Then what actually is the purpose for the hdmi port is it just to get the best quality possible?
Pretty much.
I don’t own a 360. But for the PS3 I use HDMI for normal gaming and watching Blu-ray, and switch to VGA (via HDFury2) whenever I play fighting games.
sorry if this is a stupid question but can you plug a vga cable into a hdmi porty because I looked at the back of the tv and there is no VGA port :sad:
Are you sure your TV has no VGA port? Sometimes manufacturers like to call them ‘PC input’
Yup I am sure but this isn’t my normal tv (forgot to mention that is doesn’t even have a game mode or anything to that effect) I use but I will be going back to my old hdtv with the input in a couple weeks though some people say is makes game look a little washed out is this true if you connect it into a tv and is it true the max output it can go to is 720p? So if anybody has any idea or advice on the best thing to do I will try it. Thanks.
So I’ve managed to read a lil’over half of the thread and wondered if anyone’s gone with the “Commercial grade HDTV” those TVs used for digital signage and so on. Any comments on their satisfied purchase?
I want to buy a FullHD TV but this input lag issue is killing me T-T
I read the entire faq and few other pages too (including the avsforum links that was posted here), but more I read, more I get confused.
So, sorry if I’m asking something stupid… So, here’s the deal:
I own a PS3 and a Xbox360. My primary concern is about the PS3, since I play every fighting game there (SFIV, Soul Calibur, HD remix and waiting for MVC2 and Blazblue) except the PS2 ones. I know that the input lag happens because of the downscaling and upscaling of the image, right? But since PS3 has its own internal setup (you configure what type of cable you’re using, if your tv native image is 4:3 or 16:9 and etc), I wonder if I’m going to be safe just by configuring everything correctly or there’s still a possibility of having a postprocessing lag? Man, I’m going to dream with this stuff tonight…
Guess I need to read more too.
RESPONSE TIME HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH LAG. read the 1st post.
To be fair, what Deviljin saying is sort of correct, even if he doesn’t intend it. 15ms response time IS too slow for gaming, after 8ms you really start to notice ghosting and what not. :tdown:
Not that most consumer grade TVs are ever slower than 8ms response time anymore anyway.
OK, so myself and a friend did a bit of testing tonight on our two LCD monitors. Partially to test them, and partially to figure out how reliable the Rock Band 2 test is.
Why the Rock Band 2 test?
In events like Evo it’s fine to test one monitor and just be done with it, since they are buying them outright. Our Ranbats run a little differently though, with people volunteering their own displays when they can. We need something we can plug straight in, test it and be done with it in less than 10 minutes when it’s on the day and there isn’t time to stuff around.
For our testing we used two different 1080p monitors.
-Asus VH226H: My friend wanted the Evo monitor for testing purposes but it was too expensive to import and you can’t buy it locally, so he ended up importing the cheaper version. Still cost like approx $300AU. :s
-Acer P244W: My own monitor. I bought it at the end of last year or there abouts.
Camera tests:
We did some side by side photo shots with each monitor at both 1080p and 720p res cloned with an old 21’ IBM Aptiva CRT. This was probably the weakest part of our testing, with neither of us being photographers. 
About half our photos came out with CRT/LCD being the same milliseconds. The other half were either unreadable or the CRT would be 15-16 milliseconds in front. From what I understand from Ponder and Halvie’s testing in the Evo thread, some of this may be due to vertical refresh. Our stumbling block was camera shutter speed. If we tried to turn it up any higher than 1/200 the CRT became unreadable, and we lose a lot of results to this.
We weren’t very scientific with this, we didn’t record down exact numbers because we weren’t satisfied with the cameras results, but the results didn’t vary greatly between either screen. Either:
a) The VH226H isn’t quite as great as the slightly larger Evo cousin.
b) Our results our inconsistant because we suck with a camera (I’m hoping this).
Rock Band 2 tests:
Afterward we did Rock Band 2 tests. These are a tad more interesting. I should note that we can’t test the native res this way with the PS3, since RB2 won’t display that high. 360 people might have more luck.
VH226H:
-720p Average of 9ms after 5 tests. Variance was only 1ms.
-480p Average of 11ms after 5 tests. Variance was only 1ms also.
P244W:
-720p Average of 12ms after 5 tests. Variance was about 2ms.
-480p Average of 15ms after 5 tests. Variance also of about 2ms.
