Best 2006 1080p ~60" TV for Console Video Games (SXRD and HL-S Game Modes Discussed) - Page 5 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #121 of 413 Old 07-21-2006, 02:15 PM
Senior Member
 
fade23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 278
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by hellerbrewing View Post

I'm sorry that this is a bit off topic, but I have been considering the sony and samsung 1080p models and am also very interested in gaming performance. I have read elsewhere that some of the older samsung 1080p models are not truly 1080p. They use a method of downgrading the signal and doubling the lines with some sort of wobble chip. Are the new samsung and sony models now true 1080p?

Boy, that's a loaded question. There are several different things going on related to your question and by the way you phrased it, I can't tell which one you're really trying to get at, so I'll address all three.

First, all current consumer level DLP rear projection sets use a chip with a 960x1080 array of mirrors. Each mirror "wobulates" back and forth on the horizontal axis to produce two distinct pixels (ostensibly at a rate faster than the human eye can perceive), thus resolving the full 1920x1080. Sticklers would claim that these sets are not truly 1920x1080p, although in the real world there is 1920x1080 pixels of resolution, there is just a very small temporal distortion (almost like horizontal interlacing).

Which brings up the second issue: All of the first generation 1080p sets, while capable of displaying a full 1080p image, were unable to actually receive a 1080p signal over HDMI (with the notable of exception of the HP DLP). This meant that the max signal that could be sent was 1080i, which then had to be deinterlaced to 1080p. Theoretically, a 1080i signal SHOULD resolve to 1920x1080p at 30 frames per second. Film based material that is deinterlaced properly does normally result in a progressive frame that's very close to the full perceived resolution of 1080p.

I hesitate to even mention the third thing, since there's been so much hubub about it in other threads. A while a go, some professional reviewers performed tests on the deinterlacing abilities of various progressive scan HD displays, and discovered a large portion of them (greater than 50%), used an inferior method of deinterlacing that effectively threw away half of the lines of resolution in a 1080i signal to produce a 1920x540 frame which, the case of 1080p displays at least) was then scaled back up to 1920x1080. Mitsubishi was the worst offender, as virtually all of their displays, including the 1080p models, were shown to have done this. The first generation Samsung DLPs and Sony SXRD sets were shown to have done a proper deinterlace to maintain the full 1080 lines of vertical resolution.

The current generation (just coming out) 1080p models from both Sony and Samsung all accept 1080p natively over HDMI, and most likely do proper deinterlacing of a 1080i signal (some of us are anxiously awaiting confirmation of this for the Sony A2000 SXRDs that are just now shipping). Samsung DLPs do still use a wobulated chip, while the Sony SXRD panels do use a full 1920x1080 panel. The effective difference between the two is debatable though.

Regardless, none of these issues should really effect gaming performance, as you'll most likely be sending a progressive signal in from any modern console.
fade23 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #122 of 413 Old 07-21-2006, 02:18 PM
Senior Member
 
fade23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 278
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by DVD Freaky View Post

Will PS3 games be in 1080p or is it only the Blu-Ray movies on the PS3 that will be in 1080p?

Sony claims that they CAN be at 1080p, provided that the horsepower is there to render that at an acceptable framerate. Sony showed footage of Gran Turismo HD at E3 this year that they said was 1080p, so it seems to be at least theoretically possible. It'll really be up to the developers to see how much real performance they can squeeze out of it though. What's likely is that most early games will render at 720p, and we may start seeing 1080p native games later in the console's lifecycle as developers get more comfortable with the architecture and are able to squeeze more performance out of it.
fade23 is offline  
post #123 of 413 Old 07-21-2006, 03:36 PM
AVS Special Member
 
bbexperience's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Jackson, MI
Posts: 2,667
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by RassilonZero View Post

I dont know how much this will apply to the 1080p sets, but i compared the sony 50" A10 3LCD and the samsung HLS 5086 DLP 720p sets side by side in circuit city the other weekend so heres my 2 yen:
I brought my Neo-geo, Sega Genesis and PS2 in to test. I played Samurai Shodown 5 special on the neo-geo; sonic, revenge of shinobi and star control on the genesis; virtua fighter 4: evolution and shadow hearts (an RPG that has a hit wheel in combat that requires good timing) on the ps2.
I connected the neo-geo with component and s-video and composite (its modified), the genesis with composite, and the ps2 with component and s-video.

