lcd panel input lag pricelist

When you"re using a monitor, you want your actions to appear on the screen almost instantly, whether you"re typing, clicking through websites, or gaming. If you have high input lag, you"ll notice a delay from the time you type something on your keyboard or when you move your mouse to when it appears on the screen, and this can make the monitor almost unusable.

For gamers, low input lag is even more important because it can be the difference between winning and losing in games. A monitor"s input lag isn"t the only factor in the total amount of input lag because there"s also delay caused by your keyboard/mouse, PC, and internet connection. However, having a monitor with low input lag is one of the first steps in ensuring you get a responsive gaming experience.

Any monitor adds at least a few milliseconds of input lag, but most of the time, it"s small enough that you won"t notice it at all. There are some cases where the input lag increases so much to the point where it becomes noticeable, but that"s very rare and may not necessarily only be caused by the monitor. Your peripherals, like keyboards and mice, add more latency than the monitor, so if you notice any delay, it"s likely because of those and not your screen.

There"s no definitive amount of input lag when people will start noticing it because everyone is different. A good estimate of around 30 ms is when it starts to become noticeable, but even a delay of 20 ms can be problematic for reaction-based games. You can try this tool that adds lag to simulate the difference between high and low input lag. You can use it to estimate how much input lag bothers you, but keep in mind this tool is relative and adds lag to the latency you already have.

There are three main reasons why there"s input lag during computer use, and it isn"t just the monitor that has input lag. There"s the acquisition of the image, the processing, and finally actually displaying it.

The acquisition of the image has to do with the source and not with the monitor. The more time it takes for the monitor to receive the source image, the more input lag there"ll be. This has never really been an issue with PCs since previous analog signals were virtually instant, and current digital interfaces like DisplayPort and HDMI have next to no inherent latency. However, some devices like wireless mice or keyboards may add delay. Bluetooth connections especially add latency, so if you want the lowest latency possible in the video acquisition phase, you should use a wired mouse or keyboard or get something wireless with very low latency.

The time this step takes is affected by the speed of the video processor and the total amount of processing. Although you can"t control the processor speed, you can control how many operations it needs to do by enabling and disabling settings. Most picture settings won"t affect the input lag, and monitors rarely have any image processing, which is why the input lag on monitors tends to be lower than on TVs. One of these settings that could add delay is variable refresh rate, but most modern monitors are good enough that the lag doesn"t increase much.

Once the monitor has processed the image, it"s ready to be displayed on the screen. This is the step where the video processor sends the image to the screen. The screen can"t change its state instantly, and there"s a slight delay from when the image is done processing to when it appears on screen. Our input lag measurements consider when the image first appears on the screen and not the time it takes for the image to fully appear (which has to do with our Response Time measurements). Overall, the time it takes to display the image has a big impact on the total input lag.

For PC monitors and smart TVs, speed largely comes down to pixel response and input lag. They’re both measured in milliseconds, and they’re at least a little interrelated – but they’re not the same thing at all.

As for input lag, that’s a measure of the delay between signal output from a source device, such as a games console, set top box or PC, and the video image being shown on the display. And it’s all about feel. Does the screen respond quickly to your control inputs in a game? If it does, it has low lag or latency. If there’s a noticeable delay between wiggling a mouse or control pad and on-screen movement, then it probably suffers from significant lag.

Anyway, response and lag don’t apply in quite the same way to all display and panel types, be that OLED vs LCD or TVs and PC monitors (note that TVs and other screens marketed as ‘LED’ are typically LCD panels with LED backlights, not actually LED panels).

Shown on a graph, the pixel response of an LCD panel follows an ‘S’ curve, with a slightly sluggish immediate response, followed by that rapid middle phase, before response tails off dramatically towards the end of the transition. The net result is the time taken to fully transition from one color to another can be dramatically longer than the quoted GtG response.

In theory, MPRT response is a direct function of refresh rate. So, a refresh rate of 1000Hz is required to achieve a 1ms MPRT pixel response. However, mitigating measures including black-frame insertion or strobing backlights can improve MPRT response to below the refresh rate of the panel and to the point where it’s typically faster than a screen’s GtG response, at least in terms of quoted specifications.

