RTINGS test 240Hz HP Omen X 25f - Lowest input lag yet

[HalfwayDead]

RTINGS have just released their test of the HP Omen X 25f. The first review of the monitor that I've seen.
https://www.rtings.com/monitor/reviews/hp/omen-x-25f

It has the lowest input lag that they've ever tested (although this is only their second 240 Hz monitor). Coming in at only 2.6 ms. 1.1 ms less than the BenQ XL2540. Based on their specific testing setup, I'd estimate that averages below ~1.7 ms should actually be impossible with a 240 Hz monitor. They don't even say if they subtract some time for the lag introduced by using the USB connection in their test. If they do not, then the real lag is even lower.

The Overdrive seems to be tuned really well too. It is Freesync compatible and NVIDIA GSync certified. I'd assume that this also means it won't have any frame skipping issues. Based on this test, it seems like it does everything that a competitive gamer would want except for strobing.

What do you guys think? There is a store that offers it for 380€ in Germany. I'd have to drive 100 km, but my university train ticket allows me to drive there for free. I'm considering it at the moment

[Notty_PT]

Finally I see a new review of a 240hz monitor by Rtings! And I KNEW IT! I said several times on this forum that after trying every 240hz monitor, only the Asus XG258Q shown me the real advantages of a 240hz scanout panel, with its crazy low input lag, and I even said "I bet according to rtings it would have around 2ms-2,5ms input lag"

2,6ms is the type of value we are looking for! Otherwise is not worth it to buy a 240hz monitor if it´s only 0,4ms faster than the best 144hz ones (Benq XL254x has 3,7ms and ViewSonic XG2402 144hz monitor has 4,1ms).

It also has way better overdrive it seems with 5ms vs 8ms on the Benq. So it seems HP did a great job with this one, wich is surprising to me as their previous 144hz monitors were all very bad.

This is a winner and from now on it will be on my recomendations as I trust 200% on Rtings. The best reviewers out there.

Outstanding product for gaming it seems! A proper low lag 240hz monitor with clear response advantages over 144hz!

EDIT: It also costs 350€ on Amazon Spain right now, wich is a very fair price for a 240hz monitor!

[Leki]

So is this using the new AUO panel?

Can't see any mention of a feature to brighten up dark areas in games?

Would be nice to see a comparison to the Acer Nitro XF252Q https://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/ac ... xf252q.htm

[karavanasam]

Good morning friends.165hz monitor Asus VG258QR already has the lowest input lag.2,3ms
https://www.prad.de/testberichte/test-a ... drive165Hz
Dont worry I am always here to remind you before a new record breaker comes.

[do0om]

wow!! This is great.

So is this using the new AUO panel?

I just asked rtings in the comment section on twitter : https://twitter.com/rtingsdotcom/status ... 9257980928
Considering the improved response time, it might be.

Good morning friends.165hz monitor Asus VG258QR already has the lowest input lag.2,3ms

Maybe but do we have the testing methodology ?

Im not sure at all and correct me if I am wrong but I don't think prad takes scanout latency into account when measuring input lag.
But Rtings does according to this video : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbU-6jo9AeE especially when they show the graph
at 1:14. They take average screen reaction. Average screen scanout latency on 240hz is (1000/240)/2=2.08ms.
If what I am guessing is true, we can infer the signal processing latency + response time threshold for detection by their device on the hp x25f is 2.6ms-2.08=0.52ms.

Average scanout latency on 165 hz is (1000/165)/2=3.03ms. So if the testing methodology takes average input lag to the center of the screen, it would be impossible to be below 3ms with a 165hz.

What also makes me believe this is that there is no 144hz monitor under 4ms. Since the average scanout latency of 144hz is 3.47ms.
The "best" 144hz monitor on rtings has 4.1ms input lag https://www.rtings.com/monitor/reviews/viewsonic/xg2402
This would give a 0.63 ms signal processing latency + response time threshold detection.

I'd like to have your feedback, I am not sure at all.

Finally I see a new review of a 240hz monitor by Rtings! And I KNEW IT!