The sony looked the best with the older systems, by a huge margin. Even with game mode off on the samsung, and on for the sony, the sony looked much better.

The samsung had noticeable lag with game mode turned off, and looked TERRIBLE with game mode on. the colors were bad, it was blocky/blurry and the picture was jittery.
It wasnt as bad with the PS2, but not as nice as the sony.

The sony had little to no lag even with game mode off, and still looks just as good with the game mode on.

conclusion from my test: the samsung DLPs are awful for gaming if you play anything older than PS2.

This is no knock on you RassilonZero, and I certainly appreciate you making the effort to lug all that stuff to C.C. to test this BUT, I generally don't put a lot of stock in in-store testing/viewing. I know in alot of cases (such as yours) we don't really have any other way to get a comparison. Just keep in mind that unless you went through all the settings on both TV's, investigated the remaining bulb life, etc., etc. you really have know way of knowing what they did to the displays they're showing you. Think of this as more of a public service announcement for those that don't know.

Now, having said that, did you notice any lag/PQ difference between Component vs S-video vs Composite in your testing? I would assume that composite would look pretty bad on all set's of this size, followed by s-video looking a little better, followed by component looking good.

Read. Think. Post. In that order, preferably

"If the Playstation and Xbox are like the Bloods and the Crips, then the Wii is whatever gang Sha Na Na was in" - Christian Finnegan
bbexperience is offline  
post #124 of 413 Old 07-21-2006, 04:38 PM
Senior Member
 
RassilonZero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Wish I was in Japan (But I'm in Ohio...)
Posts: 254
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by bbexperience View Post

This is no knock on you RassilonZero, and I certainly appreciate you making the effort to lug all that stuff to C.C. to test this BUT, I generally don't put a lot of stock in in-store testing/viewing. I know in alot of cases (such as yours) we don't really have any other way to get a comparison. Just keep in mind that unless you went through all the settings on both TV's, investigated the remaining bulb life, etc., etc. you really have know way of knowing what they did to the displays they're showing you. Think of this as more of a public service announcement for those that don't know.

Now, having said that, did you notice any lag/PQ difference between Component vs S-video vs Composite in your testing? I would assume that composite would look pretty bad on all set's of this size, followed by s-video looking a little better, followed by component looking good.

While I agree that its hard to make any absolute judgements based on the in store demo, I think making a relative comparison of the 2 sets in the same environment is very relevant. Particularly since I controlled the source.
I did go through some of the settings (e.g., i set both to "standard" picture), though of course not all. I STILL havent gotten through all the settings now that ive bought the TV (the sony kdfe50a10).

It also wasnt a small difference in PQ between the 2 sets that could be attributed to (and/or fixed by) different settings or an aging bulb.

Yes, there was a pretty big difference in PQ from component down to composite. s-video, though not as good as component, was pretty decent.
Composite was of course not as good. I didnt really notice much difference in lag across the different connections. The PS2 perhaps showed a bit more lag over s-video v. component. The neo-geo felt about the same regardless of connection type.
RassilonZero is offline  
post #125 of 413 Old 07-30-2006, 04:05 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
AVBill's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Suburbs of Detroit
Posts: 769
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Here are my initial thoughts on my new KDS-60a2000:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...&&#post8106304

I'm finalized on running my Xbox 360 with the Game Mode on in 1080i. So far I do not notice any lag. Hopefully, I'll be able to do more specific tests in the future.

My
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
for the S3 TiVo, PS3, Xbox 360, and Nintendo Wii.
My
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
&
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
.
AVBill is offline  
post #126 of 413 Old 08-03-2006, 10:34 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
AVBill's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Suburbs of Detroit
Posts: 769
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I'm going to try to de a more scientific a2000 lag test tonight with a friend and two networked Xbox 360s. Here is the test setup I'll use:

http://gear.ign.com/articles/720/720303p1.html

I'm not sure we will get to all the resolutions, but here are my priorities in order.

1) 1080i (with game mode)
2) 1080i (no game mode)
3) 720p
4) 480i (with game mode)
5) 480p
6) 480i (no game mode)

Hopefully, I'll have some good news to report.

