Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

4ms LCD Monitors

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
a b C Monitor
March 18, 2005 2:21:52 AM

Archived from groups: nz.comp,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

ViewSonic on Wednesday announced what the company is billing as the world's
fastest 17-and 19-inch LCD monitors.

The new products, the 19-inch Xtreme VX924 and the 17-inch Xtreme VX724,
feature an eight to ten times improvement in the average gray-to-gray response
of 4 milliseconds, the company said.




http://www.crn.com/sections/breakingnews/breakingnews.j...;jsessionid=NQTFZ2U34YGTAQSNDBGCKH0CJUMEKJVN?articleId=159901151

More about : 4ms lcd monitors

March 18, 2005 2:21:53 AM

Archived from groups: nz.comp,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Just ignore Woger. He gets a bit mixed up and reports his own thoughts
as facts. Hes a well known troll on the NZ groups and you'll be best
advised to take anything he posts with a grain of salt.
Anonymous
a b C Monitor
March 18, 2005 3:57:23 AM

Archived from groups: nz.comp,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

BILL wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 21:22:29 GMT, MarkH <markat@atdot.dot.dot> wrote:
>
> >Nicholas Sherlock <n_sherlock@hotmail.com> wrote in
> >news:D 1cijb$cpg$1@lust.ihug.co.nz:
> >
> >> BILL bs.xxxxxxxxxx.corn wrote:
> >>> ViewSonic on Wednesday announced what the company is billing as
the
> >>> world's fastest 17-and 19-inch LCD monitors.
> >>>
> >>> The new products, the 19-inch Xtreme VX924 and the 17-inch Xtreme
> >>> VX724, feature an eight to ten times improvement in the average
> >>> gray-to-gray response of 4 milliseconds, the company said.
> >>
> >> Gray-to-gray? I thought response time was measured by
white<->black..?
> >
> >You should read the article, rather than rely on Roger's summation.
The
> >monitor has a 5ms white-black response time, but Viewsonic claim the
4ms
> >time to change a shade is a big leap forward for gaming (where shade

> >changes are more common then compete colour changes).
>
>
> Are you mentally sick or some thing as I never posted my summation.

I must be mentally sick too, because your post doesn't make it clear
that you're quoting anyone. It looks like you are summarising the
article you link to.
Related resources
Anonymous
a b C Monitor
March 18, 2005 10:34:04 AM

Archived from groups: nz.comp,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

BILL bs.xxxxxxxxxx.corn wrote:
> ViewSonic on Wednesday announced what the company is billing as the world's
> fastest 17-and 19-inch LCD monitors.
>
> The new products, the 19-inch Xtreme VX924 and the 17-inch Xtreme VX724,
> feature an eight to ten times improvement in the average gray-to-gray response
> of 4 milliseconds, the company said.

Gray-to-gray? I thought response time was measured by white<->black..?

Cheers,
Nicholas Sherlock
March 18, 2005 10:34:05 AM

Archived from groups: nz.comp,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Nicholas Sherlock <n_sherlock@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:D 1cijb$cpg$1@lust.ihug.co.nz:

> BILL bs.xxxxxxxxxx.corn wrote:
>> ViewSonic on Wednesday announced what the company is billing as the
>> world's fastest 17-and 19-inch LCD monitors.
>>
>> The new products, the 19-inch Xtreme VX924 and the 17-inch Xtreme
>> VX724, feature an eight to ten times improvement in the average
>> gray-to-gray response of 4 milliseconds, the company said.
>
> Gray-to-gray? I thought response time was measured by white<->black..?

You should read the article, rather than rely on Roger's summation. The
monitor has a 5ms white-black response time, but Viewsonic claim the 4ms
time to change a shade is a big leap forward for gaming (where shade
changes are more common then compete colour changes).