The fastest current LCD panels are quoted at 1ms for GtG response and 0.5ms for MPRT response. But independent testing shows a whole different ballgame. Sources including Rtings.com and Linus Tech Tips peg full-transition pixel response from speedy OLED sets like LG C1 and CX panels at around two to three milliseconds, with the bulk of the transition (and thus the GtG equivalent performance) completed in a fraction of a millisecond.

Results for LCD technology vary a little more, probably due to methodology. But the best case scenario for an ultra-fast-IPS LCD monitor, such as the Asus ROG Swift 360Hz PG259QN, by comparison, is around 3ms for the bulk of the transition and 6ms for the full color change while other results push those two metrics out to 6ms and 10ms or more respectively. Either way, OLED is clearly faster.

The refresh rate of a screen puts a hard limit on the minimum latency or input lag it can achieve. To put some numbers on that, most mainstream monitors and TVs refresh at 60Hz or once every 16.67ms. Increase the refresh rate to 120Hz and the screen updates every 8.33ms.

Now, 16.67ms might not sound like a long time to wait – but should the screen require any time at all to process the signal, that latency will only increase, as those 16.67ms are also just the latency generated by your display. A PC or games console needs time to process a control input, feed it through the game engine and kick out frames in response. It all adds up.

Happily, some TVs now offer a dedicated low-latency game mode with minimal processing. Such TVs tend to be comparable to monitors running at the same refresh rate in terms of lag. The LG C1 OLED TV has been measured as low as 5ms at 120Hz. Intriguingly, running outside of game mode, the C1 is tragically slow at nearly 90ms, which neatly demonstrates just how much impact image processing can have.

In terms of refresh rate, the fastest current PC monitors can hit 360Hz, while the highest refresh TV sets accept an input signal of 120Hz. Some TVs have higher internal refresh rates of 240Hz or more, but in terms of latency or input lag, it’s the signal refresh from the source device that matters.

Long story short, the fastest OLED TVs deliver as little as 5ms of lag, while the quickest PC monitors including the aforementioned Asus panel along with other 360Hz monitors such as the Alienware AW2521H have been clocked at well under 2ms. So while OLED wins out on pixel response, certain LCD monitors have an advantage with input lag.

Apart from the differences discussed between GtG response and MPRT, IPS and VA panel types tend not to be entirely comparable. By that we mean that the subjective experience of a 1ms IPS panel is usually that little bit crisper, clearer and cleaner in terms of response than a VA panel. IPS, in short, tends to be faster.

What’s more, pretty much all gaming monitors offer user-configurable overdrive which can accelerate response but also introduce unwanted image quality issues such as overshoot and inverse ghosting. All those caveats aside, the latest 1ms IPS panels deliver the best performance with very low levels of blur, while 1ms VA monitors are just a little behind. The next rung down and probably the slowest you should consider for gaming is 4ms. Depending on the monitor in question, the panel type and the settings used, such screens may not differ that greatly in terms of the subjective experience. But the worst of them will have noticeably more blur than a 1ms display.

Beyond that, you’re into 7ms and beyond territory. On paper, that ought to be fine. But as we’ve seen, even the fastest LCD panels rated at 1ms can be measured at 10 times that long for real-world response. So quoted specifications should be viewed more as a tool with which to categorize screens than set expectations for actual performance.

But what of lag or latency? Most gamers will find a PC monitor with 144Hz refresh offers no noticeable lag and feels seriously slick and super quick. For really competitive esports competition there are small gains to be had from 240Hz and 360Hz displays. But for us? We’d be very happy with either a 120Hz OLED TV or a 144Hz 1ms monitor.Just want a good low-lag screen? Check out the best gaming monitors and best 120Hz TVsToday"s best gaming monitors and 120Hz TVs

As time has gone on, with the older technologies, it has gotten easier to make larger panels that don"t have problems, but now we are seeing newer technologies that raise the difficulty again.

Two years ago, the cost of a 23 inch panel was MUCH higher than it is today, and you are seeing displays that could not do 1080p going away. So, now that 1080p is the norm for flat panel displays, the question is when better displays will become the norm on the desktop.