My
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
for the S3 TiVo, PS3, Xbox 360, and Nintendo Wii.
My
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
&
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
.
AVBill is offline  
post #127 of 413 Old 08-03-2006, 12:28 PM
Advanced Member
 
Googer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Posts: 687
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 17
FWIW, one of the first things I did this past Sunday on my coworker's A2000 after he had it delivered was play Geometry Wars on his 360. Since he's one of the least driven people in the world in terms of just playing around with and discovering things on his own, he's still never discovered the joy of XBLA and hadn't even downloaded anything from it in all the time he's had his 360 (since launch day) so it was just the trial version that I had downloaded just before playing. Nevertheless, I didn't note any lag issues at all and in fact was having a pretty good game going when the 4-minute timer ended - I was still on my first life and my score was up to a bit shy of 400,000 as I recall. I set his 360 to output 720p since that's what just about every (if not all) 360 games internally render at (with the one known exception of PGR3 which renders somewhat lower and has to scale to your chosen output resolution no matter which you choose).
Googer is online now  
post #128 of 413 Old 08-03-2006, 02:31 PM
Member
 
jlstamey's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 19
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
sammy HLS all the way!!
360 looks GREEEEAAAT!
No lag in normal modes at all!
jlstamey is offline  
post #129 of 413 Old 08-04-2006, 08:56 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
AVBill's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Suburbs of Detroit
Posts: 769
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
OK, I've done some lag tests on the a2000. First off, let me mention to you all that all microdisplays have some level of lag. It is only a question if it is enough to be perceivable. Anyone stating that a given microdisplay has 0 lag, is basically saying "there is not enough lag for me personally to notice it." My tests effectively prove that:

A) The a2000 has far less lag than the infamous Samsung HL-R.
B) We can derive that the a2000 has less lag than the Samsung HL-S in Game Mode (ADDITION: the A2000 might not beat the HL-S as much as I suggest below, because umr has added data suggesting a 54ms HL-S lag).
C) The a2000 still has lag (but according to many sources it is not enough for most people to notice).

My testing process was not perfect. Frankly, all the lag measurements I recorded for the a2000 at the higher resolutions are probably worst case scenarios (which I will justify later). It is for this reason that I can conclude that the a2000 is likely better than even the HL-S Sammy DLP in game mode, but I can't truly nail down how much better. However there are a number of relative inferences we can make. These measurements are only comparable to other TV data if the exact same testing method is used.

Test Method
- A KDS-60a2000 and a 32" Toshiba CRT both connected to Xbox 360s via component cables.
- The 32" Toshiba is always running 480i content.
- The Xbox 360's are networked together through a D-Link switch.
- The game being tested is Halo 2 (running on emulation software on the respective Xbox 360s).

Why these are worst case scenarios for the a2000
Halo 2 is not running on an Xbox, it is running on an Xbox 360 through emulation software. For the 720p and 1080i resolutions the Xbox 360's emulator is upscaling the image before the TV even gets a hold of the feed (the emulator of the 360 connected to the CRT does not need to go through this upscale). If it can be confirmed that this emulation upscale adds no lag, then you can treat this data as accurate. However, I suspect the 360 upscale may add a small amount of lag. Given how close many of the lag measurements are (from one resolution to the next), I suspect the upscale emulation lag is minimal. For my 480i comparison, we can conclude the data is accurate (since both outputs are identical though the emulation software). For all the other comparisons we can conclude the data is close to accurate, but may be a worst case scenario for the a2000.

This is the Samsung HL-R test that inspired me to do this:
http://gear.ign.com/articles/720/720303p1.html

I couldn't think of a native 360 game both my friend and I owned that had something quite as measurable as the train in a certain Halo 2 multiplayer level. For the IGN reader jvanduser's test case, it is likely he was outputting 480p to his Sammy HL-R (which would have been the best output for Halo2 on an orignal Xbox). It is clear that the gentleman, jvanduser, who did this test with his Sammy HL-R knew what he was doing. It even mentions that he disabled DNie processing (which is a necessity for Sammys). The component lag measurement in the above link will henceforth be referred to as the "HL-R 480p test".

Dan Schinasi: Samsung's current 1080p models incorporate "GAME MODE" which minimizes lag time by 30 percent. This feature will be common on most 2006 models.
http://www.gamingillustrated.com/samsunginterview.php

This implies (but does not perfectly conclude), that if we assigned a value of 100 to the HL-R 480p Test, then the HL-S in Game Mode would be about 70 (assuming the primary gaming advancment from the HL-R to the HL-S is the game mode). It is possible they have sped the processing up further, but if so, one would expect Dan to have made greater claims that just a 30% increase with the Game Mode. If anyone with an HL-S wants to take some pictures doing the exact same test, then we could be more conclusive. Until then, my conclusions are "likely" conclusions, not guaranteed. In no way am I trying to dog the great Sammy HL-S. I just need something to compare the a2000 too since I can't determine precise ms lag measurements. As stated before, many people say the HL-S is fine for games when in game mode.

