Any Sub 3MS Input Lag Monitors Out There?

[Ghilbi]

144Hz + (signal processing + pixel response) =< 3ms
Link source

[lexlazootin]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctdmBUVbYUU

[Glide]

Keep in mind that the lag tester they use outputs a 1080p60 signal.
So the best-case scenario for the last line would be around 16.67ms.
At 144Hz that should drop to 6.94ms.

The top line is a better indicator of measuring latency caused by the display's image processing, in which case a result of 2.4ms is very low.
That said, I don't think anything matches a CRT yet, which will be <1ms.

I wish that all sites who posted tests using this device specified what position was being used, since the results could be ±16ms

[Ghilbi]

Displaylag goes by the center.

http://us.hardware.info/reviews/6016/9/ ... -input-lag

For the first three test we use a photo meter in combination with a oscilloscope. To measure input lag we use a visual comparison with a CRT screen using a high speed slideshow, as well as (if possible) a Leo Bodnar input lag tester. This tester is unfortunately limited to 1920x1080 and we have found that using this on higher resolutions causes unpredictable results, which is why we do not always publish input lag results for these screens.

^Only good for judging various pixel response times.
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/ - a few sub 4ms models are shown here.

http://www.prad.de/new/monitore/test/20 ... sverhalten - plan to check out this site some more later, seems to have the most promise.
Results of interest so far:
https://translate.google.com/translate? ... teil7.html
https://translate.google.com/translate? ... t=&act=url
https://translate.google.com/translate? ... &sandbox=1

https://translate.google.com/translate? ... t=&act=url

[Ghilbi]

Best pick I found so far: BenQ XL2430T (XL2420G same panel w/Gsync)

• 5 Star ratings on Amazon/Newegg
• Prad results (144Hz overdrive):

• displaylag 60hz signal test results:
  

Let me know if you guys find something better

[Ghilbi]

This just in: 160Hz monitors on the way - http://www.overclock.net/t/1561697/pcmo ... t_24077480

[Glide]

This just in: 160Hz monitors on the way - http://www.overclock.net/t/1561697/pcmo ... t_24077480

I'd expect a frame or more of latency if they're using FreeSync though.

ASUS' MG279Q has 0.8ms latency with a 144Hz input and 13.35ms at 90Hz with FreeSync enabled, according to TFT Central's testing.

[Ghilbi]

LG 24GM77 144Hz Overdrive high to BenQ:

Toms hardware comparison: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/lg- ... 082-7.html
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2484512,00.asp mentions 10ms response under 60hz test with DAS on.
10w less power usage than the XL2420G.
LGs the way to go imo, save $100+ over a <1ms difference.

[Falkentyne]

Keep in mind that the lag tester they use outputs a 1080p60 signal.
So the best-case scenario for the last line would be around 16.67ms.
At 144Hz that should drop to 6.94ms.

The top line is a better indicator of measuring latency caused by the display's image processing, in which case a result of 2.4ms is very low.
That said, I don't think anything matches a CRT yet, which will be <1ms.

I wish that all sites who posted tests using this device specified what position was being used, since the results could be ±16ms

A CRT's input lag is tied to the refresh rate, but isn't the RESPONSE TIME of a CRT measured in nanoseconds?
Someone said something about "um" but I have no idea what "um" means.
Some old arcane post said something about 60hz having a response time of 200-300 "um", while google says "um" means "micrometers" which doesn't make sense.

Some articles there.
https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimf ... e_time_of/

Since CRT's operate with electron guns, magnetic fields and phosphors, we can say that the -response time- of a CRT is instantaneous.
And this is not the same as input lag.

[Glide]

They probably meant µs (microseconds)
And yes, a CRT responds almost instantaneously:

http://www.journalofvision.org/content/13/7/6.full

You can see that the rise time (leading edge of motion) on the CRT here (fig. C) is almost a straight vertical line, while the OLED (a Sony PVM) is much slower to respond, taking almost 2ms. (fig. B)
Most of the measured "response time" for the CRT is the fall time. (trailing edge of motion)

I wish someone still manufactured CRT monitors.