Input lag wars!, post your input lag results of your LCD display here for reference - Page 133

Wow, that last update is amazing and confirmed what I thought about the EX645 series.

Game mode is decent on this series... But, too bad I am planning to upgrade to a 70" screen in a month or two.

Still have to test the new Sharp 2013 70" and the Vizio 70"!

Echoing what others have said FourWude, brilliant work on the database. Really nice to have so many screens grouped together in one location! Also cool to see all the low results on the Samsung EH series. I just purchased a 46" EH5000 on Sat assuming it was in the low 30's, so it was a wonderful surprise to find out its even lower than that.

Appreciate the work!

Thanks guys! I plan to have the next update very soon, maybe as early as tomorrow! Will keep you guys updated.

Are you doing this in-store? Many TV's purportedly have a kind of "floor room" mode where many settings are greyed out, or simply have no effect to keep the sales staff and walk-by customers from mucking with things. If you've reset the tv away from that first, then all's well, but if not, you might be up against what the TV is naturally trying to prevent on the floor.

Yeah, I checked on that. It's mainly with those 2 series. Regardless, I'm doing it again in PC mode and got different numbers. The numbers in my database with (PC) next to them reflects that.

Interesting, I own the KDL40EX640 and noticed considerable lag in game mode playing Black Ops 2. Now I have not done any testing nor have the capacity to. I hooked up my PS3 to an older Bravia 40" from 2007/2008 and the lag is much less and barely noticeable. Has anyone else used a KDL40EX640 and noticed any input lag? 32ms seems low in the input lag scale but if I can still notice it...

Even in Game mode does changing the picture settings EG color, Sharpness, brightness or any of the temperature settings affect lag time?

As far as I've tested, changing basic settings such as Sharpness and Color does not affect lag ratings. Curious as to why it feels so laggy, it shouldn't feel THAT bad based on the numbers. Maybe your old Bravia is just really good? I'd like to see the model number if you can provide it!

On a side note, database is updated again. Here are the new additions:

LG 55″ 55LM6700
LG 60″ 60LS5700
LG 60″ 60PM6700
Panasonic 55″ TC-L55ET5
Samsung 55″ UN55ES6600
Samsung 55″ UN55ES7500
Samsung 59″ PN59D8000
Samsung 60″ UN60ES7500
Samsung 60″ UN60EH6050
Samsung 65″ UN65EH6000
Samsung 64″ PN64E8000
Sharp 60″ LC60C7450U
Sharp 70″ LC70LE847U
Sony 55″ KDL55EX640
Sony 55″ KDL55HX750
Sony 60″ KDL60EX645
Toshiba 50″ 50L5200U
Toshiba 50″ 50L2200U
Toshiba 55″ 55L6200U

I am really shocked at the numbers for the 55" Toshiba 55L6200U. Its one of the fastest large HDTVs I've graded, rated at 24ms in Game Mode. I'm very curious to learn more about this TV!

Database is here: http://www.displaylag.com/display-database/

Can you test any Vizio units? I don't know when my tester will arrive, but I am extremely curious about the E70 Vizio.

I wonder if Sharp will add Vyper Drive or reduce the input lag in 2013. For some reason, though, I believe Sharp probably didn't change anything much in the firnware from 2012 to 2013.

I'll see what I can do regarding Vizio. I think my next run will be on computer monitors, but I'm aware Vizio is the one major brand I'm lacking.
Every single Sharp I've tested has been horrible. Even MULTIPLE versions of the same Sharp TV. It seems like all of their marketing is going purely into their size now.

Yeah. Sharp started being poor with the 80LE632U and all models last year.

However, the LE632U in any size other than 80" is decent. The reason is the 80 came out way later than the others and started using different firmware. (80 inch version is the only one that doesn't list Vyper Drive in it's specs as well...)

The 70LE632U should be around 32ms. Actually any Sharp 63x, 73x or 83x that isn't 80 inches should have 32ms input lag in Game mode as well.

Problem with 70" in 2011 was the full array (without local dimming) backlighting was implemented poorly and there are a lot of uniformity issues with those models...

