Gaming And LCD Monitors

silverkirfsco

Mar 2 2005, 08:27 PM

i have an lcd monitor. i think it has a response time of about 25 ms. this creates a problem with games because of the ghosting effects. the games are playable but it makes it hard to see some of the details.

anyway, what are the fastest response times you can buy on an lcd monitor?

also is having a high contrast ratio good or bad? what is a minumum or maximum to look for?

Comment/Reply (w/o sign-up)

jipman

Mar 3 2005, 06:25 PM

lowest response times were 8 ms with a benq lcd i think.

High contrast ratio? do you mean brightness, a high brightness level is good because that lights up dark levels

I thought that response times below the 10 were good for gaming.

Myself,

I love CRT, big fast and got used to it.

Comment/Reply (w/o sign-up)

MajesticTreeFrog

Mar 3 2005, 06:45 PM

QUOTE (silverkirfsco @ Mar 2 2005, 04:27 PM)

i have an lcd monitor. i think it has a response time of about 25 ms. this creates a problem with games because of the ghosting effects. the games are playable but it makes it hard to see some of the details.

anyway, what are the fastest response times you can buy on an lcd monitor?

also is having a high contrast ratio good or bad? what is a minumum or maximum to look for?

I have a monitor with a 15 ms response time and it was fine. But you should test each monitor because the rating companies give their monitors doesn't necessarily reflect normal usage. As for contrast ratio, 350:1 is a good minimum. You can go as low as 300:1, but I would'n go lower. These days LCDs come in 450 and 500:1 models. I suggest getting one of those if you can. Also, make sure to look at screen clarity and the company's dead pixel policy.

Comment/Reply (w/o sign-up)

silverkirfsco

Mar 6 2005, 12:14 AM

ya, i do know that some companies dont allow you to return the monitor unless it has a certain amount of dead pixels.

lcd monitors have gotten a lot cheaper.

i think having them connected digitally instead of analog help performance

Comment/Reply (w/o sign-up)

Sadas

Mar 12 2005, 04:13 PM

If your are kind of maniac, you should use CRT monitor, becouse these 25, 16 ,12... ms can cost your life

Imagine: you are playing some first person shooter game online (CS for example

):
Server ping 50ms + your reaction time ~200ms + LCD LAG 25ms = 275ms
Another player plays in the same server with CRT, so he has 25ms advantage.
Normal human's reaction time is ~200ms, so if you want to compete another player you must react in 200-25=175ms.

(I'm not talking about player skills here

)
If talking about 8ms LCD lag, I think it's ok for playing. But no more than 12ms!
for offices and siple home user 25ms lag is no problem.

If talking about energy savings and your health, choose LCD...

Comment/Reply (w/o sign-up)

MajesticTreeFrog

Mar 12 2005, 04:27 PM

QUOTE (silverkirfsco @ Mar 5 2005, 08:14 PM)

i think having them connected digitally instead of analog help performance

It may help picture quality and color accuracy, but it won't do a thing for gaming performanc.

Comment/Reply (w/o sign-up)

arunkumarhg

Mar 21 2005, 11:54 AM

thats the problem with LCD and TFT's Ghosts, Shadows, Negative fx .
U can't use LCD or TFT' in differenrt agnles. but u need to be straight to the Display device.

Arunkumar.H.G

Comment/Reply (w/o sign-up)

nakulgupta

Mar 22 2005, 10:50 AM

I agree...LCD is fast replacing CRT monitors in gaming parlours out here in India. But i feel that CRT is still a better option for clarity and response time..if only they were a lot safer for the eyes.
But LCD's look a lot sleeker and and obviously space saving. It'll take a while for them to completly replace CRT...Meanwhile they have to get cheaper.

Comment/Reply (w/o sign-up)