Are we permanently stalled on LCD response times?

[Pugchucker]

Seems like things have not improved much since 16-25ms response times came out about, what, 2 years ago? Prices have been about the same and sizes haven't changed much either. Have manufacturers hit a wall or just leaving well enough alone?

 

[John]

The problem is that people put too much emphasis on response times. You don't always find the best diamond by referencing the paper specs, and most of the time you need to see it in person. LCD's follow the same trend.

As a point of reference my Dell 1800FP does not ghost at all, and it has a 30ms response time.

 

[Dman877]

Originally posted by: John
The problem is that people put too much emphasis on response times. You don't always find the best diamond by referencing the paper specs, and most of the time you need to see it in person. LCD's follow the same trend.

As a point of reference my Dell 1800FP does not ghost at all, and it has a 30ms response time.

Yup, there's way too much emphasis on response time. My 25ms 172N owned my 192N (also 25ms) in pixel response and exhibited much less ghosting. If you look at a good panel like a 2001/1800 etc dell or one of the NEC's, etc and have a problem with ghosting, you have freakishly sensitive eyes .

 

[drag]

The trouble I get into with LCD displays is that I like to read text while scrolling up and down the screen.

No matter what type of LCD display I get it will eventually give me big eye strain if I don't remember not to do that. That and prices are the main reason I still prefer CRT to LCD.

My secondary screen is a LCD display, because of it's small size, but I wouldn't use one for my main desktop display.


Of course once they get OLED displays perfected then that will solve most of LCD's problems. Black is true black, not just a darker gray then the rest of the display, and much much faster response time. And they'd be even thinner with a much wider veiwing angle.

 

[zephyrprime]

I guess we're screwed. Just not possible to make those little crystals twirl faster. I've read some stuff about various techniques to improve response times from the likes of Sony and Mitsubishi but they never materialize.

 

[Lyfer]

I saw one of those new Samsung 12ms 17" lcd's at a local shop. Its fvcken nice, watching some of the demos didn't notice any ghosting at all.

 

[Tab]

I am starting to beileve that there is more too it than just response time, like why does the 12ms Samsung 172x Ghost like a nightmare? Oh, PRICES have changed! Go look at www.newegg.com

 

[lenjack]

Of course response times will improve...it's just a matter of waiting.

 

[imported_intercollector]

Display technology is, and always will be slow. CRT's are the same way. People ask too much, because of how fast other hardware improves in performance and cost.

Things will always be slower in the display market as far as cost and improvements are concerned. With hardware, most of the cost is in the technology and the fab process. With displays, most of the cost is the materials, and the cost of material wont decrease, it will actually increase over time.

 

[drag]

Originally posted by: Tabb
I am starting to beileve that there is more too it than just response time, like why does the 12ms Samsung 172x Ghost like a nightmare? Oh, PRICES have changed! Go look at www.newegg.com

Also it helps that their is no industry-wide agreement on what exactly the advertised "refresh time" means.

Some advertised refresh times, while not techinically innaccurate, are bullshit non-the-less.

 

[imported_intercollector]

Originally posted by: drag

Originally posted by: Tabb
I am starting to beileve that there is more too it than just response time, like why does the 12ms Samsung 172x Ghost like a nightmare? Oh, PRICES have changed! Go look at www.newegg.com

Also it helps that their is no industry-wide agreement on what exactly the advertised "refresh time" means.

Some advertised refresh times, while not techinically innaccurate, are bullshit non-the-less.

That's why actually very few manufacturer's sites actually are advertising it. It's really more of a benchmark than an actual spec, since it can be measured many different ways.

 

[imported_intercollector]

Originally posted by: drag

Originally posted by: Tabb
I am starting to beileve that there is more too it than just response time, like why does the 12ms Samsung 172x Ghost like a nightmare? Oh, PRICES have changed! Go look at www.newegg.com

Also it helps that their is no industry-wide agreement on what exactly the advertised "refresh time" means.

Some advertised refresh times, while not techinically innaccurate, are bullshit non-the-less.

 

[Pocatello]

How about a price drop? Or no more dead pixels for brand new LCDs? Those things stop me from replacing my heat lamp of a CRT monitor with a nice LCD one.

 

[Mithan]

Originally posted by: Lyfer
I saw one of those new Samsung 12ms 17" lcd's at a local shop. Its fvcken nice, watching some of the demos didn't notice any ghosting at all.

I bought one of those and it was comparable to my NEC LCD1765. Great, but not perfect. Still worth the buy but I had to get 4 Samsungs before I finally got one without a burnt pixel.

 

[pillage2001]

What are the model numbers of the new Samsungs?

 

[n7]

Originally posted by: John
The problem is that people put too much emphasis on response times. You don't always find the best diamond by referencing the paper specs, and most of the time you need to see it in person. LCD's follow the same trend.

As a point of reference my Dell 1800FP does not ghost at all, and it has a 30ms response time.

Do i ever agree!
Mebbe i just do not know what to look for, but i have never ever noticed any ghosting with any of my games on my 20ms LCD.

 

[CanOWorms]

Organic LEDs are supposed to be fast. Imagine in the future (far future!), you can just print out your monitor from a printer with organic semiconductors!

 

[Nebor]

Originally posted by: CanOWorms
Organic LEDs are supposed to be fast. Imagine in the future (far future!), you can just print out your monitor from a printer with organic semiconductors!

But you couldn't change the height of your monitor... only the width.... I'd rather be able to print drivers licenses. Kids love those things.

BTW, to improve response times, try a little chocolate pudding. Or a large latte. My NEC 1760 shows no ghosting after being treated with those. Or maybe that's "in spite of being treated with those."

 

[RS3RS]

One thing I can't stand about LCD's is.... Contrast. I have yet to see an LCD that didn't drive me insane trying to watch anything with lots of contrast, shades of dark grey along side black, etc.

That and response times are the two things stopping me from ever buying an LCD until they're approved. Well, price too...

 

[CJP]

A couple of years ago I read about a technology that was supposed to really speed up LCD's. It was called "feed forward driving" or something (can't remember exactly). Anyway it never seemed to materialize. Doesn't matter with the 12 and 16ms models out now I guess. Still having the non native resolutions suffer in quality is what keeps me away still.

 

[0roo0roo]

its not too much emphasis on response times at all. its the fact that the differences between the less then optimal response times isn't so great. not that we've reached perfection. the ms rated now is just for the black/white transition, rest of shades take up to 3x longer. we've got a long way to go.

 

[Marth]

I think the industry is slowly working to make lcds with lower response times but they still haven't fixed the contrast problems. Ghosting isn't really any issue anymore but lcds still can't compete with crts for contrast which is why I don't own one yet.

 

[tweeve2002]

I have an NEC 1560M and Its great...OLEDs are great but the only problem with then right now are that the blue OLEDs have an extreamly short life compaired to the other primary colors.

 

[CrazyHelloDeli]

I fear the day CRT's go away forever

*Hugs his CRT*

 

[ROcHE]

I'm still in love with my 21" CRT.