If I were to assume that the VH226H was the same display as the VH236H where it counts, then I would have to assume that the game is taking the 15-16ms ‘outliers’ into the equation and bumping up the reading. It shouldn’t do this, but hey… no one ever said that it was a perfect technology. To prove that point, I tested the lag test on a CRT TV in 480p and ended up with some strange results:
0, 1, 0, 17, 13, 12, 15, 9, 15…
I actually wonder if CRT is too bright for the sensor or something.
The good thing is, if my hypothesis was correct and this was true, I’d be able to tick off screens that average about 10ms in RB2 as being ‘lagless’ (Evo having a reputable standard really helps here). A few TN panels I’ve tried prior to this average of get fairly close to the 10ms mark, so the green dragon of lagless displays isn’t so mystical anymore. Again, this is based purely on an assumption.
Here are a couple of things that would further help us ‘science’ this out.
-If somebody could do the same RB2 tests on the VH236H (Evo) display. If you have the 360 version, please set your monitor output to 720p. You require the RB2 game and RB2 guitar to do this, none of the other guitars have the sensor.
-Someone with experience with this recommend us acceptable shutter speed settings. 1/200 to us felt not good enough, and yet the CRT was barely readable often. Do people use cameras with some sort of gain/brightness setting to overcome this at higher shutter speeds?
So I have the new Sony KDL-32XBR9 with a ps3 hooked up to it via hdmi only. I did the calibration test with guitar hero IV and got response times from 0 - 10ms constantly. do these results suggest anything? or should i only trust rockband2 results? trying to figure out if its worth the trouble to find a copy of RB2 and do more tests
The RB2 one is probably a little better for consistency purposes, but even that never gets the same results and has to be averaged out. Think of it like a drumming machine compared to a human drummer, a machine isn’t likely to be ‘out of time.’ Someone else could do the tests with a different sense of timing and it could be better or worse. Sounds like you’ve got a good display though.
The upside to doing tests by eye, is because you are going by what you see, where as I’m not entirely satisfied with the results that rock bands sensor.
Thats a 120htz display? Could you do a few tests in that mode and see what sort of results you get? If you can have this and ‘game mode’ activated anyway. A lot of people have been asking about whether it introduces lag or not.
Zanken, did you use a chronometer to compare the ms results?
I’m probably going to do what this website is recommending (http://hdtvlag.googlepages.com/ourtest), because I see no other way but testing this stuff on a store by myself…
Or, if someone has some concrete info about this HDTV, I will be glad to know about it. Model: LG 47LG70YD
Yeah we did, that’s how I got the measurements in the previous post. It was obvious that we were getting less than one frame of lag (as RB2 reported), but figuring out by how much was difficult. Ponders assumption that vertical sync is an issue that will affect results is a big X factor in all this, which is why I really badly want to somebody to test the VH236H a few times on RB2.
I skimmed through the post, but didn’t see anything about this so here goes:
Ive heard great things about the D64U Sharp Aquos when it comes to lag. Anyone done any lag tests for D65U Sharp Aquos (im looking at the 46")? Are they about the same as the D64U? Or for that fact anyone done lag tests on the D85U? I could spend 100$ more for the D85U 120Hz display and 10bit panel vs. the D65U, but I’m most worried about delay for gaming (the 120Hz gonna be a problem or does it adjust it to 60 Hz in gaming mode?). Thanks.
The official Evo display (Asus 23" VH236h) is back on sale @ newegg for $180.
If you’re not a lazy ass and mail in the rebate, you’ll get an extra $20 off.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824236059&Tpk=asus%20vh236h
Yes my tv is 120hz. I couldn’t figure out if i can change the refresh rate so I’m assuming it’s running at 120hz. I tried turning on game mode and found that it did not affect the response times from the GH calibration test… mostly 0-7ms (on and off 5 trials each). Even my gf was getting these times. is it safe to assume this tv gives little to no lag?
just got it :lovin: many thanks good sir. Sure i have like 20 bucks left in the bank but this is the only time I’ll be able to afford the monitor lol
I haven’t actually tried the manual tests, but it sounds like you’ve gotten yourself a good display.
Just curious what peoples thoughts are on this http://www.cablesandkits.com/hdmi-dvid-cable-gold-plated-connectors-p-3368.html
I have an Xbox Elite so it has hdmi port on it and a syncmaster 2232gw , was wondering if the cable would make a diffrence at all in regards to the lag. I wonder if it would be higher delay still compared to what i currently have.
Im really trying to get my games to look a bit better since im currently using the MS Vga Cable atm which runs in analog but still looks good. So far the lag with the VGA is very damn good and almost non existent but was wondering if I could use the DVI-D port instead, thanks for anyone who can answer that for me.