Because if it’s 17ms then it’s not sub 1 frame, but if it’s 16ms, then it’s 0 frames, am I wrong? What I’m worrying here is not being 1 frame late.
@Tensho: wow, those are good, I wonder why they arent on inputlag database. According to the database the results they show is input lag + response time. How do we know what’s the response time of these models?
It’s not like it being at 16ms = 0 frames input lag, and 16.7ms = 1 frame input lag. It’s not an off/on switch.
16ms is still 95.8% of a frame. Not trying to be too patronizing here, but do you honestly think you can tell the difference between ~96% and 100% of a single frame @ 60FPS?
Frames don’t start on 0, you always have the first frame. That’s why having a single frame of lag is the best you can hope for. 17 ms is nothing to worry about vs 16. If you feel it’s a problem, then look for another TV.
Also, for games that target 30 fps, then you are still under a single frame even at 2 frames of lag. Many console games play at 30 fps.
That’s very pleasing to know. I guess I’ll just go for a big screen then :D. I guess I should go for this one then http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/kdl42w705b-201402233639.htm … however how can I know if the response time is good too?
Those times are impressive, but annoyingly I don’t see 40/42" Sony TV’s listed anywhere. I only ever see the 40" W600B, which has about 30ms of lag. Are the other ones in that size range just not on the market yet?
Hi, I’m planning to buy a new 22-24 inch low input lag monitor, and I was wondering, which monitor on this thread’s list is the best looking monitor that I can get for under $250? I was gonna buy an EVO monitor, but I heard that the picture quality is really bad on it. The quality doesn’t have to be perfect, but I don’t want to end up with a 1080p monitor that is bad enough to look worse than a decent 720p or 900p monitor, like the 900p ASUS VW195N I currently have. I plan to do a mixture of playing new big budget games and speedrunning older games, so I was looking for a good balance between low input lag and decent picture quality.
Sorry for my misunderstanding but I’m not experienced with this tech stuff. I’m looking for a 23/24ish tv for my Playstation 3 and my laptop, and I think the Dell in the front page is good? says 8ms, I think if its sub 16ms its fine?
Thanks in advance for help!
Hey Guys! I’m thinking about buying the Asus MX279H Monitor! It’s input lag data on displaylag.com is excellent (9ms). Can you suggest that monitor (picture quality etc) or would you suggest a similar one? 
I have the sony 47 inch wich has 17ms of lag. It feels great and I own the old evo monitor.
@querschnitt
I ordered that monitor and its being delivered tomorrow, so I can tell you if its good or not.
Did it arrive hecz? =x
Yep its huge and no lag. The only downside is the brightness. Blacks look gray but maybe can be fixed with the settings. Totally recommend it.
I really appreciate the info in this thread. I just bought an asus monitor with 10 ms of lag and it doesn’t seem to be noticeably different from the crt I have been using. I’m just glad I’m not using the vizio I had a while back. I suppose you can play with lag, but for an old guy like me (used to crt arcade cabinets) 2-4 frames of lag feels really off especially with third strike.
I am also looking into buying an ASUS MX279H and I have some questions regarding ASUS’s overdriving function (Trace Free), if anyone can help.
By setting the monitor to game mode, does the Trace Free setting change on its own to another value?
If it doesn’t, is there any recommended TF setting for the mx279h that is preferable for gaming?
And finally, considering DisplayLag’s lag tester uses combined input lag and response time, should I assume the website’s lag result is based on the default TF setting in game mode?
I’d appreciate answers to any of these questions. Thanks!
Trace free just minimizes the motion blur you see, doesn’t affect the input lag in any way
Well, I’ve read some posts in this thread saying the Trace Free setting affects response time, and considering response time is one of the two factors tested by the lag tester (the other being the input lag proper), couldn’t it affect the end result?
Response time =/= input lag, so no changing trace free settings will not alter your input lag, changing options that turn on processing things like dynamic contrast etc will
Yeah, I know that. I’m talking about DisplayLag’s results.
From a link I’ve provided earlier:
So, if TF does affect response time, wouldn’t the tester’s result vary according to the setting? That’s what I want to know.
With the Bodnar tester you will probably see a 1-2ms difference with TF on 0 and 100(both settings you wouldn’t want to use anyway because ones fuzzy and one looks horrible)
That’s why in Displaylag.com they use 60 or high or whatever is the standard setting.
A lot of stuff also affect the Bodnar, you can test a monitor right when you turn it on and test again in an hour and it will have slightly different input lag, it’s still accurate with our crappy LCD technology, just shoot for a good low input lag monitor and that’s as good as it gets unless you go CRT.
I see. Thank you for the answer!