Owning uber powerful computers is one thing, but experiencing the power is another. Having more than half a dozen computers at home, it"s kind of interesting how my main machine is not paired up with an incredible display setup. That said, I don"t think it ever sucked. Seven years ago, I became a proud owner of a 17" NEC LCD1712 LCD monitor -- that was the days when CRT monitors were the most common, and everyone who actually had an LCD was 15". Three years later, I purchased a 20" Dell 2005FPW when it was on sale. That was the time when most people only had a 17" or 19" -- a 20" widescreen was uncommon -- not to mention the beautiful 8-bit S-IPS panel. Two and a half years later, the monitor died. I called up Dell and I was immediately sent a replacement. Interestingly, they got me a Dell 2007FP; which was a standard aspect 20" monitor. Because it has larger surface area, I decided to keep it. At the meantime, thanks to the cross-ship replacement, I hooked up both screens to my computer temporarily for the weekend and was immediately addicted to the benefits of dual monitors. Wanting the best of both worlds, I purchased a widescreen 20" monitor as a secondary unit after I returned my Dell 2005FPW, and I bought a pretty cheap one with a 6-bit TN panel because I thought I could not tell the difference much. I wasn"t too satisfied at the end, to be honest. Getting used to wide viewing angles and nice colors by 8-bit units, and the TN panel used simultaneously with my S-PVA Dell 2007FP, along with the lack of height adjustable stands, I knew I would not keep it for all too long. I was right.

So, I went monitor-shopping online. I wanted something that would match my Dell 2007FP, would be larger than anything I"ve owned before, but would still fit on my desk. After some research, I found the one I wanted. That"s the Dell 2408WFP. With tons of inputs, S-PVA panel with greater than 100% NTSC color gamut, height adjustable stand, etc... Generally speaking; you name it, it has it. With similar display height as my Dell 2007FP and identical vertical resolution, I found my computer setup in my room to be more perfect than ever. Some research online indicates that the 2408WFP has "input lag" issues, but most reports indicate that it is "not significant" in reality. Yes, some benchmarks measure it to be up to and around 50ms, but how does that ACTUALLY affect the end user?

Believe it or not, I am not a gamer anyways, and when the Dell 2408WFP became on sale one afternoon for one of the lowest listed prices from their site, I took the plunge and took out my credit card. The monitor came a week later. But how about input lag? Some people went as far as saying that their mouse pointer moved significantly slower than it appears on screen (!). Yeah? I"m curious as you are, so let"s investigate about the claimed issues of Dell 2408WFP"s input lag problems.

By the way, if you don"t know what a monitor"s input lag is, it is the delay between signal output of your graphics card to the time the image is actually displayed on screen. All electronic peripherals connected to your computer has a certain amount of lag; but usually undetectable by the end user unless split-second motions are measured -- such as, in this case, gaming. This has nothing to do with pixel response times, which is a completely different story.

My particular unit used in this article is a Dell 2408WFP Revision A01; reference monitor on the right is a Dell 2007FP with an S-PVA panel (There are S-IPS based Dell 2007FPs out there). A01 is the latest revision from Dell at press time.

Before we get on the relatively more objective aspects, let me tell you one thing: The Dell 2408WFP is certainly not a problem in office applications; I noticed zero input lag. I moved the mouse slowly along while staring closely at the screen and noticed no lag at all. Even in my gaming tests, I subjectively noticed no particular difference -- I don"t game, but if I did, I would pwn ;) and I still pwned as usual with this monitor :P

I ran across the second floor to the opposite side and turned around, shot the enemy a few times as I quickly reloaded during the interval. Take a look at the tip of the rifle and the nearest vertical wall. The Dell 2007FP shows that the player"s gun at this angle appears to be almost overlapping the adjacent wall, while the Dell 2408WFP is a little behind as it"s not quite to that spot yet. Remember though -- I was playing the game looking at the Dell 2408WFP, and did not feel any input lag.

Do you see the differences in the one above? Take a look closely at the green crosshair in relation the box behind it. The one on the right (Dell 2007FP) has less input lag than the Dell 2408WFP for sure, as the position is slightly different. Is that significant? At 100-200FPS that it"s running and considering I was moving pretty quickly, even at that stage, input lag is quite negligible.

Moving forward, the guy went out of my view and then returned with a backwards run. The head and the legs of the guy in relation to the wall blocking my view has no difference at first glance, but if you look really closely you can see more of the person with the Dell 2007FP; indicating that the Dell 2408WFP has a bit more input lag. The second reference can also be made to the radar map on the top left corner contrasted to the edge of the entrance. This is probably one of the most significant differences in my entire collection of comparison screenshots in this report.

