Nitro XF252Q vs Omen X 25F

Everything about displays and monitors. 120Hz, 144Hz, 240Hz, 4K, 1440p, input lag, display shopping, monitor purchase decisions, compare, versus, debate, and more. Questions? Just ask!
whitepuzzle
Posts: 30
Joined: 13 Jun 2019, 17:46

Re: Nitro XF252Q vs Omen X 25F

Post by whitepuzzle » 18 Sep 2019, 21:17

Fabulist wrote:Can someone explain how does the Omen have lower input lag although it states 1ms GtG while the Nitro has slightly higher input lag with 0.3ms GtG?

What about the XN253QX and KD25F that they state 0.4/0.5ms respectively, is this not the case? I also see that @ tomshardware reviews the Omen has lower input lag than the KD25F.

What am I missing here?
You're confusing response time and input lag. Response time is pixel transition speed; speed at which pixels change colour. This more so affects perceived motion blur.

The XF252Q could have higher signal processing delay. Or, more likely, the variance between measurement methods as well as the inaccuracy of the methods used could have resulted in the XF252Q appearing to have higher input lag due to margin of error. Both monitors probably have a minimal amount of signal processing delay.

Fabulist
Posts: 9
Joined: 24 Feb 2014, 20:52

Re: Nitro XF252Q vs Omen X 25F

Post by Fabulist » 19 Sep 2019, 14:27

whitepuzzle wrote: You're confusing response time and input lag. Response time is pixel transition speed; speed at which pixels change colour. This more so affects perceived motion blur.

The XF252Q could have higher signal processing delay. Or, more likely, the variance between measurement methods as well as the inaccuracy of the methods used could have resulted in the XF252Q appearing to have higher input lag due to margin of error. Both monitors probably have a minimal amount of signal processing delay.
But isn't input lag directly tied and correlated to response time, whilst response time itself being an individual metric?

I mean, isn't the XF252Q using the new AUO panel, while the Omen does not? What about the fact the XF252Q states a 0.3ms response and Omen a 1ms response, however the Omen has a response time report of:

80% Response Time: 2.1 ms
100% Response Time: 5.3 ms
Best Overdrive Setting: Level 3

While the XF252Q has a response time report of:

80% Response Time: 1.8 ms
100% Response Time: 4.5 ms
Best Overdrive Setting: Normal

Their charts for the highest setting also share the same deviations, how is this even possible?

boxszs
Posts: 20
Joined: 17 Aug 2019, 13:43

Re: Nitro XF252Q vs Omen X 25F

Post by boxszs » 19 Sep 2019, 22:03

So isnt the XF252Q faster? Lower ms?

Fabulist
Posts: 9
Joined: 24 Feb 2014, 20:52

Re: Nitro XF252Q vs Omen X 25F

Post by Fabulist » 20 Sep 2019, 04:54

Not as fast as it states, or should be, or I am misunderstanding every single thing reviewers' test results say and what companies put on the boxes.

Post Reply