Forum Thread

Console gaming monitors : 5ms vs 2ms or 1ms. Can you tell the difference?

halekulani 299 62 January 9, 2014 at 03:18 PM in Video Games (3)
Deal
Score
0
8,181 Views

Thread Details

Just wondering what your thoughts are for those who have 2ms or 1ms monitors. Did you really notice the difference when you played? Is it worth it if all I really play is CoD? Does it look weird in non-FPS games (I like jRPGs too)?

10 Comments

1

Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.

Joined Sep 2007
L10: Grand Master
24,045 Posts
2,237 Reputation
#2
unless you're a pro gamer you're not gonna be affected by monitor lag
more of the time you'll be affected by latency issues with your connection.

Not to mention on current gen consoles you get only 30 fps, next gen maybe 60 fps on some games so its really not that big of a deal.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
Joined Aug 2010
L9: Master
5,984 Posts
930 Reputation
#3
just wanted to second what IPT said.

your time is better served decreasing your latency. If you play over a wireless connection and can change to quality wiring = best thing you can do in most cases.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
~~
xRANDALLxFLAGG [xbox.com]

kindle SO saved so far: $801
book savings: $100
Joined Oct 2007
Foxiest of the Hounds
12,491 Posts
340 Reputation
#4
Quote from halekulani View Post :
Just wondering what your thoughts are for those who have 2ms or 1ms monitors. Did you really notice the difference when you played? Is it worth it if all I really play is CoD? Does it look weird in non-FPS games (I like jRPGs too)?
No, you wont be able to tell the difference.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
Quote from toolio20 View Post :
Achievements are not for the meek, it is better to forfeit inheritance of the earth so that the mighty may look upon my gamerscore, and despair. Achievements are for men who dream; men who dare; men who achieve! Men who carve out entire galaxies with nothing more than nimble cheetos-dusted fingers and their wits, and in our leisurely twilight days we shall sit by softly flickering fires with our descendants recounting the tales of these unimaginable glories.
Joined Sep 2008
L9: Master
4,358 Posts
656 Reputation
#5
Quote from halekulani View Post :
Just wondering what your thoughts are for those who have 2ms or 1ms monitors. Did you really notice the difference when you played? Is it worth it if all I really play is CoD? Does it look weird in non-FPS games (I like jRPGs too)?
refresh rate is more meaningful for FPS, 120hz is optimal, anything less and you'll be at a disadvantage.

of course, like IPT said, it doesn't matter unless you're playing professionally
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
Joined Jul 2008
L3: Novice
299 Posts
62 Reputation
Original Poster
#6
thx guys

i know about refresh rates but consoles don't project anything past 60
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
Joined Sep 2007
L10: Grand Master
24,045 Posts
2,237 Reputation
#7
Quote from halekulani View Post :
thx guys

i know about refresh rates but consoles don't project anything past 60
also you're not playing any serious game that'll be affected really by motionblur.

Only game genre off the top of my head on console that's affected severely by motion blur are fighters.
I know EVO uses the ASUS VH236H monitors, but that's prob more sponsorship-wise than needed.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
#8
I'm not even sure the human eye can detect such marginal differences in frame rate. Even if they could, I highly doubt it would affect the gaming performance that much. I've played on 10ms monitors before and thought it was fine. Not many games run at over 100 fps anyway...
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0

Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.

Joined Sep 2007
L10: Grand Master
24,045 Posts
2,237 Reputation
#9
Quote from mirazu View Post :
I'm not even sure the human eye can detect such marginal differences in frame rate. Even if they could, I highly doubt it would affect the gaming performance that much. I've played on 10ms monitors before and thought it was fine. Not many games run at over 100 fps anyway...
http://www.testufo.com/#test=framerates
http://frames-per-second.appspot.com/

60 fps vs 30 fps is a big diff
under 30 fps is even worse.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
#10
Quote from IPT View Post :
http://www.testufo.com/#test=framerates
http://frames-per-second.appspot.com/

60 fps vs 30 fps is a big diff
under 30 fps is even worse.
I don't think the human eye can detect over 100fps anyway, so 10ms or 5ms doesn't really matter. 10ms would be capable of 100fps if the monitors refresh rate was high. Most wouldn't be able to distinguish that from 60. 10ms or under is fine.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
Joined Oct 2007
Foxiest of the Hounds
12,491 Posts
340 Reputation
#11
Quote from mirazu View Post :
I don't think the human eye can detect over 100fps anyway, so 10ms or 5ms doesn't really matter. 10ms would be capable of 100fps if the monitors refresh rate was high. Most wouldn't be able to distinguish that from 60. 10ms or under is fine.
It's not quite that simple though. Refresh and frame rates arent the same thing as pixel response times, which became relevant due to the display tech at hand. LCDs change the individual pixel states with something called a sample and hold method. By nature, these panels are prone to a form of motion blur which looks like smearing of bright objects on dark backgrounds or sometimes referred to as "ghosting."
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
Last edited by godfather927 January 13, 2014 at 01:05 PM
Page 1 of 1
1
Join the Conversation
Add a Comment
 
Copyright 1999 - 2016. Slickdeals, LLC. All Rights Reserved. Copyright / Infringement Policy  •  Privacy Policy  •  Terms of Service  •  Acceptable Use Policy (Rules)  •  Interest-Based Ads
Link Copied to Clipboard