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.