Input lag wars!, post your input lag results of your LCD display here for reference - Page 71

Hindsight thought: 1080p60 is actually not a normal (for example, broadcast) video format. You won't get it from Bluray. Is it possible that none of these TVs are even capable of accepting 1080p60 (over HDMI)? The only TV that didn't complain was the Sharp 42SB48UT. The other TVs were: TC-L42U25, TC-L42D2, TC-P42S2, 42LD520, LN40C630.

I'd like to tackle this question before tomorrow.

Indeed. I had high hopes for the LN32C530. Apparently it doesn't do 4:4:4 unless it's in PC mode (attained by relabelling an HDMI), which in turn adds 20ms (40ms total) for some reason. It's a shame, as it would otherwise be the perfect set for my needs. If it rendered 4:4:4 outside of PC mode and actually maintained 20ms as reported, it would be "The One".

Awsome job profiling those sets, btw. Thanks for the effort. If you intend to head back tomorrow, and should you happen to stumble across one, would you be able to take a quick look at the C530 if only to confirm that it does in fact fail at 4:4:4 in Game mode? It should be noted, Game mode is useless on this set, it doesn't actually impact lag. It does provide a decent color preset, however. Cheers!

40ms is a heck of a lot better than the results I got on the LN40C630. I'm not sure about relabeling an HDMI; all I did was plug my DVI-HDMI cable into the most convenient input. If there was a method of relabeling the input thereafter, it was well hidden. But the display definitely handled 4:4:4 color. I hope to get a macro shot of the results next time. But before that, I really need somebody to tell me exactly what needs to be done to force game mode. I want to see for myself what happens, both to the color and to the lag.


If they've got it, and the laptop is still cooking after I've finished everything else, why not. (Today it ran out of juice.)

I've possibly answered my own questions about the LN40C630. The display's insistence on 1080i60 may be attributable to the fact that I was using HDMI input 4 (the only one that's somewhat easily accessible), whereas only HDMI input 1 is meant to work with a PC. It is an interesting observation that full color was nonetheless supported. Game mode is supposedly in the "setup" menu under "general", if I am deciphering the somewhat vague manual correctly. We will see. Hopefully, fixing these two oversights will have a huge impact on the 108ms input lag I measured today.

Thanks, I'd really appreciate that. Are you testing North American units? Almost all of the reports I've read regarding the Samsung 530/50/80 have been based on European builds (LE, not LN). Though I have a hard time believing that US or Canadian builds would somehow, inexplicably, handle 4:4:4 better than the same model destined for Europe, it does make me wonder.

I think someone once said the twice as high wall voltage in Europe is somehow more beneficial on displays. I don't recall what was the benefit though. I know CRTs have serious step up coils (transformers), but I'm not sure any non CRTs need even a mild step up. Maybe Euro models internally run on 24 vs 12v, who knows. If so it could involve less latency maybe. Any of this make sense, or is it foolish speculation?

Seriously what's the best 32'' SONY CRT i can find right now on craiglist ? I have plenty of space in my garage. Thinking about buying one just to mess around with FPS game and get 0 input lag Anyone know any specific model name that has good picture or even 720p picture ? If anyone can recommend a good model that would be appreciated thanks

Well Ill take the one you got of the 37. The 503 you pass off as a 500 is anything but. The 503 sports bravia3 engine which is completley different processing and scaling for the set. That as you might not know is the part of the set which cause most of the lag or lack thereof.

The ex500 US set sports a bravia2 engine which is better on lag. The lag test I speak of was here in my house with supplied tests by this thread with pics to prove. 60ex500 is 50ms sometimes better.

That is avg to better than avg for this years set. And is PLENTY fine for online gaming. I SMOKE people. If you are having problems with a set at that range its you and a faster set aint gonna help that much.

If you need to game that hardcore a TV isnt right for you. Get yourself a gaiming PC monitor with hdmi input. TV are meant for general purpose use and 50ms or less is good. considering all else a aset does.

IMO everythign I have seen with better lag from a ttv set is far worse in image quality or other areas.

i hate to sound like a broken record... especially because of my post count.. but...


if i were to go buy a 37" tv to be used as a computer monitor (that has a xbox, wii and 360 and cablebox) connected to it what one would be the best for COMPUTER gaming...

I mean i want to be able to do console gaming but i really dont care compared to using it as a computer monitor.

