4ms LCD Monitors

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by BILL bs.xxxxxxxxxx.corn, Mar 17, 2005.

  1. BILL bs.xxxxxxxxxx.corn, Mar 17, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. 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
     
    Nicholas Sherlock, Mar 17, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. BILL     bs.xxxxxxxxxx.corn

    Hank Guest

    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.
     
    Hank, Mar 17, 2005
    #3
  4. BILL     bs.xxxxxxxxxx.corn

    MarkH Guest

    Nicholas Sherlock <> wrote in
    news:d1cijb$cpg$:

    > 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"
     
    MarkH, Mar 17, 2005
    #4
  5. BILL     bs.xxxxxxxxxx.corn

    BILL Guest

    On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 21:22:29 GMT, MarkH <> wrote:

    >Nicholas Sherlock <> wrote in
    >news:d1cijb$cpg$:
    >
    >> 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.
     
    BILL, Mar 18, 2005
    #5
  6. BILL     bs.xxxxxxxxxx.corn

    Murray Symon Guest

    On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 23:21:52 +1300, 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.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > http://www.crn.com/sections/breakin...34YGTAQSNDBGCKH0CJUMEKJVN?articleId=159901151


    You may wish to check out the following article in The Inquirer on
    18 Jan 2005. Apparently even a rated zero response time may still
    show motion blurring due to human physiological effects.

    http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=20773

    "Peter Gamby, principal analyst at Meko, said that the whole question
    of response times is confused and confusing.

    He told the INQ today that even a zero millisecond response rate on a
    conventional LCD panel would show blurring on fast moving images. That's
    because, he said, of the way the backlight and LC materials work together.

    The transistors in a liquid crystal screen, he said, have to "hold" the
    aperture open to allow the light to pass through each pixel. That's
    different from a CRT monitor, which pulses each pixel to generate the light.

    With LCDs, he said, the eye and the brain continue to see light in
    between each frame, while with a CRT there's a period of lower or no
    light in between each frame, and that helps the brain to process the
    movement.

    It's not enough to deliver faster response times and other functions
    need to be added, said Gamby. Future tech investigated includes
    something called blinking backlights which imitate a CRT, but which
    inevitably add cost and also degrade contrast and/or colour gamut
    performance."




    ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
    http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
    ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
     
    Murray Symon, Mar 18, 2005
    #6
  7. BILL     bs.xxxxxxxxxx.corn

    Chadwick Guest

    BILL wrote:
    > On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 21:22:29 GMT, MarkH <> wrote:
    >
    > >Nicholas Sherlock <> wrote in
    > >news:d1cijb$cpg$:
    > >
    > >> 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.
     
    Chadwick, Mar 18, 2005
    #7
  8. BILL     bs.xxxxxxxxxx.corn

    drocket Guest

    On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 07:34:04 +1300, Nicholas Sherlock
    <> 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.
     
    drocket, Mar 18, 2005
    #8
  9. BILL     bs.xxxxxxxxxx.corn

    Connected Guest

    On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 09:03:39 GMT, drocket <> 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.
     
    Connected, Mar 18, 2005
    #9
  10. BILL     bs.xxxxxxxxxx.corn

    drocket Guest

    On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 11:38:34 -0800, Connected
    <> 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.
     
    drocket, Mar 18, 2005
    #10
  11. <BILL bs.xxxxxxxxxx.corn> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > 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/breakin...34YGTAQSNDBGCKH0CJUMEKJVN?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.
     
    The Black Wibble, Mar 19, 2005
    #11
  12. BILL     bs.xxxxxxxxxx.corn

    MarkH Guest

    drocket <> wrote in
    news::

    > On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 11:38:34 -0800, Connected
    ><> 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"
     
    MarkH, Mar 19, 2005
    #12
  13. BILL     bs.xxxxxxxxxx.corn

    Lou Guest

    "The Black Wibble" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > <BILL bs.xxxxxxxxxx.corn> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >>
    >> 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/breakin...34YGTAQSNDBGCKH0CJUMEKJVN?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.
     
    Lou, Mar 19, 2005
    #13
  14. BILL     bs.xxxxxxxxxx.corn

    ELVIS2000 Guest

    On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 04:33:05 GMT, MarkH <> 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?
     
    ELVIS2000, Mar 20, 2005
    #14
  15. BILL     bs.xxxxxxxxxx.corn

    ELVIS2000 Guest

    On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 04:33:05 GMT, MarkH <> 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?
     
    ELVIS2000, Mar 20, 2005
    #15
  16. ELVIS2000 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?


    most games...
    otherwise you suffer with way less performance.

    removed crossposting.
     
    Dave - Dave.net.nz, Mar 20, 2005
    #16
  17. BILL     bs.xxxxxxxxxx.corn

    Connected Guest

    On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 03:02:17 GMT, ELVIS2000 <>
    wrote:


    >Who says you need to run full screen?


    Who wants to run their games at less than full screen? Get a clue.
     
    Connected, Mar 20, 2005
    #17
  18. BILL     bs.xxxxxxxxxx.corn

    plonksville Guest

    ELVIS2000 wrote:

    > Who says you need to run full screen?


    You like watching DVD's in a little window on your desktop do you?
     
    plonksville, Mar 20, 2005
    #18
  19. BILL     bs.xxxxxxxxxx.corn

    plonksville Guest

    Connected wrote:
    > On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 09:03:39 GMT, drocket <> 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.
     
    plonksville, Mar 20, 2005
    #19
  20. BILL     bs.xxxxxxxxxx.corn

    BILL Guest

    On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 21:02:12 +1200, plonksville <> wrote:

    >Connected wrote:
    >> On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 09:03:39 GMT, drocket <> 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..
     
    BILL, Mar 20, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Boomer
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    494
    Keyser Soze
    Dec 17, 2003
  2. drvnguy

    LCD monitors

    drvnguy, Dec 26, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    599
    M Mullen
    Dec 27, 2003
  3. Flat Panel LCD Monitors

    , Feb 14, 2004, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    749
  4. NEC LCD monitors any good?

    , Jun 7, 2004, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    16
    Views:
    697
  5. Martin

    Re: Are LCD Monitors Brigter than CRT Monitors

    Martin, Sep 8, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    580
    Martin
    Sep 8, 2004
Loading...

Share This Page