Is "good display response" a nice thing to have, or does it affect gameplay like other types of input lag?

[davidl41]

For instance, if a computer has more end to end latency, or a mouse sensor has more input latency that is considered bad for gaming performance. Does an Oled that has 0.1ms response time have as big an effect for gaming performance as a relatively good IPS's response time of 4ms? Or, is it exclusively a quality of life improvement than a gaming performance improvement?

[Hyote]

It has to be a net positive. Not that I care too much with a 240 Hz TN.

[kyube]

For instance, if a computer has more end to end latency, or a mouse sensor has more input latency that is considered bad for gaming performance. Does an Oled that has 0.1ms response time have as big an effect for gaming performance as a relatively good IPS's response time of 4ms? Or, is it exclusively a quality of life improvement than a gaming performance improvement?

1.) Display latency cannot be simplified to a singular value, it's a range of values.
To cut any explanations short, go for OLED to have a 'truthful' refresh rate representation. Ideally, wait for the new RGB stripe panels.

2.) G2G RT is one of the most important metrics in the total display latency chain, when chasing the sample & hold path.
Even in the backlight strobing path, it helps dealing with artifacts tremendously.
See this discussion for the state of G2G RT performance in +240Hz displays as of Q4 2025: viewtopic.php?t=15089#p120604

Of course, all of this discussion is irrelevant if you aren't able to sustain the required frame rate = refresh rate target which is necessary for benefitting fully from the sample & hold path.