--
Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
See my pics at www.gigatech.co.nz (last updated 20-Jan-05)
"There are 10 types of people, those that
understand binary and those that don't"
Anonymous
a b C Monitor
March 18, 2005 12:03:39 PM

Archived from groups: nz.comp,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 07:34:04 +1300, Nicholas Sherlock
<n_sherlock@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Gray-to-gray? I thought response time was measured by white<->black..?

Only because the white-to-black response time makes LCD monitors sound
a lot better than they are.

(bad explaination)LCD devices are made of crystals that rotate when
voltage is applied to them. When you go from black-to-white, you go
from 0volts to 5volts (or whatever voltage that the LCDs run on.)
With 5 volts pushing them, the crystals rotate quickly. In a
grey-to-grey change(or a light blue-to-dark blue, or whatever.
Grey-to-grey is shorthand for any change that isn't as 'extreme' as
black to white), though, you may be going from 3volts to 3.5 volts.
In that case, you only have 0.5volts 'pushing' the crystals, so they
rotate to their new position slower than in a black-to-white
change.(/bad explaination)

This is the reason why LCD monitors are still pretty bad for gaming,
even though the claimed response times have improved dramatically.
They work great for browsing the web or working in Word because -
surprise, surprise - that's generally black text on a white
background, exactly what LCDs are good at, while gaming uses
grey-to-grey transition, which are much slower than the claimed
speeds.

Anyway, this is definitely a major advancement for LCD monitors in
gaming. If this technology works out, CRTs will be dead in a couple
of years.
Anonymous
a b C Monitor
March 18, 2005 2:38:34 PM

Archived from groups: nz.comp,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 09:03:39 GMT, drocket <drocket@hotmail.com> wrote:


>Anyway, this is definitely a major advancement for LCD monitors in
>gaming. If this technology works out, CRTs will be dead in a couple
>of years.

Why? Just because of response time? You are forgetting colour accuracy
and contrast ratio. I was in a digital imaging shop yesterday and
there was not one LCD to be seen. Guess why? And it has nothing to do
with response time.
March 18, 2005 5:58:10 PM

Archived from groups: nz.comp,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 21:22:29 GMT, MarkH <markat@atdot.dot.dot> wrote:

>Nicholas Sherlock <n_sherlock@hotmail.com> wrote in
>news:D 1cijb$cpg$1@lust.ihug.co.nz:
>
>> BILL bs.xxxxxxxxxx.corn wrote:
>>> ViewSonic on Wednesday announced what the company is billing as the
>>> world's fastest 17-and 19-inch LCD monitors.
>>>
>>> The new products, the 19-inch Xtreme VX924 and the 17-inch Xtreme
>>> VX724, feature an eight to ten times improvement in the average
>>> gray-to-gray response of 4 milliseconds, the company said.
>>
>> Gray-to-gray? I thought response time was measured by white<->black..?
>
>You should read the article, rather than rely on Roger's summation. The
>monitor has a 5ms white-black response time, but Viewsonic claim the 4ms
>time to change a shade is a big leap forward for gaming (where shade
>changes are more common then compete colour changes).


Are you mentally sick or some thing as I never posted my summation.
Anonymous
a b C Monitor
March 18, 2005 11:56:27 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Right. Some use 16 bit color or lower and some other tricks to get faster
response time.
"Connected" <connected@somewhere.here> wrote in message
news:6ebm31pocdhrugfveo7hf5eb8h5bmukig8@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 09:03:39 GMT, drocket <drocket@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> >Anyway, this is definitely a major advancement for LCD monitors in
> >gaming. If this technology works out, CRTs will be dead in a couple
> >of years.
>
> Why? Just because of response time? You are forgetting colour accuracy
> and contrast ratio. I was in a digital imaging shop yesterday and
> there was not one LCD to be seen. Guess why? And it has nothing to do
> with response time.
Anonymous
a b C Monitor
March 18, 2005 11:58:05 PM

Archived from groups: nz.comp,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 11:38:34 -0800, Connected
<connected@somewhere.here> wrote:

>Why? Just because of response time? You are forgetting colour accuracy
>and contrast ratio. I was in a digital imaging shop yesterday and
>there was not one LCD to be seen. Guess why? And it has nothing to do
>with response time.

