Blur Busters Forums

Posted: **09 Nov 2019, 14:56**

Hi guys,

I'm curious why the LG 27GL850-B has no love here. It's an 1440p 144 hz IPS panel that has 100% response time .7ms faster than the XG2402, with .2ms slower input lag, and .4ms slower 80% response time according to rtings:

https://www.rtings.com/monitor/tools/co ... eshold=0.1

If you get the viewsonic xg270qg, a version of this panel that is overclocked at 165Hz, it will arguably have less input lag than the XG2402 at 165Hz. pcmonitors.info has reviewed that panel here:

https://pcmonitors.info/reviews/viewsonic-xg270qg/

Posted: **10 Nov 2019, 14:21**

It's a great monitor if you are within its target audience.

That said, keep in mind many professional gamers in esports, prefer 1080p instead of 1440p. Framerate is a much bigger cause of input lag at these timescales. It's the same reason why some people switch to 1024x768 or 1280x1024 to get better scores because of higher frame rates.

100fps has 1/100sec = 10ms input lag from GPU rendering
200fps has 1/200sec = 5ms input lag from GPU rendering
300fps has 1/300sec = 3.33ms input lag from GPU rendering
500fps has 1/500sec = 2ms input lag from GPU rendering

This is in addition, above-and-beyond monitor input lag. Plus don't forget GtG. I can see the difference between 0.5ms GtG versus 1ms GtG and 3ms GtG -- faster GtG looks better in many situations, especially at fast motion speeds at high resolutions. The higher the resolution and refresh rate, the more visible GtG and MPRT issues can become. See Pixel Response FAQ: GtG vs MPRT

So running games at a lower resolution saves a lot more input lag, than 0.7ms monitor lag.

Not to say, this monitor is an excellent monitor. It just doesn't satisfy the whole audience.

That's why I am excited about the 1080p 240Hz 1ms IPS panels -- fewer compromises for the 1080p competitive audience.

Posted: **14 Nov 2019, 21:21**

Thank you.

Posted: **15 Nov 2019, 20:39**

Chief Blur Buster wrote:It's a great monitor if you are within its target audience.

That said, keep in mind many professional gamers in esports, prefer 1080p instead of 1440p. Framerate is a much bigger cause of input lag at these timescales. It's the same reason why some people switch to 1024x768 or 1280x1024 to get better scores because of higher frame rates.

100fps has 1/100sec = 10ms input lag from GPU rendering
200fps has 1/200sec = 5ms input lag from GPU rendering
300fps has 1/300sec = 3.33ms input lag from GPU rendering
500fps has 1/500sec = 2ms input lag from GPU rendering

This is in addition, above-and-beyond monitor input lag. Plus don't forget GtG. I can see the difference between 0.5ms GtG versus 1ms GtG and 3ms GtG -- faster GtG looks better in many situations, especially at fast motion speeds at high resolutions. The higher the resolution and refresh rate, the more visible GtG and MPRT issues can become. See Pixel Response FAQ: GtG vs MPRT

So running games at a lower resolution saves a lot more input lag, than 0.7ms monitor lag.

Not to say, this monitor is an excellent monitor. It just doesn't satisfy the whole audience.

That's why I am excited about the 1080p 240Hz 1ms IPS panels -- fewer compromises for the 1080p competitive audience.

Do you have any write-ups on the relationship between visibility of GtG smearing and resolution? It's not something I've considered before. Why does an increase in resolution affect how noticeable the GtG transitions are?

Posted: **23 Apr 2020, 22:33**

Chief Blur Buster wrote: ↑
10 Nov 2019, 14:21
It's a great monitor if you are within its target audience.

That said, keep in mind many professional gamers in esports, prefer 1080p instead of 1440p. Framerate is a much bigger cause of input lag at these timescales. It's the same reason why some people switch to 1024x768 or 1280x1024 to get better scores because of higher frame rates.

100fps has 1/100sec = 10ms input lag from GPU rendering
200fps has 1/200sec = 5ms input lag from GPU rendering
300fps has 1/300sec = 3.33ms input lag from GPU rendering
500fps has 1/500sec = 2ms input lag from GPU rendering

This is in addition, above-and-beyond monitor input lag. Plus don't forget GtG. I can see the difference between 0.5ms GtG versus 1ms GtG and 3ms GtG -- faster GtG looks better in many situations, especially at fast motion speeds at high resolutions. The higher the resolution and refresh rate, the more visible GtG and MPRT issues can become. See Pixel Response FAQ: GtG vs MPRT

So running games at a lower resolution saves a lot more input lag, than 0.7ms monitor lag.

Not to say, this monitor is an excellent monitor. It just doesn't satisfy the whole audience.

That's why I am excited about the 1080p 240Hz 1ms IPS panels -- fewer compromises for the 1080p competitive audience.

How does the LG 27 GL 850-B relate to the LG 38 GL 950G-B ?

The 38" sounds great, but is too large for my use case, does the 27" (Listed on the same Amazon page.) have similar performance?

I know that most "competitive" players want a 1080, but I think if the 27 2560x1440 27GL850-b has the high ratings that the 38" model has it would make a fantastic joining of both speed and clarity.

Blur Busters Forums

no love for LG 27GL850-B ? its .7ms faster than XG2402

no love for LG 27GL850-B ? its .7ms faster than XG2402

Re: no love for LG 27GL850-B ? its .7ms faster than XG2402

Re: no love for LG 27GL850-B ? its .7ms faster than XG2402

Re: no love for LG 27GL850-B ? its .7ms faster than XG2402

Re: no love for LG 27GL850-B ? its .7ms faster than XG2402