Question on input lag and HD TVs

lol. : )

 

Thanks for this link.

 

perhaps i'm just very jaded on the subject, but if you ask me hdmi is utter shit.

it's dvi-i and spdif in the same cable, plus a bunch of post processing and hdcp garbage. usually ends up with inferior all around image quality than an analog counterpart (not to mention it lags like a 90's dialup connection).

vga is, imo, the best all-around input there is. instant response (all analog signals have this, though most hdtv's only disable post-processing for their vga ports), beautiful colors and sharpness that digital video connections simply can't compare to. the only "issue" with it now is that you can't display bd material on it in 1080p (this is in no way a technical limitation of RGB, rather a drm implementation on the part of sony. you can display virtually every resolution possible over both component and vga).

component is an incredibly high quality and versatile platform with only one problem- hollywood can't control it. it's essentially (i use this term rather loosely) the same thing as vga, just sent over a different signal (Y/Pb/Cr instead of RGB).

not a problem. anything to help prevent people from wasting money on a crap display.

i posted more of this info over at srk, where it has sadly been ignored in favor of baseless claims that $display is "lagless" and a bunch of people spouting shit they think is true because everyone on srk is a complete fucking retard.

sorry bout' the nerdrage, just pisses me off that once someone there steps in with actual facts they either get flamed or downright ignored. then again, that's why i post there so rarely.

 

That is awesome. Thanks for the link so much.

I dont know any theory on displays, I just speak of what I have personally experienced over time. In WCG qualifier last year and WCG grand final I had to play on Samsung HDTVs. And it became obvious to me that composite cable connected to those TVs produces horrible lag. Anyone who cant see it must be blind. The lag was however solved by using either VGA or HDMI.

There are tons of reports of lag, I remember in Moscow fighting arena last year (I didnt travel there but some of my friends did) They had to change completely into CRT TVs to avoid lag. I have no idea what label HDTVs they were originally using.

At home I play on CRT TV, so I am used to the game being completely lagless.

 

well firstly, component and composite are not the same thing. component is the red/blue/green cables and composite is the yellow cable most of us grew up plugging in our consoles with. component sends separate signals over separate cables, whereas composite sends one signal over one cable.

that being said, like i said in my previous post, most hdtv's only disable post-processing (the biggest barrier between the signal and the screen) on their vga port because they know that people will be using that for their pc's. all other analog connections (composite, svideo and component) are all victim to post-processing and upscaling because this does increase the overall image quality of those inputs (though at the expense of response).

if you search on newegg for large format displays, those are all lcd's designed for commercial use (for hospitals, businesses, etc.) that have little to no input lag at all on all of their inputs. this of course comes at a price, but well worth it if you're playing fighters or anything else display-intensive.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">There are tons of reports of lag, I remember in Moscow fighting arena last year (I didnt travel there but some of my friends did) They had to change completely into CRT TVs to avoid lag. I have no idea what label HDTVs they were originally using.</div></div>

it's not necessarily something that differs between manufacturers (though i will say that lg's are typically really good about reducing input lag), but rather the quality of the components used and the image processing chipset of that particular display.

but yes, crt's are still the best overall displays in nearly every aspect. the only issues they have is that they're big and use a lot of energy. i still use crt's for everything i can (well, i do have a dlp, but that's only for the 360 and movies really) and i'm not letting go until a superior technology (oled or sed) hits the consumer market.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">At home I play on CRT TV, so I am used to the game being completely lagless.</div></div>

good man. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

 

Well, not in picture quality.

 

just about every cad designer and professional photographer would like to have a word with you.

anyways, for shits and giggles i decided i'd do my own input lag test. the lcd is my laptop, a lenovo thinkpad r61. the crt is an envision EFT7x0.

the lcd was in it's native resolution at 1680x1050 (as to prevent any potential upscaling) and at it's highest possible refresh rate at that resolution (60hz). the crt was at it's highest possible non-widescreen resolution (1280x1024, which is technically 5:4 but still fits on this 4:3 monitor quite beautifully; plus crt's don't upscale things the same way lcd's do) and it's highest possible refresh rate at that resolution (60hz). the lcd is on the left side of the picture and the crt is on the right.

the camera i took these with is a canon powershot sd1000, using the fastest shutter exposure setting the camera has (1/8th of a second). before someone mentions it, yes, i know the ccd has a few hot pixels. no, i don't care.

so, without further ado:







if you find the difference in milliseconds a bit hard to make out, look at the rotating indicator on the right. you'll notice that even if what appears to be the exact same number shows up (like in the second one), the rotating indicator is always slightly ahead on the crt.

so, luckily for me, my laptop's lcd has more or less instant response. as we all know, this isn't typical of lcd's or hdtv's in general. i'll follow this up tomorrow with a comparison between the laptop and my dlp.

edit: it may have been assumed already, but this was using the thinkpad's vga output.