Now let"s make my in-game movement really fast, to see how input lag goes in this scenario -- there"s nothing in the game of Counter-Strike: Source that you can normally do that exerts the power of gravity (That"s why surf maps are so fast!) -- but in this case I just jumped off the third floor of the map and let gravity accelerate me. To be honest with you, looking at the crosshair and mini-map/radar map reference, and the stuff on the side, it"s pretty close on both monitors.

Generally speaking, despite what some likes to claim with the Dell 2408WFP (Noticeable delay between physical mouse and cursor movement!?), I did not notice anything at all during my two weeks of everyday usage -- at least with my Revision A01 -- there are times that a maximum few frames difference in really, really quick gaming scenes compared to my Dell 2007FP monitor when I actually compare it with my camera. I don"t think I"ve heard much at all about people complaining about Dell 2007FP, so it should be a good reference monitor compared to "normal" LCD units. In real life usage, it"s unlikely that you will notice the difference compared to any other regular-performing LCD monitors, and as sure I didn"t either. Office work? Perfect. Gaming? Input lag is not really a problem at all, and I believe it"s safe to say 99% of all users won"t notice it either.

I took the plunge and put my hard earned money into the Dell 2408WFP, knowing that it "may" have issues with input lag, but thankfully it doesn"t. If you"re contemplating to buy this monitor because of input lag issues, it shouldn"t be a problem at all. 8-bit S-PVA 24" monitors are expensive, just make sure you aren"t running into credit problems when you buy it!

To compare the M27Q X’s performance, I had to go back in time a bit to find other QHD/240 Hz monitors. I’ve included Samsung’s 32-inch Odyssey G7, AOC’s PD27 and Asus’ PG279QM. At 165 Hz is BenQ’s EX3210R and Monoprice’s 43548. The comparison panels are a mix of IPS and VA technology.

For total control lag, the M27Q X scores in the top percentile of all gaming monitors. A 360 Hz display might shave off a millisecond or two, but the difference is miniscule. Since both cost about the same, the 240 Hz panel with greater resolution sounds like a winner. The Gigabyte is a great example of the genre.

When a monitor finishes last with a 25ms lag score, it means the other monitors are really good. 25ms is plenty quick enough for competition; the XG2431 certainly qualifies for professional play. But for the ultimate fragging tool, 360 Hz is the pinnacle of performance right now. And it will cost you almost twice as much. At the XG2431’s price, you get most of that quickness.

Input lag is the amount of time it takes for a display to process a button input while gaming. If you value your gaming experience, you want to avoid displays that exhibit high input lag, as it makes your gameplay feel sluggish and unresponsive. Our input lag database below will help you avoid laggy displays, as it is the world’s largest database for input lag data.

Stick to displays marked Excellent for the best user experience, as they provide the lowest input lag when set to Game Mode. All displays are tested at 60hz. Most displays of the same model number share nearly identical input lag across size ranges.

NVIDIA is on a mission to further improve the experience of competitive multiplayer games. NVIDIA Reflex is a new suite of GPU, G-Sync display, and software technologies that measure and reduce system latency in esports titles, with the end goal of allowing the PC and display to respond faster to your mouse and keyboard inputs and ultimately enabling you to hit your shots with greater accuracy.

If there"s one thing that players of competitive shooters are obsessed about, it"s input lag. We pick high refresh rate monitors and hardware that can maintain a high and consistent frame rate, while also scrutinising the response times of our monitors and nitpicking at settings like V-Sync and the now defunct maximum pre-rendered frames setting in the NVIDIA Control Panel.

But what exactly is input lag? Most of us understand it as the time it takes for you to see an action on your monitor after you"ve executed an action on your mouse or keyboard. According to NVIDIA however, that term is not entirely accurate since it can be applied to describe different pieces of system latency, be it your mouse, monitor, or even how long a game takes to process your inputs.

Then there"s the Reflex Latency Analyzer, a system latency measurement tool that will be incorporated into the new 360Hz G-Sync displays releasing soon from Acer, ASUS, MSI, and Dell. While the only way to accurately measure input lag now requires a tedious setup involving high-speed cameras and a modified mouse and LED, the new analyser can detect clicks from your mouse and measure the time it takes for the pixels to change on screen, vastly simplifying the entire process.

Taken together, NVIDIA says you can expect up to a 33 per cent improvement in PC responsiveness with Reflex, even on a mid-range card like the GeForce GTX 1660 Super. Lower latency can deliver gameplay improvements, such as fewer instances where your display lags behind the current state of the game engine and results in a missed shot. It also influences peeker"s advantage, and NVIDIA claims a lower system latency can potentially mitigate peeker"s advantage completely.

