Response Times
A topic that usually comes up as a problem with LCDs is their slower response times relative to CRTs. While there's no doubt that even the best LCDs still exhibit some slight pixel smearing, the vast majority of users are okay with the level of performance we have available now. We also find it extremely difficult to tell the difference between various LCDs with response times ranging from as low as 2ms all the way up to 16ms. As with other specifications, there appears to be marketing influence on the final reported numbers.
To try to illustrate response times, we use our camera set to 1/80s shutter speed and a 2.5 F-stop at ISO-400. However, taking a picture of a display using a high shutter speed still isn't the same as looking at the display in person. LCDs run at a refresh rate of 60 Hz, and we use a shutter speed of 1/80s, so the net result is that we will capture an image of the display as it appears over a short period as opposed to an instantaneous look at the state of the various pixels. Image retention on your retinas also occurs, so even if you can eliminate the smearing effect at the display level you won't necessarily "see" a perfectly crisp transition. Then you have to consider some of the latest games are adding motion blur back in using DirectX 9/10 in order to make things look more realistic... but in that case, it's an artistic effect rather than a technological defect, right?
Links to previous response time images are below, taken during the Game 1 demo in 3DMark03.
Acer AL2216W #1 Acer AL2216W #2
Dell 2405FPW #1 Dell 2405FPW #2
Dell 2707WFP #1 Dell 2707WFP #2
Dell 3007WFP #1 Dell 3007WFP #2
Gateway FPD2485W
HP LP3065 #1 HP LP3065 #2
HP w2207
HP w2408
 MPA Off |
 MPA On |
Samsung advertises a 5 ms gray-to-gray (GTG) response time, although it's not entirely clear whether that figure is with MPA enabled or disabled. We tested response times and configurations, and we would be hard-pressed to tell the difference. In our best-case images, the 245T does appear to have slightly better response times than other 24" LCDs that we've reviewed, but the actual difference is probably less than a couple milliseconds. We're not sure about the rest of you, but our eyes just aren't sensitive enough to tell the difference between 6/1000s and 8/1000s, even if the first is theoretically 33% less time.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
60 Comments
View All Comments
Deusfaux - Thursday, February 7, 2008 - link
I thought Samsung monitors had a 16:9 scaling mode?JarredWalton - Thursday, February 7, 2008 - link
This one doesn't... other Samsung displays might. See the OSD image gallery for details. The only options are "Wide" (fill the whole screen) and "4:3". That means that 5:4 resolutions (1280x1024) will also be distorted no matter what you do. I don't think the minor stretch of 16:9 to 16:10 is terrible, but some people care more about that than I do. Again, though, this is only an issue on non-PC use (or if your drivers don't allow you to correct the scaling).hotdogandchips - Thursday, February 7, 2008 - link
Jarred, can you tell us when the NDA regarding the 2408WFP expires by any chance? ;0JarredWalton - Thursday, February 7, 2008 - link
LOL... actually, no, I can't. Funny thing is that the date isn't set in stone just yet either, which is part of the reason I can't say. It's supposed to be this month, based on what I heard at CES, but it might get moved to early March?AcAuroRa - Thursday, February 7, 2008 - link
According tohttp://www.samsung.com/us/system/consumer/product/...">http://www.samsung.com/us/system/consum.../C070096...
... its a TN.... bah I'm confused -_-.. is it a TN or a PVA?
I actually own a w2408... and I actually like the thing -_-;;...but if there can be some facts straightened out I might go and get a 245T off the 'Egg as it is currently on sale for $650...
JarredWalton - Thursday, February 7, 2008 - link
See above post... the unit I reviewed is most assuredly an S-PVA panel. I believe the PDF is simply erroneous.bobo51 - Thursday, February 7, 2008 - link
I am confused.The article identifies the 245T as having a PVA panel. But I just went to the Samsung website and in their specification PDF for the 245T the panel is stated to be a TN.
Is their website document incorrect?
JarredWalton - Thursday, February 7, 2008 - link
I can absolutely state that the 245T LCD I have is S-PVA (based on how it looks from various angles), and Samsung told me it was S-PVA before I received it. http://www.samsung.com/us/system/consumer/product/...">This states otherwise, so I guess someone just put the wrong information in there. The other possibility is that there are different LCD panels in some of the 245T displays... hopefully not.Most companies do not make a point of stating what sort of technology their panels use. While I can understand that on TN panels, I'd think anyone using a PVA or IPS panel would want to crow about it. Kudos to Samsung for at least putting information on all of their displays in the PDF files; now they just need to make sure the data is correct. :)
I'm going to email my Samsung contact about this and see if there's just an error in the PDF that they can correct.
XrayDoc - Thursday, February 7, 2008 - link
I was all excited about this new display until I read about the limited scaling choices. I can't believe they didn't include a 1:1 or pixel to pixel option! Not everyone has a triple SLI video card setup that can run Crysis well at 1920 x 1200. I'd much prefer to run the game at a lower resolution with black borders and have the "pixels" look sharp, as opposed to stretching the non native resolution to fill the screen and look blurry! Plus automatically stretching 16:9 aspect sources vertically to fill the 16:10 screen is just plain ludicrous. Most people can notice when the aspect ratio is displayed incorrectly. What happens with a 2.35:1 ratio DVD? Does that also get stretched vertically so that you dont' see any black bars at the top or bottom? This single design flaw is a definite deal breaker for me. I hope the upcoming new models from Dell, etc. don't have this same design flaw.yyrkoon - Friday, February 8, 2008 - link
The big question would be; 'why do you need a 24" LCD to play Crysis?' For me personally I cannot see the need for anything much more than a 19" LCD(a good one at that) for gaming. This making current title fly on my C2D system with a 7600GT, and it draws way less power than one of the current higher end cards. Granted I probably wouldnt mind using a 8600 or something that draws slightly more power, and has DirectX 10 capabilities, but I wont go out of my way just yet to purchase another card, especially since I am still using XP Pro.Also I'm noticing complaints about input lag ? I would think this would be an image retouching LCD which doesnt require fast screen refreshes. You can buy cheap fast LCDs that will play games just fine(all day long).