4ms LCD Monitors

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.jhtml;jsessionid=NQTFZ2U34YGTAQSNDBGCKH0CJUMEKJVN?articleId=159901151
19 answers Last reply
More about monitors
  1. 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.
  2. 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:d1cijb$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.
  3. 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
  4. Archived from groups: nz.comp,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

    Nicholas Sherlock <n_sherlock@hotmail.com> wrote in
    news:d1cijb$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"
  5. 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.
  6. 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.
  7. 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:d1cijb$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.
  8. 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.
  9. 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.
  10. 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"
  11. 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.jhtml;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.
  12. 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.jhtml;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.
  13. 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?
  14. 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?
  15. 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.
  16. 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.
  17. 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..
  18. 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.
  19. 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.
Ask a new question

Read More

PC gaming LCD Monitors Video Games Product