Results: Pixel Response And Input Lag
To perform these tests, we use a high-speed camera that shoots at 1000 frames per second. Analyzing the video frame-by-frame allows us to observe the exact time it takes to go from a zero-percent signal to a 100% white field.
The pattern generator is placed at the base of the monitor so our camera can capture the precise moment its front-panel LED lights up, indicating that a video signal is being received by the monitor. With this camera placement, we can easily see how long it takes to fully display a pattern after pressing the button on the generator’s remote. This testing methodology allows for accurate and repeatable results when comparing panels. Here’s a shot of our test setup.
The brighter section of the camera’s screen is what actually appears in the video. You can see the lights of the pattern generator in the bottom of the viewfinder. We flash the pattern on and off five times and average the results.
Here’s the screen draw result.
The Asus VG248QE, which has a max refresh rate of 144 Hz, is the only TN-based monitor we’ve tested this year. All of the others are IPS 60 Hz screens. The draw times are within a hair of each other, but Planar is at the lower end of the range. You won’t see any motion blur at video frame rates, but you might see some in fast-paced games. It all depends on how quickly you move your mouse and how speedy your graphics card is.
Here are the lag results.
The overall result puts Planar's PXL2790MW in the middle of the pack. As with most 60 Hz screens, a majority of gamers won’t have a problem. But those with faster reflexes will experience some lag. In this case, you’ll be waiting 4.8 frames from button press to on-screen response.