When most people go shopping for a gaming monitor, their primary concerns are resolution and refresh rate. Those are certainly important considerations, but if you’ve ever had to put up with dull colors, murky blacks or terrible viewing angles, you’ll understand that panel types are important too.

TN, or Twisted Nematic panels, are the oldest variety of LCD panels, but they’re still quite common even today. They’re cheap to produce, and they have very low input lag, which makes them appealing for gamers. They also support refresh rates of up to 240Hz, another plus for fast-paced environments.

The problem with TN panels is that they have very poor color reproduction. While modern TN panels are far better than earlier models, it’s still relatively rare to find a TN panel with close to full sRGB reproduction. Even if they do have good color reproduction when you’re looking at them straight on, their viewing angles are limited, and they look washed out when viewed from the sides.

If you’re on a budget, enjoy playing competitive shooters or strategy games where reaction times matter, a TN panel could be fine for you. But if you want something that doubles as a media player, the average TN monitor might disappoint.

Fortunately, our GFT27CXB monitor is far from “average.” We engineered our TN panel to do what most TN panels simply cannot: deliver stunningly accurate colors. And with its 99% sRGB gamut, colors are rich and vibrant. And it’s fully customizable, with space to store up to 3 unique user profiles. So you get amazing color. But you also get full HD resolution with lightning-fast speeds up to 240hz refresh rate and 1ms response times.

IPS, or In-Plane Switching, monitors are almost the exact opposite of TN panels. They offer much wider viewing angles than TN panels as well as better black reproduction. The trade-off is that they’re more expensive. They have a history of slower refresh rates, too, although that has been changing lately. Today’s IPS panels can reach max. refresh rates as high as 200-240Hz.

There are some IPS monitors with very good refresh rates and response times, but they’re on the pricier side. You can expect to pay more than $500 for an IPS monitor with a 1ms response time. If you’re looking for a more budget-friendly IPS monitor, then you’ll have to settle for response times of 4ms or slower. IPS panels are also prone to backlight issues. Color reproduction is better than on TN panels, even at extreme angles, but the backlight can sometimes be seen.

Our REAPER series monitor—starting with the RFI25CBA—has been designed to overcome this particular issue. It’s been engineered to reduce the amount of backlight bleed-through on its IPS panel. The monitor also features an MRPT Mode to produce extremely clear moving pictures with excellent color while significantly reducing backlight issues.

VA, or Vertical Alignment, panels are somewhere in between TN and IPS, offering the best of both worlds. This type of panel is common in TVs but is relatively uncommon for gaming monitors. TN panels offer very good contrast ratios, so you can expect vibrant colors and good color reproduction. They also offer good viewing angles, and while brightness may vary depending on the angle you’re looking at the screen from, they’re not susceptible to the backlight issues of IPS panels.

The downside of VA panels is that they have slower response times. As with IPS panels, newer models do have high refresh rates, but the slow response time means you may see ghosting or motion blur in fast-paced, competitive games. Fortunately, all VIOTEK monitors come with AdaptiveSync, which works with AMD® FreeSync® and NVIDIA® G-Sync™ technologies. AdaptiveSync eliminates image distortion (e.g., tearing, stuttering, ghosting and judder) and other glitches that can happen if the monitor’s refresh rate doesn’t match the frame rate of the computer’s GPU. The result is smoother action with clearer images.

There are benefits and downsides to each panel type, and there’s no one correct answer to the question of “which is best.” It depends on your budget, the type of games you enjoy playing, whether you prize response times over other features, and what else you do with the monitor.

If you’re a competitive gamer who wants the absolute best response time on a budget, TN panels will get the job done, but they may disappoint when you’re playing a heavily modded game of Skyrim and want to stop and enjoy the scenery. IPS panels can deliver a similar experience if you’re willing to spend a lot of money. But if you’re like most of us, you’d rather put that extra cash towards a slightly better GPU.

Looking for something with a little more power? The GNV32CBO or GFV24CB are two 1080p monitors. These offer super-fast 165Hz refresh rates for pro-motion with reduced input lag. They’re also VA panels, delivering great color reproduction, AMD FreeSync to reduce image ghosting, and other game-friendly features.