Page 2 of 2

Re: xl2540 vs other 144hz

PostPosted: 26 Sep 2017, 05:35
by lexlazootin
DP had the same latency as DVI. You're probably just fooling yourself.

If you want just put your custom refreshrates in CRU and it will show up in game.

Re: xl2540 vs other 144hz

PostPosted: 26 Sep 2017, 07:31
by mello
lexlazootin wrote:DP had the same latency as DVI. You're probably just fooling yourself.


And even if there would be a tiny difference, 1-2ms for example, he still wouldn't be able to tell which performs better. What he is probably feeling is a combination of placebo effect and internet performance fluctuations that affect hit registration and game responsiveness during different times in a day when he plays the game. Doing these kind of tests (DVI vs DP) regarding input lag difference during online fps games is completly pointless, solely because of internet performance fluctuations, i have described it in this thread (pages 3 & 4).

Re: xl2540 vs other 144hz

PostPosted: 26 Sep 2017, 07:48
by Straifer
without sounding like a lunatic or asif I'm just wanting to argue but I am curious about broad statements like 'I wouldn't be able to tell the difference between 1-2ms'. I guess my question would be - With my 2720z BR ON and tweaked with Strobe Utility I've read that I would only notice 1-4ms of input delay with BR ON. I can genuinely feel the difference with BR ON vs OFF. Would that not be in the range of not being able to tell the difference?

I know we're talking about very small margins here but I've just been on my own little mission to test different options to see what feels natural.

Mello, I'm not saying you're wrong just trying to have a open discussion so I can understand better.

Re: xl2540 vs other 144hz

PostPosted: 26 Sep 2017, 09:29
by mello
Straifer wrote:without sounding like a lunatic or asif I'm just wanting to argue but I am curious about broad statements like 'I wouldn't be able to tell the difference between 1-2ms'.


The thing is, not even a professional gamer would be able to see the difference in a few ms range.

Straifer wrote:I've read that I would only notice 1-4ms of input delay with BR ON.


This is incorrent. There is 1-2ms (AFAIK) difference, but no one said that you would be able to notice it or tell the difference in input lag between BR on and BR off.

Straifer wrote:I can genuinely feel the difference with BR ON vs OFF. Would that not be in the range of not being able to tell the difference?


You can feel that something is different but it is not the input lag delay that you feel... so no, such low ms differences are not noticable.

Straifer wrote:I know we're talking about very small margins here but I've just been on my own little mission to test different options to see what feels natural.

Mello, I'm not saying you're wrong just trying to have a open discussion so I can understand better.


There are many different things that may affect of how you feel or perceive smoothness or responsiveness. The change in itself, either higher/lower hz or BR on or BR off will affect how you feel... until your eyes will adapt to the change. You can see the difference between 60Hz and 144Hz, and when you switch to 60Hz after some time it will look horrible... for a few days, after that you eyes will adapt and 60Hz will not look as bad as when you switched from 144Hz to 60Hz. Same w G-SYNC, you can see better smoothness and it feels better, but it is not because of lower or higher input lag.

Another thing is internet performance fluctuations during different hours and your ISPs network which may be overloaded during different hours in a day. And i am not talking about ping or packet loss specifically but about general network usage (in your area or city) that may create more errors on your line, which in turn may increase interleaving and error correction and that will directly create an effect (to a different degree depending on the line) of poor hit registration, laggy feel, non smooth aiming or poor responsiveness. Doing tests during online fps gaming is not a good idea for doing any kind of input lag tests... especially by the feel.

And please do not assume that if you feel that something is different (better or worse) that it automatically must be an input lag that you are feeling.

Re: xl2540 vs other 144hz

PostPosted: 26 Sep 2017, 11:48
by lexlazootin
Na, i think BR usually adds about half a frame. around 3-4ms at 144hz.