 

Sorry, but this is more bile than fact. HDCP is not a requirement of HDMI, it's a requirement of content control systems for blu-ray, dvd, etc. "Post-processing" is not a requirement of HDMI, there are plenty of displays that do 1:1 pixel mapping over HDMI and allow for disabling image enhancements. Image quality on HDMI is not inferior; especially on large displays, analog signal noise on a vga connection is noticeable compared to hdmi. Yes, there probably is a minimal amount of time necessary for processing HDMI signals as compared to analog signals, but certainly doesnt "lag like a 90's dialup connection". I've tested ~ 1 frame of difference between CRT and HDMI displays.

(I own an HDMI tv and a cab with a 29" vga monitor; I'd rather play VF on the cab, but it has nothing to do with HDMI being inherently shit)

 

From what I see you guys write, I believe our gaming experiences are affected more than anything how the TV manufacturers put their TV's together rather than what connection or standard we use.

And quash, I just based my opinion on the machines I have seen over here.. My own CRT certainly has inferior picture quality.

 

hdmi is required to allow for hdcp, though it is ultimately up to the display manufacturer if they choose to add hdcp support to their displays or not.

so this means that if you have one of the early hdmi-capable monitors that doesn't support hdcp, you won't be able to watch bd's at 1080p because the hdcp handshake will have failed.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"Post-processing" is not a requirement of HDMI, there are plenty of displays that do 1:1 pixel mapping over HDMI and allow for disabling image enhancements.</div></div>

i kinda said that when i mentioned large format displays (though i guess maybe my bitter sarcasm came through more than i wanted it to).

and again, this is something that depends far more on the display than the connection itself. there's lcd's out there that lag over vga ffs.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Image quality on HDMI is not inferior; especially on large displays, analog signal noise on a vga connection is noticeable compared to hdmi.</div></div>

in the countless numbers of tests on several different displays i've done, i have not found this to be true. but, that's hardly anything worth arguing over.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Yes, there probably is a minimal amount of time necessary for processing HDMI signals as compared to analog signals, but certainly doesnt "lag like a 90's dialup connection". I've tested ~ 1 frame of difference between CRT and HDMI displays.</div></div>

exaggeration for comedic effect. whoops.

and again, i've compared hdmi to component/vga a number of different times, and even on crt's with hdmi inputs (like some of the toshiba's and sony's from 04-05) i've noticed significant lag using hdmi (sometimes as high as 8ms).

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">(I own an HDMI tv and a cab with a 29" vga monitor; I'd rather play VF on the cab, but it has nothing to do with HDMI being inherently shit) </div></div>

i'd rather play fighters on a 4:3 crt as well. and so would most people who play fighters.

that is usually the case, no doubt. but it's hardly fair to compare consumer grade crt's from the 90's to brand new lcd displays. look at some of the crt tv's from the mid 2000's and the last crt monitors (sony fw900 comes to mind). they're not the largest or thinnest displays out there, but if you're going for picture quality those are still the best there are.

 

so wait, it the standard cable that comes with my xbox for plugging into my TV, is this a component cable? an HDMI component, or? I guess i should just accept that i may or may not be being hampered by lag and leave this thread....its all over my head anyways.

what is exactly is a "vga" is

 

The Elite come with an HDMI cable. Otherwise, it's the HD cables with the colored tips... Like blue and green and something else...

HDMI is only one plug, the other one is 3(?)

Just use an HDMI cable and set the XBOX to 720p...

 

You need pictures!

Composite cable...
Yellow is video. Red/White are audio.




S-Video replaces the yellow cable with this kind of end...




Component Video replaces the yellow cable with three cables (it retains the red/white audio for a total of five cables)...

 

OH OHOH OH OH OH Thanks Gern.

I dont' think I purchased the elite, b/c i didn't have HD at the time and didn't want to shell out the money. Mine has the multiple inputs and the HD vs Reg TV on the base of the cords.

Will My picture quality be better and game play better if i go buy the HDMI that came in teh elite package??????

 

You forgot the VGA cable!

 

how do you 'notice' 8ms of lag on a display that only updates every 16ms . . .

 

The question should be: if the reaction time of your HD-TV is 16 ms (0.016 s) and if the game runs in 60 frames per seconds (1 frame = 1/60 = 0.016 s), then why do we have an argument about (input) lag here?

 

a good eye, and an input lag test to confirm it.

edit: 8ms meaning 8ms longer than 16ms, so 24ms effectively.

 

Uhm, no. There is absolutely no way that your eyes can tell 8ms of difference in input lag.

Again, specifically how do you 'test' a difference of 8ms of time using a clock whose hand only moves in discrete 16ms increments . . .