| Forum Index > BW General |
|
LaStScan
Korea (South)1289 Posts
Source PPooH 작성일 07-03-18 17:20 전에 LCD로 경기한 적이 있었는데 반응이 안좋아서 철회됐습니다. 덕분에 세팅하시는 분들만 힘들죠 ~.~ Translation: They have played with LCD, but the response was not good so they withdrew the match. Unfortunately, staffs had to do more work for the setting ~.~ | ||
|
LaStScan
Korea (South)1289 Posts
Korean PC cafe usually have some CRT monitors for FPS users. Anyways, Take a look at the difference of response time from these two videos. Scan vs Hero(using lowlat) Muta M Micro Lecture(Without lowlat) | ||
|
iFU.pauline
France1556 Posts
| ||
|
ProMeTheus112
France2027 Posts
| ||
|
sabas123
Netherlands3122 Posts
On March 20 2016 17:05 iFU.pauline wrote: CRT monitor always been superior to LCD, reason is simple, it has a much better color rendering and a much higher refresh rate This is not true, crt montiors can only reach 155Hz at 640x480 if im not mistaken, meanwhile there are (expensive) lcd screens on the market at 240hz. | ||
|
sabas123
Netherlands3122 Posts
On March 20 2016 15:54 LaStScan wrote: Anyways, I probably would like to visit PC cafe later in this summer and test CRT monitors and LCD monitors. Korean PC cafe usually have some CRT monitors for FPS users. Anyways, Take a look at the difference of response time from these two videos. Scan vs Hero(using lowlat) Muta M Micro Lecture(Without lowlat) Those are network related delays, not caused by the monitor. | ||
|
mca64Launcher_
Poland629 Posts
| ||
|
Scarbo
294 Posts
On March 21 2016 04:14 sabas123 wrote: This is not true, crt montiors can only reach 155Hz at 640x480 if im not mistaken, meanwhile there are (expensive) lcd screens on the market at 240hz. The only 240hz on the market are upscaled, not true 240hz. Example 1 http://www.amazon.com/FORIS-FG2421-BK-23-5-Inch-Screen-Monitor/dp/B00GBG5SPO + Show Spoiler + Experience fluid gameplay free from motion blur with the gaming industry's first 240 Hz monitor. EIZO's Turbo 240 converts 120 Hz input signals to 240 Hz for a refresh rate double that of conventional gaming monitors so you can enjoy the smoothest motion display yet for first-person shooter, racing, and other fast-action genres. Example 2 http://www.amazon.com/Sony-PlayStation-Widescreen-Monitor-SimulVie/dp/B00K287K1M/ref=sr_1_4?s=pc&ie=UTF8&qid=1458528965&sr=1-4&keywords=monitor 240hz + Show Spoiler + Since when the PS4 can run games at 240fps? They go so far as require companies to lock games at 60fps on PC so that the console version doesn't look that bad in comparison. It's probably possible to make an actual 240hz monitor but I can see there being not enough people interested to justify the costs. Your point holds true to the resolution issue though. In LED and LCD you can get 144hz at 1080p, which doesn't happen on CRTs. | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20285 Posts
this site has a lot of information for motion quality - http://www.blurbusters.com/faq/60vs120vslb/ ------ "response time" on any monitor stats is not referring to input lag (it is something else) and is hard to directly compare between brands and technologies ------ the LCD technology seems unable to perform as efficiently, always a little bit of lag Good LCD's have input lags roughly comparable to CRT's. What they do NOT have is motion clarity anywhere near CRT level which is important for some games and is quite often visible. Some LCD's have strobed backlight options to get CRT-level motion clarity but that comes with drawbacks It's also worth noting that old LCD's were nowhere near as good as more modern ones | ||
|
Assault_1
Canada1950 Posts
On March 20 2016 15:50 LaStScan wrote: What I heard from forums, people did try out LCD LED monitor in 2007 or some around there, and players said that the response was so slow (50 ms or something). Source PPooH 작성일 07-03-18 17:20 전에 LCD로 경기한 적이 있었는데 반응이 안좋아서 철회됐습니다. 덕분에 세팅하시는 분들만 힘들죠 ~.~ Translation: They have played with LCD, but the response was not good so they withdrew the match. Unfortunately, staffs had to do more work for the setting ~.~ Not sure what you're getting at, LCD's are normally 5ms response time, you wouldn't notice any difference with a CRT even if it was 0ms. | ||
