Fastest 60hz monitor?

[Malinkadink]

This one is a bit difficult to look up i feel as there isn't really an emphasis on 60hz displays with low input lag and fast pixel response times.

I know with regards to fast pixel response i'm relegated to TN monitors and i can accept that as they're unquestionably the fastest LCD in terms of pixel response. So then the question remains which 60hz TN monitor has the lowest input delay? I've actually been considering a 240hz monitor as it'd be more convenient to have a single display to do both pc gaming and consoles but i understand that the 240hz displays aren't well optimized for 60hz usage.

If anyone can chime in with some hard facts as to the quickest 60hz monitor i'd appreciate that. The 240hz display i was looking at is the AW2518H. Tomshardware gave it a pixel response of 6ms from 0-100 and a total delay of 19, these tests are at 60hz so the monitor has an input delay of 13ms and then the additional 6ms from the pixel response. This doesn't sound too bad in all honesty especially when you consider console titles all tend to have input delays of 50-100ms so if the quickest 60hz monitor is like 10ms then i could hardly be bothered by an extra 3ms and just go with a 240hz monitor as an AIO solution.

[Chief Blur Buster]

I can understand, while we are mainly a "Better Than 60Hz" site, we do need to make sure we have at least the basic informations for input lag of 60Hz, since our site is also heavily input-lag oriented too.

There are an extremely huge amount of input lag measuring methodology differences between different sites.

For input delay, that can vary a lot between monitors and inputs. Also, if they use the Leo Bodnar tester (which is a 60Hz VSYNC ON lag tester) they are testing only 60Hz scanout lag to a specific location on screen. Screen middle of VSYNC ON lag is generally half a refresh cycle, due to scanout lag.

That's why some sites like RTINGS and TomsHardware has dramatically different lag numbers -- the input lag measuring methodology necessitiates understanding the scanout (SMTT tests VSYNC OFF lag, while Leo Bodnar tests VSYNC ON lag), cable transmission latency (DisplayPort has about a millisecond more lag than VGA), the point where stopwatch begins measuring lag (VBI? Page flip from GPU? Detection of VSYNC wire on DVI cable? Visible pixels on a high speed video or photograph (SMTT)), and the point where the stopwatch ends measuring lag (First faint change? Or GtG10%? 90%? 100%). Etc. Etc. So it's hard to compare numbers between websites.

For pixel response, you can see the pixel before it is 100%. For example a 10% transition from black to white, would be a dark grey. A 50% transition would be grey. Most 80% transitions happen within ~2ms, though takes much longer to go to 100% transition, it's important to note that the curves vary quite a lot. If it is a slow curve from 0 to 100%, it may end up being slower than a monitor with a fast curve 0 to 80% (but even slower to 100%). Different sites have different triggers on when to stop measuring pixel response -- the first photons emitted from a pixel hits the human eye well before 100% and a human can still begin reacting. As a result, we believe lag measurements to either 10% or 50% for pixel response is actually pretty relevant.

If you are concerned about 60Hz console lag, you can look at websites that use the Leo Bodnar lag tester -- like http://www.displaylag.com -- then you can compare 60Hz lag that way. Remember, Leo Bodnar numbers doesn't tell you which 240 Hz monitor is good or bad. And sites that test mainly highest-Hz lag, doesn't necessarily tell you lag of 60Hz.

Also, remember min-average-max lag can be important too. Lag range varies quite a bit based on things like frame rate, and whether you are using VSYNC ON or VSYNC OFF. Lag differences between Hz varies quite a lot based on how lag measuring methodology is done. Some lag measuring methods (e.g. VSYNC OFF, SMTT, etc) will have almost equal "min" lag numbers between 60Hz and 240Hz (even if min/max/avg may vary more). Other lag measuring methods (e.g. VSYNC ON, Leo Bodnar "techniques" of stopwatching from VBI, etc) will have huge differences in lag between 60Hz and 240Hz for center square and bottom square. And not to be left out, the full famous button-to-pixels lag tests, using CS:GO and a high speed camera -- the GSYNC101 tests went as low as 12ms for the whole chain on a 240Hz monitor.

So every site is correct in their lag numbers but any site that doesn't give you the lag measuring methodology means the numbers is just crap for comparisions -- So it's important that sites that measure input lag, must always tell their readers the input lag measuring methodology that they use. They output very different numbers -- I understand why the numbers are different -- but few people do (e.g. scanout influence on lag).

We probably will include 60Hz tests as part of our future 240Hz tests, to verify a monitor's 60Hz lag, but in the meantime, you can check out numbers on the displaylag.com for 60Hz lag (Last time I read, they use the Leo Bodnar tester -- unless this changed).

[Notty_PT]

I can talk about this subject because:

1- just like you, I'm an input lag freak
2- I tested so many monitors that I even lost count
3- I'm not only an avid pc gamer but also Consoke gamer. I play football games competitively (fifa, pes)
4- I use XIM4 mouse adapter for PS4, where the absolute minimum input lag is needed @ 60hz

With that in mind, and just so you can consider my thoughts on this subject, let me assure you the fastest input lag monitor you can get for 60hz is the Asus VG245H (or vg245HE wich is the same model without height adjustement)

This monitor is the most responsive to the controller I ever tested. Is also very fast response time wise. I use it at 60 trace free to minimize overshooting, but it can go on 80 without any problem.

Asus VX238H is another very fast monitor BUT is smaller, wich may not serve you well and it has niticeable worse colours. It costs way less tho.

As for 240hz monitors DO NOT buy one if you want to connect a console, even if you use a PC aswell. These first 240hz panels have around 16ms input lag @ 60hz (leo bodnar). The Asus models I mentioned are around 9ms/10ms. This is the reason I didnt buy 240hz monitor yet, I want to pay 500€ for a good whole package. 240hz monitors for now are only fast at 240hz because of the lower input lag high refresh rates induce.

Also tried the new Samsung CFG73 144hz, LG 24GM79 144hz, Benq models, etc. They all lagged behind at 60hz.

So you may ask me wich monitor is fast for both 60hz and 144hz right?

Asus MG248Q (or MG248QR with freesync). What a surprise! Asus again! LG w236d 120hz is also fast at 60hz but you cant find one anymore. Asus VG248QE also fast at both refresh rates but has pwm flicker wich is bad for eyestrain or headaches.

So pretty much your best options are:

Asus VG245H/HE 75hz monitor
Asus MG248Q/QR 144hz monitor

If you have a model in mind, tell me. There is a high chance I tested it so I can give you my impressions about its performance at 60hz.

Cheers

[Adamchevy]

Just curious, what were your best measurements? I’m trying to find a 4:3 aspect ratio monitor to use with my Mister FPGA. The best LCD monitors today still don’t do any better than 8ms of measured latency at 60hz. I found an Eizo S2133 monitor that’s 4:3 rated at 6ms, but I’m not sure how accurate that really is.