I play mainly RPGs, FPS, MMORPGS

I have dual evga gtx480 in SLI

i'll be damned if i can find a tv (im currently using a westinghouse 37" i bought in 2006)

Huh. I found a report on AVForum of a "new" version of the LG 32LD450. It apparently comes in a brown box, not white like the W and the D, and includes the letter "I" in the service/product code. According to the LG reference link, "I" hasn't been attributed to any specific panel tech. Just FYI. Still trying to determine where the guy is from, geographically.

EDIT: Nevermind! Seems the guy was looking at an entirely different model of LG, the LD320 in Finland.

EDIT2: Nevermind the nevermind. Turns out he mistyped. He is in fact looking at an LD450 with an "I" in the service code. Not sure what panel that refers to ...

For #1, I recommend putting your camera on a tripod (or anything else stationary), set your macro mode accordingly, and use the timer to snap a picture. This will eliminate blurry-ness due to shaking hands.

For #2, I've never played around with the xxLD520, but assuming its menu is identical to the xxLD450, these are the optimal lag settings I've found...

• Aspect Ratio: Just Scan

• Picture Mode: ISF Expert1 or ISF Expert2

• Within Advanced Settings, disable every post processing feature manually

You can also relabel the HDMI port to "PC", or set Picture Mode to "Game", but from my tests, none of those do anything for lag performance.

This seems to be the norm where both Game and PC modes are concerned, but there are specific instances where results deviate. Besides the oddness of the Samsung C530/50 and it's PC mode adding lag/allowing 4:4:4 and it's Game mode doing nothing to reduce lag, the Sammy C580's Game mode on the other hand DOES improve lag while it's PC mode doesn't introduce lag. However, the Game mode lag results of the C580 are very similar to the PC mode lag on the C530/50. Not sure if PC mode is necessary to activate 4:4:4 on the C580. Should also be noted that the C580 is not available in North America.

I have a 37" Westinghouse that I simply cannot part with. It's much too small for my living room but after experiencing the hell that is my mom's new LG 55" I'm just too afraid to "upgrade" to a slower monitor.
We shouldn't have to be so afraid of our new tvs being worse than our old ones.

@thepoohcontinuum: Just curious, do you plan to attempt Colmino's 4:4:4 test on your LD450? If only to view his modded image at 1:1 to determine whether there's an obvious impact to the PQ? I'm sort of waiting with bated breath to hear your results, equally so with Colmino confirming that the C530 does in fact fail at 4:4:4 outside of PC mode. However, if you have no intention of running the test (which I'd absolutely understand), no worries.

Same to you, Colmino. If you're not able to test the C530, cheers and no worries. I'll eventually decide between the two and pull the trigger at an outlet with a reasonable return policy. There's only so much one can glean from second hand experience, after all.

I'll run Colmino's 4:4:4 test soon enough. But between work, exercise, sunday football, and monday night football, you might have to wait a bit . I'll try to get the test done by Tuesday.

No rush, of couse. Whatever is convenient. I'm just happy to hear you intend to do the test! You rule. If the LD450 doesn't do 4:4:4, I wonder if changing the input to PC enables it similar to the Sammy C350.

A lot of people really like their Westys. Too bad they don't make a 37" anymore, and their 32" sets, even in LED, are only 1366x768.

Guys, for anyone that's interested in the results of Colmino's 4:4:4 test on the 32LD450, I posted my result in his Panasonic 4:4:4 thread (link).

This 4:4:4 talk in a input lag thread was starting to get off topic. So probably a better idea to continue the 4:4:4 discussion in his thread.

Edit: From Colmino's response, the 32LD450 passes the 4:4:4 test, woo hoo!

Great! Cheers (yet again) for doing that. Potential buyers with obsessive research habits everywhere thank you. To be honest, I'll have to wait for Colmino to weigh in on the subject. I'm not entirely sure what to look for in his test image.


Good call. My bad for contributing to the tangent.

Well, after 3.5 hours of testing various TVs, taking photos and noting details, plus another six hours of parsing data and playing with Photoshop, I'm ready to post. With respect to thepoohcontinuum, I'll be staying in this thread; half of my quest involved input lag and I'll be sharing my results. But I also figure anyone interested in input lag is probably a gamer - PC or console - and for such folks, the concern for accurate color reproduction can be just as significant as the concern for lag. I know it is for me.