I have seen that the Samsung HL-S Game Mode dulls the picture down. So too does the a2000's 480i game mode. However all the progressive resolutions on the a2000 do not require the game mode, and the 1080i game mode doesn't seem to be a visual downgrade to me. Don't take the picture quality in any of the pictures to be accurate. I was going for measurements, not prettiness in the display. Pictures were taken off-axis, with poor gamma settings, in bad lighting conditions.

I am only posting a fraction of the pictures I took. None of the advanced options in the custom picture mode seemed to effect the lag. DRC (for 480i) certainly did, but it also made the game look worlds better. Unless if you absolutely need lighting fast response times, you might want to consider turning off the a2000 Game Mode at 480i.

Attached here are the 480i pictures I took. This pictures carry the most weight, because both emulators on both 360's were producing the same output. The first picture is with DRC 4X on and game mode off, while the second picture is with DRC off and game mode on.
LL
LL

My
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
for the S3 TiVo, PS3, Xbox 360, and Nintendo Wii.
My
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
&
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
.
AVBill is offline  
post #130 of 413 Old 08-04-2006, 09:11 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
AVBill's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Suburbs of Detroit
Posts: 769
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Here are the 480p and 720p tests. Here the lag "might" be slightly increased by the emulator. Note that the 480p test has lower lag than the a2000 480i with DRC test.

Also note the dotted black lines on the 480 picture. This is about the same resolution as the "HL-r 480p test", and the black marks signify the lag difference on the HL-R (with the red marks signifying the a2000). Using this image I estimate that the a2000 (without any game mode) has about 44% of the lag the HL-R had. This would give it a value of 44, compared to the earlier HL-S estimated value of 70. If these numbers hold true, that would imply that the a2000 is at least 37% faster than the Sammy HL-S. A number of assumptions are certainly made here, but these assumptions are using the best data available to me at this time. I wish manufacturers actually posted these specs, but since they don't we are stuck making such assumptions.

Don't get too hung up on the perspective switch (from the 480 images to the 720/1080 images). Just look at how much of a full train car the lag represents. Note the first car in the train is shorter than the rest, but the later cars are very similar.
LL
LL

My
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
for the S3 TiVo, PS3, Xbox 360, and Nintendo Wii.
My
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
&
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
.
AVBill is offline  
post #131 of 413 Old 08-04-2006, 09:20 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
AVBill's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Suburbs of Detroit
Posts: 769
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Finally, we get to the 1080i tests. Again, there may be some Xbox 360 emulation upscale lag in these measurements. Obviously 1080p would be faster than this (no deinterlacing is involved with 1080p). Here you can see the difference with and without game mode on at 1080i. Unlike the 480i game mode, I can barely tell the difference in visual quality with and without the game mode when in 1080i on the a2000 (I made this visual quality assessment in Oblivion and Perfect Dark Zero not Halo 2). This makes enabling Game Mode on 1080i on an a2000 a no brainer. To my eyes it appears that the 1080i a2000 Game Mode reduces lag by at least 1/3.

So far I like playing my Xbox 360 on my a2000 at 1080i with Game Mode turned on the best of all my options.
LL
LL

My
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
for the S3 TiVo, PS3, Xbox 360, and Nintendo Wii.
My
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
&
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
.
AVBill is offline  
post #132 of 413 Old 08-04-2006, 09:33 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
AVBill's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Suburbs of Detroit
Posts: 769
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
As I mentioned before, in no way is this perfect information, but I would suspect it is some of the best information we have on a2000 lag thus far. Even if the quantifiable measurements are off by some degree (maybe because of 360 emulation upscale lag), they still give us something to consider that is a bit more involved than "my tv my 0 lag" or "my tv lags like crazy". Also, the relative differences with and without the interlaced game mode might help some people make better decisions on whether they need the game mode turned on or not.