Yes rtings, badly needs more 240hz monitors tested so we can compare!
I think we should vote for the MSI OCULUX NXG252R https://www.rtings.com/monitor/suggestions
What do you think?

2,6ms is the type of value we are looking for! Otherwise is not worth it to buy a 240hz monitor if it´s only 0,4ms faster than the best 144hz ones (Benq XL254x has 3,7ms and ViewSonic XG2402 144hz monitor has 4,1ms).

Again, I am not sure but I think that if the input lag is the same, 240hz will have an advantage over 144hz because it has
less motion blur and less jitter error while aiming.
Maybe Chief can confirm this.

[1000WATT]

This is a winner and from now on it will be on my recomendations as I trust 200% on Rtings. The best reviewers out there.

I will wait for your review Notty_PT ) I tried the xg258q, and got a feeling for which I was not ready, the crosshair just clung to the enemies like aimbot. But unfortunately a terrible overdrive and black and white colors. It's hard for me to call it a color monitor.
pg258q with better colors and overdrive, too slow, I didn't notice the difference with pg279q .
I do not have confidence in third-party resources. But your personal assessment is what will make me tear my ass off the chair and go to the store behind the monitor with the best overdrive and at least with the same input delay as xg258q. I am waiting for you. I think I'm not the only one waiting for you.

[karavanasam]

I will add one weird result.VG278QR is also 165hz and 1080p but somehow its input lag is 7,3 ms compared to 2,3 ms VG258QR.It is only 2 inch bigger but it somehow has a lot more input lag
Doom my feedback is simple.This thing is very fast.I feel it everytime I play a multiplayer shooter.

[karavanasam]

This is a winner and from now on it will be on my recomendations as I trust 200% on Rtings. The best reviewers out there.

I will wait for your review Notty_PT ) I tried the xg258q, and got a feeling for which I was not ready, the crosshair just clung to the enemies like aimbot. But unfortunately a terrible overdrive and black and white colors. It's hard for me to call it a color monitor.
pg258q with better colors and overdrive, too slow, I didn't notice the difference with pg279q .
I do not have confidence in third-party resources. But your personal assessment is what will make me tear my ass off the chair and go to the store behind the monitor with the best overdrive and at least with the same input delay as xg258q. I am waiting for you. I think I'm not the only one waiting for you.

Yesssss.Notty should buy and test this monitor too. His followers like this guy will only buy this model after Notty's review so dont make him wait.

[Notty_PT]

Good morning friends.165hz monitor Asus VG258QR already has the lowest input lag.2,3ms
https://www.prad.de/testberichte/test-a ... drive165Hz
Dont worry I am always here to remind you before a new record breaker comes.

Completly different testing methodologies bro, not even comparable! Plus if you notice they also rated the ViewSonic 2,3ms on their website. Rtings methodology is different and as a previous Vg258QR owner I can defo assure you it is slower than 240hz monitors input lag wise, while still being great for what it is (165hz).

This is a winner and from now on it will be on my recomendations as I trust 200% on Rtings. The best reviewers out there.

I will wait for your review Notty_PT ) I tried the xg258q, and got a feeling for which I was not ready, the crosshair just clung to the enemies like aimbot. But unfortunately a terrible overdrive and black and white colors. It's hard for me to call it a color monitor.
pg258q with better colors and overdrive, too slow, I didn't notice the difference with pg279q .
I do not have confidence in third-party resources. But your personal assessment is what will make me tear my ass off the chair and go to the store behind the monitor with the best overdrive and at least with the same input delay as xg258q. I am waiting for you. I think I'm not the only one waiting for you.

Well, thecnically I don´t do reviews, no science, nothing, only feel and stats But I would recomend this model right now because I trust Rtings more than even me 2,6ms for Rtings means an absolute monster low input lag wise, and 5ms on the response time same thing, means the overdrive must be really good!