Preface: 1. I had no tripod. I took these photos quickly and sloppily, trusting in PS to make up the difference. Also, my camera is substandard. It cannot focus closely enough to take a proper macro shot. Its LCD screen is too small to enable me to identify when my shots were out of focus. I tried to compensate by taking a LOT of photos, with some success. 2. All processing on each TV was disabled. 3. Many TVs failed to sync at 1080p60 and settled upon 1080i60. In most cases, this surely had a negative impact on input lag. Again, there's no explanation. 4. Input lag was gauged using the RefreshRateMultitool and averaging no fewer than five samples. Said samples exhibited satisfyingly little variability. 5. Laptop input lag is accurately accounted for.

Samsung LN40C630
I returned to this model because I had managed to determine how to enable game mode. Again, this TV failed to accept 1080p60 and so defaulted to 1080i60. The original input lag result, without game mode on, was 108.2ms. Here is what the modded test chart looks like with those settings:



As can be seen, there is no difference between the two shots. Without game mode, this TV displays 4:4:4 successfully. Also note the fact that the image has been deinterlaced excellently. I suppose that may be where the 108.2ms came from. Unfortunately, this TV exhibits a horizontal (if uniform) smearing of pixels, most notably red. Get used to this phenomenon, because if my experience is anything to go by, you will be hard pressed to find a TV that doesn't suffer some variant of it.

Enabling game mode provided a new result: 74.9ms, a difference of 33.3ms, or exactly two frames. A proper test with the TV successfully recognizing 1080p60 would help determine final input lag.

Here's the bad news:



Apologies for the particularly blurry photos. You can still tell that there are 4:2:2 shenanigans going on. Solitary red vertical lines alternate between bright and dim. It's not subtle, but it's not as bad as some other TVs.

Sharp LC-40D68UT
The Sharp 42SB48UT surprised me by not only supporting HDMI 1080p60 @ 4:4:4 color (albeit smeared both horizontally and vertically) but also having a pretty low input lag. Really, the only thing missing (apart from, you know, a good panel) was 24Hz support. So I had high hopes for this 120Hz model. However, I had already suspected, based on the user manuals which I had pored over, that this TV wouldn't deliver.

Well, first we'll cover the input lag. I should mention that maximizing this TV's performance involved hunting down a remote, because there was a particular function which could not be achieved without it. Fortunately, one was lying around. The result: 20.3ms. Plenty good; just what I expected. And here's what that looked like:



Yeah. When a not-so-high-quality panel is also subsampling the color, the results are not pretty.

Sharp LC-46LE810UN
I decided that since there was such a significant difference between one of Sharp's cheapest models and the somewhat less cheap 40D68UT, perhaps it would be worth it to keep trying their TVs and hope for a good combination. Enter the 46LE810UN.

In spite of the decidedly unfriendly menu system, I discovered this TV's game mode. But first we'll cover the PC mode. Input lag: 111.1ms. And it looked like:



Now, you may be noticing what I can remember being forewarned about. The pixel matrix is oriented diagonally. The results are just bad, and definitely not helped by the ubiquitous presence of the color smearing issue. Look at my checkerboard modification in the lower left. It's supposed to look different from the vertical lines it's embedded in. For what it's worth, I judge that the TV is passing 4:4:4 color, though it defeats itself with the nature of its pixel matrix and the excessive smearing.

Enabling game mode gave: 32.6ms. Well, that's more like it, although it's actually a tad high for a Sharp. Did the change affect the image?



Yes. It's an irony that the image was already so indistinct that the subsampling of the color to 4:2:2 can be said to have imposed only a subtle effect.

LG 42LD520
I already put this TV through its paces. Keeping in mind that the TV defaulted to 1080i60, the input lag result was 56.5ms. I was told to switch to ISF Expert 1, which I did. I was also told to try labeling the input as PC. This turned out to be impossible without a remote, and none was handy. However, it was said that doing so really didn't matter. The new input lag result was higher by about 1.3ms, so I'm ignoring it.

Anyway, here's what this TV looks like (keeping in mind that this is an S-IPS panel):



What is it with LCD TVs and red, anyway? Look at that big block of red. That used to be vertical lines. Whatever. It should be obvious that this TV fails to pass 4:4:4 color. The phenomenon of alternating thickness is typical.