But i do agree with mello tho. 'Feeling' a difference is unproductive. If DP had latency we would of known by now, there are tons on monitors that use DP with little to no latency. All of the shit you see online about "reducing latency" based on feel is BS and you shouldn't waste your time on it.

Re: xl2540 vs other 144hz

PostPosted: 08 Nov 2017, 13:11
by Notty_PT
According to all websites, from Rtings, prad.de, HardwareInfo, PCmag, hdtvpolska, etc, these 240hz screens have around 15ms input lag at 60hz using a Leo Bodnar device.

While I know Leo Bodnar isn´t as accurate as other methods, I also know it doesn´t give you erratic values (for example, for 2 monitors with the same measure input lag with accurate methods, leo bodnar won´t show you a discrepancy of more than 1ms on its center screen value).

So, what´s the drill? Well, a good 144hz monitor has 9ms to 10ms input lag at 60hz. You divide that by 2,25 (because of the 144hz) and you end up with around 4,2ms input lag.

With 240hz screens you get 3,75ms (15/4). So objectively speaking, yes, 240hz monitors are more responsive. But is it really worth it to spend 500 bucks or more on something that has a 0,45ms advantage? I don´t think so, considering you can get amazing 144hz screens for half the price (LG 24GM79G for example). Also if you happen to connect a console to those 240hz screens you will have same input lag as some HDTVs!!! And that´s bad for the money you spend.

Also, if you can´t keep constant 240fps in a game (wich will happen on most of them, apart from CS GO), your input lag will increase automatically. So let´s say you can only sustain 180fps to 200fps. Your input lag is now higher than your 144hz monitor at 144fps... see what I mean?

So in conclusion, while objectively speaking 240hz = lower input lag and biggest advantage possible (altho won´t make the difference). A 144hz monitor can end up with better performance on most situations.

Maybe the 2nd gen of 240hz screens will be better and deliver the golden 9ms-10ms mark at 60hz, wich will make it 2ms-2,5ms at 240hz. And then yeah, at half the input lag compared to the best 144hz screens, you will notice its advantages. For now? Not really, not worth it at all.

Re: xl2540 vs other 144hz

PostPosted: 08 Nov 2017, 13:51
by mello
Notty_PT wrote:Also, if you can´t keep constant 240fps in a game (wich will happen on most of them, apart from CS GO), your input lag will increase automatically. So let´s say you can only sustain 180fps to 200fps. Your input lag is now higher than your 144hz monitor at 144fps... see what I mean?


This in completely inaccurate. More fps = less input lag, more hz = less input lag & less lag randomness.
So even 180fps@240Hz will always have less lag than 144fps@144Hz. There is no need to match fps with your monitor hz.

Re: xl2540 vs other 144hz

PostPosted: 08 Nov 2017, 21:05
by Chief Blur Buster
Absolute lag is never the whole story.

While min-vs-min lag is same/similiar max-vs-max is much lower.

Lower input lag jitter is still worth 240Hz in many situations.

Less randomness = better aiming. see here.

For Min/Max/Average
From tests of Acer XB252Q running CS:GO
At 1000fps@60Hz VSYNC OFF, tests had a spread of 14ms-thru-27ms (a 13ms random-lag spread)
At 1000fps@144Hz VSYNC OFF, tests had a spread of 12ms-thru-18ms (a 6ms random-lag spread)
At 1000fps@240Hz VSYNC OFF, tests had a spread of 12ms-thru-14ms (a 2ms random-lag spread)

Averaged lag from 40 mouse button presses in CS:GO.

True, 1000fps is an extreme case. But, it actually biases to tighter spreads. Lag spreads tends to be bigger with lower frame rates because of bigger rendertime and netcode fluctuations which can amplify the lag-randomization effect.

Not everyone realizes refresh rate granularity injects a lag-randomization factor in real games. Leo Bodnar is SiSoft Sandra of lag tests: A synthetic lag benchmark, albiet useful, still ignores real-world tests. Real lag tests is actual real-game CS:GO lag testing.

more info