Does the a2000 lag too much for games? I can't tell you the answer to that, but I suspect it is similar to other sets people swear up and down have "0 lag". All I can say for certain is: it's not too bad relative to some other sets. I haven't personally noticed any significant lag on it yet, but the advantage of my larger screen has probably outweighed a few milliseconds of lag for me in most game scenarios (note I seldom play fighting games). I certainly wish there were HDTV sets that truly had 0 lag. Personally, I wish there were more studies like this to help us compare sets. I welcome anyone to follow in my footsteps (and in IGN user jvanduser's footsteps) and add more tests for other TVs.

I hope you found this helpful (it sure took a ton of time)!!! Thank you to my friend Matt G for helping me out with the test, and jvanduser (who I do not know) for giving me the idea.

My
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
for the S3 TiVo, PS3, Xbox 360, and Nintendo Wii.
My
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
&
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
.
AVBill is offline  
post #133 of 413 Old 08-05-2006, 05:32 AM
Member
 
psincubus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 187
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
nicely done AVBill, great info. Thanks!
psincubus is offline  
post #134 of 413 Old 08-05-2006, 06:16 AM
Advanced Member
 
preludejtstyle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Springboro, Oh 45066
Posts: 663
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Liked: 21
So you are keeping your TV then?

What's your choice today?

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

preludejtstyle is offline  
post #135 of 413 Old 08-05-2006, 09:06 AM
Member
 
Covak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 27
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Thanks a ton to you and your friend, AVBill! Great information to have I had just about decided that even if the A2000 wasn't great for gaming, I'd still get one just for watching HD stuff, but from your test results it looks good enough for me. Hopefully I can get my hands on a 50" soon and contribute here myself A similar test I've done in the past with LCDs is to use a PC outputting the same thing to two monitors ("DualView" for NVIDIA cards, I think), with one monitor being a CRT to compare with. It'll be interesting to see how that goes...

I'm wondering, can an Xbox 1 and a 360 play Halo 2 via system link? If that's possible I could borrow a friend's copy of Halo 2 and try what you tried with two CRTs, just to verify how synchronized that train really should be. I imagine it'll be perfectly in sync, but it'd be good to check (even a 0ms network ping doesn't guarantee it). It'd be easy for me to setup (already have the side-by-side CRTs, just need to connect the old Xbox), plus I've got time while I wait for the dang 50" to get out here, anyways

Thanks again for taking the time to do all that. Really valuable info for potential owners!
Covak is offline  
post #136 of 413 Old 08-05-2006, 09:26 AM
Member
 
naxos41's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 57
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Thanks AVBill!
naxos41 is offline  
post #137 of 413 Old 08-05-2006, 08:13 PM
Member
 
psincubus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 187
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
how fast is the train moving in the game? How many seconds would you say is the difference between the two screens (in general, no particular mode)?
psincubus is offline  
post #138 of 413 Old 08-06-2006, 03:02 PM
Member
 
Covak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 27
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by psincubus View Post

how fast is the train moving in the game? How many seconds would you say is the difference between the two screens (in general, no particular mode)?

If I remember right it's moving *very* fast. From those pics I'd guess we're talking about a few milliseconds.
Covak is offline  
post #139 of 413 Old 08-06-2006, 06:11 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
AVBill's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Suburbs of Detroit
Posts: 769
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I went back to the game to try to get an actual timing estimate. The train does in fact go very fast (you could never hope to snipe a passenger on a train moving this fast in a sniper video game). The methodology was to use a stop watch and measure how long it took the entire train (not counting the leading light) to pass by a certain area. After 12 trials (dropping the top and bottom timings) I got an average of roughly half a second (or 500 milliseconds) for the entire 5 car train to pass (note the first car is virtually the same length as the later cars which goes in contrast to something I said above). This means that each train car accounts for roughly 100 milliseconds. So here is my guesses on the lag measurements for the A2000 (and the Sammy using the same assumptions I gave above).