Also don´t forget, if you want a cheap option, XL2430T 144hz monitor from Benq overclocks easily to 200hz-220hz and has better overdrive than any 240hz native monitor. You can see this situation on its own thread on "Display Overclocking" section. Is a good option for 200€ -> viewtopic.php?f=8&t=5544

[HalfwayDead]

Im not sure at all and correct me if I am wrong but I don't think prad takes scanout latency into account when measuring input lag.
But Rtings does according to this video : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbU-6jo9AeE especially when they show the graph
at 1:14. They take average screen reaction. Average screen scanout latency on 240hz is (1000/240)/2=2.08ms.
If what I am guessing is true, we can infer the signal processing latency + response time threshold for detection by their device on the hp x25f is 2.6ms-2.08=0.52ms.

Average scanout latency on 165 hz is (1000/165)/2=3.03ms. So if the testing methodology takes average input lag to the center of the screen, it would be impossible to be below 3ms with a 165hz.

What also makes me believe this is that there is no 144hz monitor under 4ms. Since the average scanout latency of 144hz is 3.47ms.
The "best" 144hz monitor on rtings has 4.1ms input lag https://www.rtings.com/monitor/reviews/viewsonic/xg2402
This would give a 0.63 ms signal processing latency + response time threshold detection.

I'd like to have your feedback, I am not sure at all.

Your math is spot on. However, their tool doesn't measure a single pixel. It measures a small area which I eyeballed to be around 1/6th of the vertical size of a 24" monitor (that was my initial guess, but it was probably a bit big, now that I'm looking at it again). They're not using VSync, so the scanline could appear anywhere underneath that area and the device should detect it immediately. The remaining 5/6th of the area would on average also take 1/6th less time because the scanout only has to reach the top row of the photodiodes. That's why I gave an estimation of ~1.7 ms minimum estimation in my main post. That would mean 0.9 ms of signal processing.

In their explanation of their testing method, they also say: "The whole chain from the PC back to the tool via USB adds no more than 1 ms and we’ve confirmed that our results are within 0.5 ms of the Leo Bodnar tool." This sounds to me like the Arduino is being used as an input device with 1000 Hz polling as that should at exactly 0.5 ms on average and 1 ms in the worst case. They didn't say if they just subtract that 0.5 ms average though. If not, then the signal processing of the X 25f would have to be even lower. I should probably ask them. They seem to be quite willing to answer questions and it should give us a better estimate of how much lower it can go.

Finally I see a new review of a 240hz monitor by Rtings! And I KNEW IT!

Yes rtings, badly needs more 240hz monitors tested so we can compare!
I think we should vote for the MSI OCULUX NXG252R https://www.rtings.com/monitor/suggestions
What do you think?

2,6ms is the type of value we are looking for! Otherwise is not worth it to buy a 240hz monitor if it´s only 0,4ms faster than the best 144hz ones (Benq XL254x has 3,7ms and ViewSonic XG2402 144hz monitor has 4,1ms).

Again, I am not sure but I think that if the input lag is the same, 240hz will have an advantage over 144hz because it has
less motion blur and less jitter error while aiming.
Maybe Chief can confirm this.

Absolutely. 240 Hz has all the advantages you named and simply pushing more frames per second is an advantage in itself. While it is usually used by competitive players where every ms counts, it's great to see that this monitor drives the input lag even lower. The advantage from the XL2540 over the XG2402 is far from useless. I'd say it's more significant than the 1.1 ms. Keep in mind that RTINGS are measuring on average slightly less than half of the scanout duration (as mentioned above). With my generous math that would mean that the time it takes for a full frame to display based on your latest action is 5.4 ms on the XL2540, 7.0 ms on the XG2402, and 4.3 ms on the X 25f.

Good morning friends.165hz monitor Asus VG258QR already has the lowest input lag.2,3ms
https://www.prad.de/testberichte/test-a ... drive165Hz
Dont worry I am always here to remind you before a new record breaker comes.

Others have already said it, but it's absolutely impossible to compare the raw ms values between different testing methods. Prad made me lose all my faith in their input lag measurements when they wrote on their LG 27GK750F-B review (loosely translated): "Our test results with our usual testing method were completely unplausible so we decided to only publish the results of the Leo Bodnar testing tool." Leo Bodnar is great but only works at 60 Hz. Their other test already had some test results that were in direct violation of different reviewers, e.g. XB258Qbmiprzx.