Anyway! I know Sharp can cut the lag down... They've done it before ( see: http://www.flatpanelshd.com/review.php?subaction=showfull&id=1330691169 ) and they can do it again... DON'T LET ME DOWN IN 2013, SHARP!

Thanks FourWude, The model number is KDL40S4100 from 2007/2008 and seems to have very very low input lag. Would be interested to know the numbers.

What about using a different hdmi port? that wouldnt change the lag would it?

From my own testing, the only time a HDMI port makes a difference is if it is designated as DVI AND it allows you to enable PC mode (for example, HDMI 1 on Samsung HDTVs renamed to PC). Otherwise, no difference.

Speaking of Sony, I just remembered, they have a 70" R520 and 70" R550 coming out this year... If it's got the same 30ish ms input lag, it may be an option for me too. But I really hope the Vizio 70" will be low too... C'mon input lag tester, get to my house soon!

I tested a couple of TV's at Target with the Leo Bodnar device and thought I'd share the info.

LG 47CM565 (Passive 3D,1080p,60 Hz)= 28 ms in Game Mode (middle testing area)
http://www.lg.com/us/tvs/lg-47CM565-lcd-tv

Vizio E471VLE=22.7 ms in Game Mode (middle testing area)
http://store.vizio.com/lcd-hdtvs/e471vle.html

I didn't have access to the remotes for the TV's so I didn't try changing the labels for the inputs. The way the TV's are displayed makes it a pain to access the HDMI ports which is why I didn't test more TV's. Sorry about that.

Edit 3/2/2013: I just learned today why there are 3 testing areas displayed by the Leo Bodnar Lag Tester and realize that I have been testing TV's using the wrong testing area. All the numbers I've posted up to now have been results from the middle testing area. I will have to retest using the bottom testing area of the device since that is the testing area that will indicate the highest possible lag of the tested display. I will edit this and my past posts to correct the mistake.
Edited by amisfit - 3/2/13 at 10:30am

Egads, no 37"?

I need a 37.....I suppose I could downgrade to an LG 32" but....

Does anybody know if the ST50 has any noticeable input lag. Or should I be looking at other displays?

40ms. www.displaylag.com/display-database/
oh ye, also st is a pdp.

The ST50 and VT50 are both rated equally at 40ms on my website. Keep in mind this includes the display's response time as well. According to this number they are rated "GREAT" under my review scale (my highest rating is one step above at "EXCELLENT", mostly reserved for computer monitors).

An interesting thing to note is that the ST30 rated lower at 32ms, and I believe there were reports of the ST30 having lower input lag than last year's ST50s.

I would personally be terrified about running a game on such an expensive plasma as the VT50. There are often far too many static things there, and despite the "never had a problem crowd" (whom I do believe), I do from time to time read BI/IR warnings from seasoned PDP owners.

I got my Leo Bodnar lag tester today and tested out my monitor/TVs here.

My Sony KDL60EX645 got 31-33ms in Game Mode, but all other modes were 127-133ms.

My Sony KDL46EX400 got 0.0ms on every mode. (Huh?)

My Asus PA246Q PC monitor got 0.0ms as well. (What?)

I have to believe those numbers for the KDL46EX400 and Asus PA246Q have to be wrong... I mean, I've never felt severe lag on either of those displays, but how could it really be 0.0ms?

I was trying to think of a way I could have goofed the test, so I went back and tried the KDL60EX645 and it measured correctly. So I went back and tested the Asus and the EX400 again... Still 0.0ms on those two screens.

Both of those screens are CCFL based LCDs, so I'm wondering if that has anything to do with it... Anyway, it's whatever, as long as accurate numbers get shown from displays I test from now into the future, I'm OK.

Kind of makes you wonder if the meter actually works. You are right, both of these LCD should not be at 0.0ms. The meter might have to be considered defective or flawed ?

Some displays don't work right with the tester. Funny thing is my friend has a display from the same model line of that year (I think its an EX400), and it gave me the same problems you mentioned with the 0.0ms. Theoretically, it should not be possible for a display to do numbers lower than 16ms using the bottom bar. So use that as a reference. I also tested a Samsung LN46C630 from 2009 and it acted weird with the tester too. I know for a fact both of those TVs lag, so don't use the 0.0ms reading as reference.