Sony SXRD A2000 Timings
A2000 480i DRC on Game Mode off: 45ms
A2000 480i Game Mode on: 21ms
A2000 480p: 45ms
A2000 720p: 42ms
A2000 1080i Game Mode off: 62ms
A2000 1080i Game Mode on: 39ms

Derived Sammy timings using my assumptions from my previous posts
NOTE: The Sammy HL-S timings are just guesses based upon Sammy's HL-R history.
All the the HL-S estimations I give are in question given umr's 1080i 54ms reading I link to in a later post.
Samsung HL-R (1080p) 480p input estimation (DNiE off): 103ms
Samsung HL-S (1080p) 480p input estimation (Game Mode off): 103ms
Samsung HL-S (1080p) 480p input estimation (Game Mode on): 72ms

Given the margin of error in my tests, I would make the assumption that any measurement that is within 10ms of another one should be considered the same. For example, the 480i DRC, 480p, 720p, and 1080i GM on a2000 measurements seem to be pretty much identical. Again, I also reiterate that these Sammy numbers are generated using the assumption that the HL-S series is only 30% faster when in Game Mode than the HL-R series with DNie off. I cited my reason for making this assumption in a previous post. The HL-S might be faster than these estimations, but I have no strong empirical evidence to support this theory (though I hope for Sammy owners it is faster than my calculations would put it). One other point worth noting, with the a2000 (except for 480i GM on), you would get these timings with a very solid non-dumbed down image. I'm not sure we could say the same for the Sammy.

Again, please only treat these calculations as estimations. Wouldn't it be nice if some of the professional reviewing sights did detailed lag breakdowns on TVs using expensive precise equipment? Until then, we're stuck with the estimations enthusiasts such as myself will deliver.

I hope you found this research enlightening.

My
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
for the S3 TiVo, PS3, Xbox 360, and Nintendo Wii.
My
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
&
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
.
AVBill is offline  
post #140 of 413 Old 08-06-2006, 06:24 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
AVBill's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Suburbs of Detroit
Posts: 769
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
One other addendum worthy to note:

Most console video game run at an effective 30 frames per second. Even if they sometimes can hit 60 frames per second, most of them dip down to 30 fps more often than not (with some exceptions of course).

For 30 fps, each frame is 33ms
For 60 fps, each frame is 17ms

Interpolate this data with the estimations above to see how many frames behind a certain TV might be from a feed (the 30fps number is likely more accurate for a majority of gaming situations). A few frames here or there probably won't kill anyone.

My
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
for the S3 TiVo, PS3, Xbox 360, and Nintendo Wii.
My
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
&
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
.
AVBill is offline  
post #141 of 413 Old 08-06-2006, 06:26 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
AVBill's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Suburbs of Detroit
Posts: 769
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by preludejtstyle View Post

So you are keeping your TV then?

Maybe, but I might return it and get an XBR2 (for non lag related reasons). Overall, I think the a2000 has passed the lag test (not with a perfect rating, but probably a very acceptable rating). I did expect it to have some lag, so 40 ms or so (just a frame or two) doesn't concern me much. Still I would have preferred it to be more like 20 ms of lag. Oh well, somehow I doubt there is a single 1080p TV out there today that could deliver only 20 ms of lag.

My
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
for the S3 TiVo, PS3, Xbox 360, and Nintendo Wii.
My
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
&
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
.
AVBill is offline  
post #142 of 413 Old 08-06-2006, 07:21 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
AVBill's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Suburbs of Detroit
Posts: 769
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Note: umr (a trusted calibrator) states that his HL-S lags at 54 ms. Please also note that his findings do in fact conflict with some of the assumptions I have used in the above comparison. This wouldn't influence my A2000 finding, but it might impact my Sammy HL-S comparison.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...&&#post8152370

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...&&#post8155923

The a2000 is likely a little faster than the HL-S, but they are probably in the same ballpark. It is tough to tell though, as we each likely used drastically different testing methods. In any case, both the Sammy HL-S and the Sony A2000 should be OK for video games (IMO).

My
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
for the S3 TiVo, PS3, Xbox 360, and Nintendo Wii.
My
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
&
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
.
AVBill is offline  
post #143 of 413 Old 08-06-2006, 08:20 PM
Member
 
copybeaver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 198
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by AVBill View Post

Note: umr (a trusted calibrator) states that his HL-S lags at 44 ms. He didn't elaborate on many specifics (input resolution etc), but his data would likely put the Sammy HL-S on an equal footing with the A2000. Please also note that his findings do in fact conflict with some of the assumptions I have used in the above comparison. This wouldn't influence my A2000 finding, but it might impact my Sammy HL-S comparison.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...&&#post8152370


er, i hate to sway this thread ever so slightly for a little bit, but what's the difference between RP lag and the "slow response time" (some people claim it...) for lcds? For LCDs, is it strictly ghosting while for RPTV, the picture is just horribly behind what it should be (i.e. what you push on the controller happens like half a second later)?

