SC Game Response Time - Page 2

LaStScan

Korea (South)1289 Posts

March 20 2016 06:50 GMT

#21

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 ~.~

LaStScan

Korea (South)1289 Posts

March 20 2016 06:54 GMT

#22

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)

iFU.pauline

France1556 Posts

March 20 2016 08:05 GMT

#23

CRT monitor always been superior to LCD, reason is simple, it has a much better color rendering and a much higher refresh rate, the only reason i am not using a CRT is because I am no progamer and it takes too much space on my desktop. Now I am not too convinced about the difference between winxp and win7 on brood war, but i can tell that brood war never worked better for me than on win98 with a 17 inches CRT monitor, I was very disappointed by the lack of fluidity when I switched to winxp and even more when I sold my crt for a lcd. I think CRT are even more superior when it comes to fps.

ProMeTheus112

France2027 Posts

March 20 2016 09:17 GMT

#24

I've kept using CRT for gaming because I've never had a similarly good experience with LCD. For arcade games like shoot'm ups, players always want to play on CRT if possible. The difference is smallish but it matters to anyone who want top notch performance, the LCD technology seems unable to perform as efficiently, always a little bit of lag. I haven't necessarily tested it on the very best LCD, but they're probably still not as good.

sabas123

Netherlands3122 Posts

March 20 2016 19:14 GMT

#25

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

March 20 2016 19:15 GMT

#26

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

March 20 2016 21:59 GMT

#27

scan wtf? do you wanna comapare monitors by watching vods on the same monitor? biggest wtf in a while

Scarbo

294 Posts

March 21 2016 03:21 GMT

#28

On March 21 2016 04:14 sabas123 wrote:

Show nested quote +

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

March 21 2016 04:04 GMT

#29

Some of the main differences between CRT's and LCD's are not viewable by a normal camera because our eyes view and track images in different ways to cameras.

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

March 21 2016 04:15 GMT

#30

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

March 22 2016 17:56 GMT

#31

So on CRT, will BW look this smooth?

I always wondered on old VODS the game looked way smoother than it looks now on LED screens...

Cyro

United Kingdom20285 Posts

March 22 2016 18:18 GMT

#32

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

March 22 2016 18:19 GMT

#33

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

March 22 2016 18:39 GMT

#34

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.

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

March 22 2016 18:52 GMT

#35

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

March 22 2016 19:01 GMT

#36

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:

Cyro

United Kingdom20285 Posts

March 22 2016 19:16 GMT

#37

^those games benefit probably the most from motion clarity, it sucks to play them on LCD

WinterViewbot420

345 Posts

March 22 2016 19:20 GMT

#38

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

March 22 2016 19:37 GMT

#39

Doesn't mean you wouldn't be able to read more easily w/ substantially better motion clarity

Scarbo

294 Posts

March 22 2016 19:47 GMT

#40

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 +

Here's an interesting article on motion blur
http://www.blurbusters.com/faq/60vs120vslb/

Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next All

Please or register to reply.

SC Game Response Time - Page 2

Completed

Ongoing

Upcoming