able to catch the different timing of when the mouse stopped or changed direction (oh man the brain is freaking AWESOME at motion stuff you guys like that gets into some crazy genetics shit from when we were hunting, and it looks like that perception has a statistical delta gap giving males the advantage; ladies have other perception advantages, it’s all real fascinating). Take it to the limit and just do a black-to-white-to-black single-frame-flash, and it’s even more likely the delta will be noticed. If you then just had the slower monitor hooked up, would you “notice the lag”? Yeah, maybe. Because you just saw it slower, so your brain’s thinking it. Would you have noticed it had we not done that earlier comparison? Almost certainly no. When our brains want to pair up and associate multiple inputs (proprioceptive input of a button press registering with something on screen, like frame of an animation), there’s some leniency. Sometimes it’s a little, sometimes it’s a lot.

But yeah, TL;DR the brain’s cool, making sweeping statements about how it works is hubris at best, but people aren’t out there reliably noticing a 2-frame monitor because that’s just silly. And even if we don’t “notice” it, it’s still there, which is why we measure. Latency is a measurement, and a valuable one; numbers are things that, when properly and consistently acquired, tell everyone the same thing; statements like “it feels fine and I’ve been playing games since forever” don’t do others much good, because different people are different. This is supposed to be a discussion of the numbers, because we’re all crazy enough to care about those; go to SlickDeals if you wanna just recommend people decent deals on monitors that feel good to you. They’ll probably complain about your lack of numbers, too, but at least it won’t be on a thread whose sole purpose is said numbers.

</walloftext>

1098

I’ll probably do a video comparison with the ps4 controller in front of the screen so you can see the button presses. Meanwhile, enjoy your Leo Bonard set in stone while I game happily.

Evidently, Leo Bonard didn’t do the HDMI ports trick on this set.

underwing: you re explained it (I’m gonna ignore the last part of your post) in the first part of your post and they will probably get it this time, because it’s more explicative. I don’t care about explaining something that should be natural to any individual with two fingers of brain. Or at least, someone who has played for years on GGPO/Supercade and knows exactly how much 0, 1 and 2 frames -feel- and -look- like.

I also want to add that, with a low latency device (DS4, computer keyboard with PS/2 port), with my finger as vertical as possible above the button or key, try to press and let go of it as quickly as I can so I don’t concentrate of that; instead, I concentrate on the time it takes for stuff to happen on the screen. It’s simple, the difference between instant reaction (which I know) and the time it actually happens at is the delay there is, combine that with knowning how much 0, 1 and 2 frames are and I’m doing a good approximate measurement. This is all, I repeat, WITH THE HDMI PORTS TRICK WHICH LOWERS DELAY EVEN FURTHER.

Believe in yourselves… not on damn machines and the internet.

1099

I think it gotten worst.

1100

just a quick question, do rear projection TVs have good latency? I just assumed they would be because its all analog (and how the old arcade machines ran) but maybe these new flatscreen HDMI tvs have better technology to reduce the delay somehow further. i dont need massive details, thanks!