Also, does game mode hurt the picture quality? If it does... by how much and is it worth it for the loss in lag?
copybeaver is offline  
post #144 of 413 Old 08-06-2006, 08:26 PM
Advanced Member
 
Googer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Posts: 687
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 17
You got it right - slow response time (which is only really a problem in older LCD's and shows up as lots of motion blur even in things that shouldn't have any like most video games) isn't the same as lag (which as you said is more along the lines of the image just lagging behind the controls by, say, 1/2 second in a bad case of it).
Googer is online now  
post #145 of 413 Old 08-06-2006, 08:28 PM
Member
 
copybeaver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 198
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Googer View Post

You got it right - slow response time (which is only really a problem in older LCD's and shows up as lots of motion blur even in things that shouldn't have any like most video games) isn't the same as lag (which as you said is more along the lines of the image just lagging behind the controls by, say, 1/2 second in a bad case of it).

Thanks for the clarification
copybeaver is offline  
post #146 of 413 Old 08-06-2006, 09:43 PM
Newbie
 
HTGamingPC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 11
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Hi,

Has anyone tried any computer games on these sets yet? I was wondering how much of an issue overscan was. I know you can set your video drivers to compensate for this in windows but does this have any effect on games? Do most games go along with the nonstandard resolutions or do they still run at the full 1920x1080, meaning they'd still be overscanned.

Also, if you were giving these sets a 1080p signal from a computer, there be no upscaling and theoretically very little lag right?

-Ian
HTGamingPC is offline  
post #147 of 413 Old 08-06-2006, 09:48 PM
Member
 
skeeball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 99
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Game mode will result in a lower quality picture. The difference in quality will depend on the TV, the game, the game system, blah blah blah, etc. If the game system is outputting an interlaced signal, high quality deinterlacing requires buffering of fields to track motion. Depends on the TV, but game mode will usually switch to a simple field scaling (bob) operation for speed. This will induce some motion artifacts.

Any games requiring twitch timing will usually be unplayable without game mode. Again, it will depend on the game and to some extent skill level.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
skeeball is offline  
post #148 of 413 Old 08-06-2006, 10:34 PM
Advanced Member
 
Googer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Posts: 687
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by HTGamingPC View Post

Hi,

Has anyone tried any computer games on these sets yet? I was wondering how much of an issue overscan was. I know you can set your video drivers to compensate for this in windows but does this have any effect on games? Do most games go along with the nonstandard resolutions or do they still run at the full 1920x1080, meaning they'd still be overscanned.

Also, if you were giving these sets a 1080p signal from a computer, there be no upscaling and theoretically very little lag right?

-Ian

This is a mixed bag - some games make it easy to use a custom resolution, while others won't work with them at all. Relatively common is that a game will unofficially work with custom resolutions: you can't select it in-game in its options but if you hand-edit an .ini file or some registry settings, it will work with it just fine. For more info on specific games, go here. I've also personally had a lot of luck with many emulators (MAME, MESS, Nestopia, ZSNES, Kega Fusion, ...) with custom resolutions on my GWIII TV (custom resolution of 1328x742 for 16:9 and 992x742 for 4:3)... If you can get a game working with a custom resolution, that means you'll be able to get it working with no overscan while maintaining 1:1 pixel mapping (on sets for which 1:1 pixel mapping is possible in the first place). I can't make any guarantees about any specific TV's, but you'd tend to think that lag would be minimized because you're effectively feeding the TV its native resolution (only with a reduced active area, not that the TV can tell the difference) so any processing should be minimal.
Googer is online now  
post #149 of 413 Old 08-06-2006, 11:16 PM
Advanced Member
 
bryanb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 563
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
When comparing the HL-S to the A2000, assuming those numbers are accurate, the difference is on the order of hundredths of a second right?

Bryan
bryanb is offline  
post #150 of 413 Old 08-07-2006, 08:32 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
AVBill's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Suburbs of Detroit
Posts: 769
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
1000 ms = 1 second
100 ms = 1/10th second
10 ms = 1/100th second
1 ms = 1/1000th second

Also, note that umr's testing implies that 1080i inputs at 54ms on the Sammy HL-S. I didn't comment on 1080i on the HL-S, and my 480p estimations were just guesses (not measurements like the A2000).

My
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
for the S3 TiVo, PS3, Xbox 360, and Nintendo Wii.
My
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
&
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
.
AVBill is offline  
Reply Rear Projection Units

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off