On the other hand, I have a newer model of the monitor you tested, the PA248Q, and that tested just fine using the lag tester. Mine rated around 36ms. The PA248Q is the LED backlit version of the PA246Q. The majority of displays test fine with the tester. Aside from those problems, the only other issues I've had are the big Sharp TVs not registering the signal properly, so I had to keep trying till it did.

I don't know if this will change anything, but try using a DVI adapter on your PA246Q. The adapter will not add any lag to the reading. I tested a ASUS VH238H which would give me readings with a BLUE background, so I couldn't measure it. I used a DVI adapter and it worked fine after that.

I'm pretty sure your tester is working fine, some displays are just weird.
Edited by FourWude - 3/3/13 at 9:01am

I am not sure if that is correct. It all depends on the way leo programmed the device. It *is* possible to measure the true lag of the electronics at any point of the screen. All that has to be done is setting the start-signal at the correct point of time.
As the device knows (should know) exactly which point of the actual picture for the screen is transmitted it can start the measurement intervall at the time the measurement-area is transmitted. So it should not matter if you take your measurements at the top, in the middle or at the bottom as long as the device knows it.
If it shows different measurement areas at the same time there will be an increasing error from left to right and up to bottom. But I hope that this won't be the case. I don't have a device myself so I can't see or even test it...
Well 0.0 as result is almost impossible as this device also measures some part of the pixel response time. So even if the display has no input lag the reading for any TFT based screen has to be above 0 ms. If it is not, there is not much room for discussion: It's a bug.
Edited by ThomasSMTT - 3/4/13 at 1:23am

I need to know what he's doing at the bottom level of his tester. If he's assuming that the screen is black (drawn black, and not full-frame-dimmed), and if he's pulsing a white frame to the screen, then there's a slight delay to some *partial* transition to white. I'm sure it's more sensitive that waiting for all-on.

If he is using a display that has a full-frame dimming feature, then his device might be measuring the uber-black of an off-light vs. the almost-almost-black of the black-LCD with a backlight turned on.

I don't have enough information.

First things first....Many Thanks to FourWude for all of the time and effort put into testing and creating the Display Lag website....AWESOME! I am a new PDP owner who is reconsidering my choice due to some concerning I/R after gaming. I bought the PDP for its picture quality and low lag time for gaming. I would like to echo one of the previous posters request for some Vizio test. Costco has lots of Vizio product and have a very attractive return policy and extended warranty program for those who do not know. I have owned a 47" Vizio for 4 years and also had a Sony 46". Screen uniformity and picture on the Vizio absolutely is second to none...Sony was junk (sold). If I return the Plasma, my first choice would be Vizio....IF input lag is acceptable for gaming. Thank you again FourWude for your work.

I don't recall a modern LED VIZIO giving anything but horrible lag results at the 1080p resolution......could be wrong but I totally eliminated them from my hunt.

For what its worth I decided to bag the Panasonic Viera LC37E5 for use as a computer monitor, replacing an aging and image-retained Westinghouse W37W1......I don't have a lag tester so I'm going to have to eyeball it, but I think this is a 2012 model that only recently started dropping in price.

In Fourwudes ratings no TV seems to get below 18 ms lag. I see TVs/monitors advertised with 6 ms lag...is this BS on their part. I just want a simple screen to use for gaming 26-32 inches.

That's response time, not input lag, that manufacturer's advertise or claim. Two totally different things.

Does anyone here have access to the LG 47LM6200 , 47LM4600 and a bodnar input lag tester? I'm in a tossup between those models (hoping prices drop a little too, with new stuff coming out) and want to make sure they have reasonably low input lag. Your help will be most appreciated.

I haven't done any anecdotal testing but I bought the 47LM4600 a while back and it feels like no more than 2 frames of input lag. I have a feeling that all LG LED TVs with the triple XD engine will be close, if not the same, in performance.

As an aside, this is a superb TV for gamers or tech nerds. It's so stripped down that you don't have to worry about it becoming obsolete. You can just plug other things into it instead. That's my kind of TV.
Edited by holytao - 3/19/13 at 4:54am

Which "32 LCD has minimum lag? I got Samsung 32ES6557 and it has 50ms!!!

Please help!!!