Ok, fine: CRTs for the home market will be dead.
March 19, 2005 7:33:05 AM

Archived from groups: nz.comp,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

drocket <drocket@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:lagm31plbjfkjs44d36sdke8i0l3qsnp9l@4ax.com:

> On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 11:38:34 -0800, Connected
><connected@somewhere.here> wrote:
>
>>Why? Just because of response time? You are forgetting colour accuracy
>>and contrast ratio. I was in a digital imaging shop yesterday and
>>there was not one LCD to be seen. Guess why? And it has nothing to do
>>with response time.
>
> Ok, fine: CRTs for the home market will be dead.

What about the ability to work well with a crisp sharp picture at other
than the native resolution?

Now that fast LCDs are coming out the biggest disadvantage of LCDs for
gaming would be how much sharpness they lose running any resolution below
their native one. The obvious fix will be faster PCs that will happily run
games at 1280x1024 free of lag.



--
Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
See my pics at www.gigatech.co.nz (last updated 20-Jan-05)
"There are 10 types of people, those that
understand binary and those that don't"
Anonymous
a b C Monitor
March 19, 2005 7:00:11 PM

Archived from groups: nz.comp,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

<BILL bs.xxxxxxxxxx.corn> wrote in message
news:khmi31lvhdikmhc6jstggkr6fnrueh52bl@4ax.com...
>
> ViewSonic on Wednesday announced what the company is billing as the
> world's
> fastest 17-and 19-inch LCD monitors.
>
> The new products, the 19-inch Xtreme VX924 and the 17-inch Xtreme VX724,
> feature an eight to ten times improvement in the average gray-to-gray
> response
> of 4 milliseconds, the company said.
>
>
>
>
> http://www.crn.com/sections/breakingnews/breakingnews.j...;jsessionid=NQTFZ2U34YGTAQSNDBGCKH0CJUMEKJVN?articleId=159901151

"VARs will see the biggest impact in video performance in heavy video motion
applications including video editing and production and DVD and gaming
applications, said Willey."

I don't understand. Given that 16ms is fast enough to eliminate motion blur
then what advantage does an 8ms/5ms LCD have over a 16ms LCD?

Tony.
March 19, 2005 7:00:12 PM

Archived from groups: nz.comp,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"The Black Wibble" <scanner@free.org.nz> wrote in message
news:423b95a9@clear.net.nz...
> <BILL bs.xxxxxxxxxx.corn> wrote in message
> news:khmi31lvhdikmhc6jstggkr6fnrueh52bl@4ax.com...
>>
>> ViewSonic on Wednesday announced what the company is billing as the
>> world's
>> fastest 17-and 19-inch LCD monitors.
>>
>> The new products, the 19-inch Xtreme VX924 and the 17-inch Xtreme VX724,
>> feature an eight to ten times improvement in the average gray-to-gray
>> response
>> of 4 milliseconds, the company said.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.crn.com/sections/breakingnews/breakingnews.j...;jsessionid=NQTFZ2U34YGTAQSNDBGCKH0CJUMEKJVN?articleId=159901151
>
> "VARs will see the biggest impact in video performance in heavy video
> motion applications including video editing and production and DVD and
> gaming applications, said Willey."
>
> I don't understand. Given that 16ms is fast enough to eliminate motion
> blur then what advantage does an 8ms/5ms LCD have over a 16ms LCD?
>
> Tony.
>
>

Who claimed that 16ms is fast enough to eliminate motion blur and ghosting?
Maybe 16ms is fast enough for some people, but I wouldnt say fast enough to
eliminate it.
I have tried a couple 16ms rated LCD's myself (Dell 2001fp and Viewsonic
VP201b, both use the same S-IPS panels) and although games were playable,
there was enough blurring to make me stay with my CRT monitor.
I have read reviews that say 8ms the blurring is not very noticeable and 4ms
you would probably not see it.
Anonymous
a b C Monitor
March 20, 2005 6:01:46 AM

Archived from groups: nz.comp,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 04:33:05 GMT, MarkH <markat@atdot.dot.dot> wrote:

>Now that fast LCDs are coming out the biggest disadvantage of LCDs for
>gaming would be how much sharpness they lose running any resolution below
>their native one. The obvious fix will be faster PCs that will happily run
>games at 1280x1024 free of lag.

