Gonna buy a new monitor and I need to know if 5ms response time in a computer monitor is short enough that I wont be effected when playing first person shooters like modern warfare 3?
I personally went from 3ms screen to 5ms grey-to-grey and my eyes hurt from the blur. Sometimes you don't get "ghosting" per say, but you see how screen becomes "out of focus" and that will really hurt the eyes. Don't believe people who say 5ms or 6ms is good. Get 2ms if you can.
For? 5ms is fine for most things. So is 25ms if you're just doing photoshop. If you're gaming, look for input lag. It's a lot larger than response time. Eg. 16ms input lag is rather standard for an LCD monitor. 8ms and under is good. 32ms and over is entering the bad zone. Much bigger numbers, pretty much dwarfing the 2ms or 5ms response time figures. -scheherazade
Im on 6ms on a Dell u2710 27inch IPS,some people will say that they prefer 2ms and it gives you a massive advantage in fps games.I disagree,i have owned both 2ms and 6ms as i said,i still do very well in games like BF3 when i play them wether on 2ms or 6ms,we are talking milliseconds remember not seconds,if it really bothers you get yourself a crt monitor with 0ms response time.
'DVI single link' and 'HDMI' are equivalent video-wise (same technology, differently shaped connector, one also has extra wires for audio). DVI dual link will go higher resolution (than DVI single link or HDMI) at 60hz, or same resolution at 120hz. Very high resolutions with single-link DVI (or hdmi) will have a reduced refresh rate (below 60hz). Generally, if you are getting something so high rez that it could max out hdmi, it most likely has a dual-link-dvi connector available on it to use. Basically, it's not an issue. (Unless it's a 3D monitor at 1080p+ using only HDMI... those suck balls as they're capped at 24hz by hdmi spec) -scheherazade
That is a bogus statement based only on your opinion. Personal preference and perception plays a huge part in determining what is acceptable. What one persons thinks is good enough for them may or may not be what another considers good enough or not. As to the OP, shop around for monitors that you might be considering and then look for reviews and ask for opinions from others that are using or have used the models you are considering. Don't get too hung up on the various numbers thrown around as most of them are inaccurate anyways.
Considering that statement is my own personal opinion, it's not a bogus statement. If I was to say that was your opinion, which it isn't, it would be a bogus statement. I wouldn't recommend buying a monitor online without ever seeing it in the store first. You play around with them at the stands, see what's acceptable and then make your decision.
LOL! i agree there. ive got a Panasonic 37inch IPS panel with a 6-10ms response time and it doesnt slow me down in FPS games at all. if anything, the extra screen real estate makes those tiny far away players look bigger. the only issue really lies with trying to buy a TV for a PC. some have notably more input lag. i agree there. before i bought my 37inch IPS panel for my PC, i brought in my whole rig. some people laughed when they saw me setting it all up, but then they were awed by how much better games look on PC compared to consoles. although for most people this isnt practical, a simpler way would be to bring in a laptop with a rhythm game.
IMO if you want a lcd monitor with less/nearzero input lag for fps games, and when i say fps i also say beat'em'ups online or even offline or another timing/precision demanding game, you should do some research. I spent some time in the avs forums to choose a lcd TV 42" with an acceptable amount input lag, i realized that was almost impossible to buy one lcd tv with that screen size with 0 input lag or even less than 15ms Or at least one mainstream tv (samsung/lg/phillips/etc) with that property and not ofc one professional lcd panel like hospitals/airports/wtv usually use with hdmi ports, those are really expensive. For a pc monitor luckly nowdays its kinda easier to buy one like that, and even most mainstream pc monitors have have a low input lag (10 to 20ms) (and btw input lag its dif from responde time) input lag doesnt normally come listed in the monitor/tv specs response time does. a monitor with 5ms response time can have like 30ms input lag for example. The more post processing the pcmonitor/tv uses the more lag it causes Some samsung TVs can reach 100ms with every eyecandy On and that's more than enough to piss off some beat'em'up players in a offline tournament, or even boycott the entire tournament (true story). (online, adding ping, its ofc unplayable) If you REALLY want a gaming pc monitor with 0 input lag there some brands outhere like ASUS and benQ (those i know for sure) that make some really good hardcore gaming monitors. if you search in google something like "benQ monitor xx input lag test" some ppl usually make the input lag test using a crt monitor (those have 0) plus the lcd they are testing and post pics IMO, you should only buy one of these IF YOU REALLY REALLY want/need one! Else just go to the store and choose one mainstream PC monitor, usually are great, 10 to 20ms lag its acceptable
Im still confused about dvi and hdmi. I want a monitor that can accept both so i can switch between my pc with dvi, and my ps3 with hdmi. Should I look for a monitor with both of those inputs; or buy an hdmi to dvi adapter; or buy an hdmi to dvi cable (if those even exist)? (edit): These are the specs display specs for the GTX 570. x1 Mini-hdmi x2 Dual-Link DVI The website does not say if it is DVI-D or DVI-I.
They say HDMI and DVI regarding video output are basically the same and using a DVI > HDMI adapter should not cause a problem at all. The video output its digital in both. I never tried tough. If you buy a monitor with both entrances you will probably only spare some time switching cables and do the switching in the menu. They are usually more expensive ofc, my LG 22" costed 50€ more 2 years ago because of that. Its you choice, but the video quality should be the same in both cases. And ofc you will need a dif audio output bcause most monitors even with hdmi input dont have speakers Just connect the PS3 to the audio input on the PC or use headphones or something
That only matters if you have an old VGA monitor, DVI-I outputs both vga (analog) and DVI (digital) video and ofc needs that specific cable for that task. If you want to connect a DVI monitor in a DVI-I/DVI-D port just use a regular DVI cable. DVI-D its just plain DVI digital output.
So if I have a graphics card that outpus dual link dvi-i, I can connect it to a monitor with an input of dvi-d like this one http://usa.asus.com/Display/LCD_Monitors/VE248HLTAA/#specifications ?
Yep no problem at all you dont even need to bother wich port you will choose on the card, just use a regular DVI cable.
3 ms is insufficient but max 0.2 ms or less time(=faster response) is good! Plasma TV (not monitor) with response time 0.001 ms is recommended for gaming/multimedia-video. do you want to buy it? NOTE: OLED monitor will be better gaming but only in 1 or 2 next year(s) but unfortunately, 1st OLED monitor will be (very) expensive.
you sure those plasma tvs don't have the same input latency as the lcds? or at least very close, i don't think that is the real responce time since when the signal reaches the tv until it is displayed on the screen