I need to point out that thepoohcontinuum kindly went through the trouble of performing a 4:4:4 color test on his own 32LD450 (see his earlier link) and his results clearly exhibit proper 4:4:4 color support. Conjecture: Perhaps only the 60Hz LGs enable such support, with the 120Hz models abandoning the feature as an unnoticed consequence of different hardware. This would be highly disappointing, but I intend to investigate, because another thing I noticed about that 32LD450 is a total absence of the all too familiar pixel smearing.

Panasonic TC-L42U25
I tested this TV's input lag and found its performance to be a match for the TC-P42S2 (about 37ms). The TV did not accept 1080p60. I consider things largely moot because of this:



Again we have a big red block where there should be vertical lines. The 4:2:2 subsampling is anything but subtle. Worse, look at the deinterlacing artifacts, such as on the number 2 on the right. This minimal deinterlacing is probably a big reason why the input lag I measured is about the same as what others have measured for 42" Panasonics without interlace woes. Anyway, I'm very disappointed in Panasonic, and sure won't be buying any of their 2010 models.

Toshiba 40G300U
Firmly in the grasping-at-straws phase, we turn to a Toshiba. 1080p60 was not synced so we got 1080i60. Game mode off: 104.1ms. Game mode on: 86.6ms. I should point out that when game mode was enabled, the TV stopped deinterlacing completely, giving instead a very flickery image. The point of this observation is to suggest that 86.6ms may be what you'd get with 1080p60, assuming the TV can accept that refresh rate.

These input lag results speak for themselves. The upside is that regardless of what mode one used, or what the pixel offset was, the image looked like this:



I think of this image as being what the Panasonic 42" TVs would look like if they passed 4:4:4 color. Maybe this is what Panasonic's 2009 models look like.

Toshiba 46G300U
Decided to try one more Toshiba, to see if there was variability between models like there is with Sharp. 1080i60 again. Game mode on: 90.6ms. Looked identical to the 40".

RCA 40LA45RQ
At the end of my rope, I tried out a 60Hz RCA (they had no 120Hz available). No game mode and very few actual menu options. Input lag was a respectable 28.7ms.

After a whole day with displays that refused to show me the video I was sending them, I was more than a little pleased to see:



No subsampling, very little pixel smear, and a decent input lag result. Make no mistake, I was laughing.

At the end of a quite long day, I'm find I'm shaking my head over how ludicrous it is that if you want to find a TV that gives back what you give to it, you have to find something old or cheap. Look at those images. How hard can it possibly be to just serve up a faithful rendition of the input?

I will refer to this article:

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum...-review-9.html

It gives some game mode / non game mode shots, and particularly this one:



Now, the article makes the argument that the game naturally looks like crap unless the Samsung is allowed to perform its image processing, at the cost of the lag performance. Well, folks, I play on a humble CRT every day. It doesn't process the image. I am here to tell you that it looks fantastic. And I would have to judge that the reason for this is because it's not modifying the image. Do you think their Samsung is just magically un-crushing those blacks and whites when the image processing is turned on?

Lastly, I have to thank thepoohcontinuum for rekindling my hope in a quest for a TV. After I left Sears, I was pretty well convinced that I'd end up having to make several compromises that would leave me unhappy in addition to $700+ in the hole. Now I know I have options remaining to me. The quest continues.

Note to De3k: They had no 32" LGs, unfortunately, and nothing below 42LD520 that I could find. Sorry.

Colmino, you could try to set output to something else than 60hz at 1080p. I suspect there is something wrong with your HDMI output if the TVs constantly fails to sync to it. Try setting it to 59 hz if you can, I have heard that it may help in some cases when the TV wont accept 1080p60.

Holy moly, that was one heck of a post, excellent job! And I agree with your sentiments how the "best" displays are ironically being the el cheapo models. Just wondering though, of all the models you tested, are they considered mid-tier models or upper-tier/flagship models? Curious to know if a flagship model has beefier electronics to combat issues like lack of 4:4:4, high lag, lack of manual controls, etc.

No worries, sir. Do you honestly think I'm disappointed on the heels of that post, clearly a magnum opus of effort on your part?? All I can say is: BRAVO. Amazing work! Between yourself and poohcontinuum, thank you for going above and beyond.

So where does that leave us Colmino? Are you saying the LG ##450 models are the only acceptable 2010 TVs other than maybe a cheapo RCA?