|
Wrath
3174 Posts
I always wondered on old VODS the game looked way smoother than it looks now on LED screens... | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20285 Posts
So on CRT, will BW look this smooth? If you're watching on an LCD, you're seeing something that an LCD is capable of. This particular difference is not due to the screen technology. | ||
|
mca64Launcher_
Poland629 Posts
On March 23 2016 02:56 WrathSCII wrote: So on CRT, will BW look this smooth? https://youtu.be/t425DOv3dZw?t=230 I always wondered on old VODS the game looked way smoother than it looks now on LED screens... cause it was professional recorded, not shitty OBS or any common other software for capturning | ||
|
WinterViewbot420
345 Posts
On March 23 2016 02:56 WrathSCII wrote: So on CRT, will BW look this smooth? https://youtu.be/t425DOv3dZw?t=230 I always wondered on old VODS the game looked way smoother than it looks now on LED screens... That's ghosting, which most people consider a problem. Pretty to look at for SC, not so fun to play on. | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20285 Posts
I think this whole argument for a game like StarCraft is silly. This may be worthy of discussion for a game like O2Jam, but single digit milliseconds on StarCraft really doesn't matter. CRT's don't beat modern LCD's by large amounts for input lag. They win in areas like motion clarity where they are not just a bit better, but in a completely different league A 100hz CRT has motion clarity in the level of 10-20x better than a 60hz LCD, which is easily visible even when dragging a folder on the desktop if you know what you're looking at | ||
|
WinterViewbot420
345 Posts
This is a game where these discussions are important: | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20285 Posts
| ||
|
WinterViewbot420
345 Posts
On March 23 2016 04:16 Cyro wrote: ^those games benefit probably the most from motion clarity, it sucks to play them on LCD That's me playing, I'm one of the best players on the private Korean server. I play with a 75Hz LCD monitor from Dell. My point here is that people seriously overestimate the effect their monitor has on StarCraft or even these crazy games. If your monitor is hurting your play, chances are it's simply a pile of garbage. | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20285 Posts
| ||
|
Scarbo
294 Posts
On March 23 2016 04:01 WinterViewbot420 wrote: My whole thing right now is that the game (excluding mouse) renders in 24 frames per second on Fastest speed and the mouse renders in 60 frames per second, so all this talk is almost useless. Not only that, but this isn't a game that requires much visual comprehension aside from cloaked units or bunches of stacked flying units, which comes down to the visual quality of the monitor. This is a game where these discussions are important: + Show Spoiler + https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yrI6U5Grxas Both your informations are wrong. As far as I can tell, BW is uncapped. There may be a cap but it's very high. The animations (tank sieging, lurker burrowing, units attacking) are indeed limited at 24fps. Having a high framerate monitor makes a huge difference. For example, if you move your mouse around at high refresh rates, and low motion blur, the movement is going to be a lot smoother, same goes for moving your screen. I have a 120hz CRT and can assure this info is accurate. I'd give some sort of proof but unfortunately there's no way for you to experiment it unless you have a good monitor to try for yourself. + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/UaUWEL4.jpg) Here's an interesting article on motion blur http://www.blurbusters.com/faq/60vs120vslb/ | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War League of Legends Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Other Games |
|
Wardi Open
Sparkling Tuna Cup
WardiTV European League
Online Event
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
The PondCast
Replay Cast
Korean StarCraft League
CranKy Ducklings
Sparkling Tuna Cup
|
|
|
EPT
