Best Twitch-Type Gaming LCD?

[Scout255]

Does anyone know what the input lag difference is between the various strobeing methods?

ULMB VS Lightboost VS BenQ ? Are they all similar?

[Chief Blur Buster]

Does anyone know what the input lag difference is between the various strobeing methods?

ULMB VS Lightboost VS BenQ ? Are they all similar?

All similiar, +/- 1ms

Non-strobed during 120Hz on most ASUS/BENQ TN monitors:
3ms -- top edge of screen
7ms -- middle of screen
11ms -- bottom edge of screen

Strobed during 120Hz on most ASUS/BENQ TN monitors:
11ms -- top edge of screen
11ms -- middle of screen
11ms -- bottom edge of screen

It goes down by about 1ms for ULMB.

EIZO's Turbo240 is 18-19ms, compared to 10-11ms for the TN-based strobe methods.

(NOTE: The delta change between top/bottom edges can lead to amplified VSYNC OFF microstutters ("jitteriness") during strobe mode, so for games like Counterstrike: GO, you will prefer fps_max 118 during LightBoost, rather than fps_max 300. This will keep most of jitteriness in check. Adaptive VSYNC, triple buffered VSYNC ON, as well as regular VSYNC ON helps too, at varying latency disadvantages)

[Scout255]

Is it merely by the nature of strobing that this input lag exists? I.e. it is waiting until the entire LCD is refreshed (top to bottom) and then it strobes to show the entire refreshed frame whereas in non-strobed you see the picture during the refresh which shows you a refreshed centre screen earlier (Because it isn't waiting for the bottom to refresh like the strobed set)? Looking at the numbers you know provided this appears to be the case.

I suppose with alternate methods such as a scanning backlight this inherent lag would be eliminated or at the very least greatly reduced yes?

[Chief Blur Buster]

Is it merely by the nature of strobing that this input lag exists? I.e. it is waiting until the entire LCD is refreshed (top to bottom) and then it strobes to show the entire refreshed frame whereas in non-strobed you see the picture during the refresh which shows you a refreshed centre screen earlier

Correct.

I suppose with alternate methods such as a scanning backlight this inherent lag would be eliminated or at the very least greatly reduced yes?

Correct, but scanning backlights are not as efficient as strobe backlights because scanning backlight segments often leak all over the place, including the opposite edge of the screen, interfering with motion clarity improvements. Full-strobe backlights/edgelights don't have this efficiency-limiting limitation, and given a sufficiently fast LCD, motion clarity improvement of LCD is actually theoretically unbounded (it's only dependant on how brightly & briefly you can flash the backlight).

See the following pages explaining motion blur reduction
-- TFT Central Motion Blur Reduction Backlights
-- Electronics Hacking: Creating a Strobe Backlight (jump to scanning backlight section)

____________________

OLED, however can do rolling scans quite efficiently (diagram from japanese site), and it should theoretically possible to have OLEDs that have the same input lag as a CRT, with the same top-to-bottom scan behaviors.



So it is possible for OLEDs to eliminate any input lag penalty from persistence-improving strobing. Alternatively, if LCD stays popular, we could eventually go to 240Hz LCDs and refresh them faster (e.g. blue phase LCDs can be refreshed in mere microseconds, as an example). Strobing during ~240Hz would add only an average of 2ms added input lag, and strobing at 480Hz or 500Hz would add only an average of 1ms added input lag. But by then, we might find a way to do cheap scanning backlights or switch to OLEDs with rolling-scan algorithms.