I did look at the LG 32 and 37 450 models in Fry's and found they take a long time to get the adjustments to an acceptable level, are very vulnerable to any room lighting regarding washout, and even when they are adjusted as well as possible can exhibit noticeably yellow skin tones on all races of people, whereas others like the LED LGs and Pannys don't. Since the LG LEDs washout in any room lighting at only slight angles and the Panny LEDs by comparison have no washout, I came away thinking the Panny's tradeoffs were less noticeable overall.

I can't help but come away from this exhaustive test feedback thinking that it's important to note we aren't looking at test patterns when we watch movies, TV shows sports, etc, we are looking at real life images. IMO it matters most how THEY look to the naked eye. I don't mean that out of disrespect. I know it takes hard work to do that kind of testing and it can cause some strange looks from store customers and employees. I also am on CRT for my monitor and HDTV still, so I know what you mean by being hard pressed to give them up.

Sadly it does feel very much like a buyer beware market concerning flat panel TVs anymore, esp if you intend to use one for multi purpose and are coming off a trusty old CRT.

I believe Colmino's in-depth testing methodology only really applies to individuals interested in PC gaming on an HDTV. 4:4:4 is a concern for console gamers of course, but due to the nature of PC gaming, specifically the viewing distance, knowing that an image is pixel perfect carries more weight. I'm willing to bet 99.9% of Xbox/PS3/Wii gamers playing on an HDTV likely never notice the results of failed 4:4:4 rendering. There are always exceptions, of course. And with regard to movies and television specifically, I suppose this sort of testing becomes somewhat superfluous, at least to the average user.

Input lag, on the other hand, is the express concern of all gamers, console and PC alike. We share that much, at least.

I'll be picking up an LG LD450 later this afternoon. I intend to calibrate it for PC use using my consumer grade (not super high end) i1Display2 with Eye-Match 3 software. I'm hoping for reasonable results, not expecting perfection by any stretch.

Well if Colmino can help find a replacement for a 37" westinghouse that is starting to die on me after 4 years i would say its a job well done and i would hand the man a beer if i saw him in person.

I just wish companies would make MONITORS that are 37" and above instead of just calling it a TV and ditching PC use out the window...

I don't know at this rate ill be stuck going back to my 19" sony trinitron but im so used to the westinghouse that i want to replace it with a newer tv that actually pulls off being a computer gaming monitor.

Is there is should there be any difference in lag whether an Xbox is connected via Component, VGA, or HDMI? - and I have a Sharp 60E88UN

In 2010, upper tier surely means some flavor of LED, or 3D-enabled. I never went out of my way to test such displays*, but I am strongly inclined to believe that performance, if anything, worsens with complexity. At best, it stays the same. Case in point, the Panasonic TC-L42D2, their LED edge-lit 42" model (the only LED model I tested). Its performance (and corresponding display) is identical to the P42S2 and L42U25.

What it seems to me is that the likes of the 32LD450 (other sizes unverified) enjoys the benefits of being effectively a 2009 model, at least insofar as its capabilities. The downside is no 24Hz support. The upsides are 1) the acceptable input lag, which is a transparent bonus of minimized processing, and 2) the 4:4:4 support - or, perhaps more accurately, the fact that there hasn't yet been introduced some video processor which degrades the video in order to minimize processing needs, such as the speculated color management processor added to Panasonic's entire 2010 line. Both of these upsides are happy, surely unintended accidents, which helps explain why 2010's offerings seem so comprehensively poor in their regard.


If my conjecture is correct, then only the 60Hz LG models would pass 4:4:4 color anyway. With all else being equal, then certainly Panasonic has its advantages, particularly over LG.


Well, two things. This is a thread for people interested in input lag, and my own particular focus is on PC use. Generally speaking, when using a PC, if you can't distinguish individual pixels, you're probably sitting too far away.

As for movies, theoretically there is actually no purpose whatsoever in investigating color accuracy if all one is going to do is watch TV or Blurays. But take a look at some of those images where the representation of the image is made so indistinct that it is actually spanning three pixels. Perhaps you have seen the HDTV chart which shows you how big / what resolution display you should buy for X viewing distance. Well, with such poor representation of the original image, you can toss that HDTV chart out the window and try again.

Funny, that. From what I have seen, the only thing imperfect about that TV (apart from its so-so size) is the chevron shape of the pixels, which does lend it a sort of squiggly look. Would that I could say this for more TVs.