Where have you been?
Anonymous
a b C Monitor
March 20, 2005 6:02:17 AM

Archived from groups: nz.comp,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 04:33:05 GMT, MarkH <markat@atdot.dot.dot> wrote:

>
>Now that fast LCDs are coming out the biggest disadvantage of LCDs for
>gaming would be how much sharpness they lose running any resolution below
>their native one. The obvious fix will be faster PCs that will happily run
>games at 1280x1024 free of lag.

Who says you need to run full screen?
Anonymous
a b C Monitor
March 20, 2005 6:02:18 AM

Archived from groups: nz.comp,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 03:02:17 GMT, ELVIS2000 <elvis2000@ElvisLives.com>
wrote:


>Who says you need to run full screen?

Who wants to run their games at less than full screen? Get a clue.
Anonymous
a b C Monitor
March 21, 2005 12:02:12 AM

Archived from groups: nz.comp,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Connected wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 09:03:39 GMT, drocket <drocket@hotmail.com> wrote:

>>Anyway, this is definitely a major advancement for LCD monitors in
>>gaming. If this technology works out, CRTs will be dead in a couple
>>of years.
>
> Why? Just because of response time? You are forgetting colour accuracy
> and contrast ratio. I was in a digital imaging shop yesterday and
> there was not one LCD to be seen. Guess why? And it has nothing to do
> with response time.

And in addition, pricing still leaves a lot to be desired, as well as
issues over dead/stuck pixels.

I won't be trading my 19" CRT for an LCD anytime soon, until they get
real on many counts. Still too much fluff and not enough substance on a
price/performance scale, particularly for professional graphics work.
March 21, 2005 12:36:44 AM

Archived from groups: nz.comp,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 21:02:12 +1200, plonksville <woger@plonker.central> wrote:

>Connected wrote:
>> On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 09:03:39 GMT, drocket <drocket@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>Anyway, this is definitely a major advancement for LCD monitors in
>>>gaming. If this technology works out, CRTs will be dead in a couple
>>>of years.
>>
>> Why? Just because of response time? You are forgetting colour accuracy
>> and contrast ratio. I was in a digital imaging shop yesterday and
>> there was not one LCD to be seen. Guess why? And it has nothing to do
>> with response time.
>
>And in addition, pricing still leaves a lot to be desired, as well as
>issues over dead/stuck pixels.
>
>I won't be trading my 19" CRT for an LCD anytime soon, until they get
>real on many counts. Still too much fluff and not enough substance on a
>price/performance scale, particularly for professional graphics work.



For Graphic work they are Ideal, no Geometric distortion of any kind..
Anonymous
a b C Monitor
March 21, 2005 12:36:45 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Thusly BILL <bill@nosite.conm> Spake Unto All:

>>I won't be trading my 19" CRT for an LCD anytime soon, until they get
>>real on many counts. Still too much fluff and not enough substance on a
>>price/performance scale, particularly for professional graphics work.
>
>For Graphic work they are Ideal, no Geometric distortion of any kind..

Which may be interesting for architects, but for most others doing
graphical work dynamic range and a reasonable color accuracy is more
important.
Anonymous
a b C Monitor
March 21, 2005 12:36:45 AM

Archived from groups: nz.comp,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 21:36:44 +1200, BILL
<bill@nosite.conm> wrote:


>For Graphic work they are Ideal, no Geometric distortion of any kind..
>

For CAD work yes, for digital photography and press work, no, due to
the lack of colour accuracy and tonal quality.
!