Is A Response time of 8ms A Good Thing?

rickbbb · 12-12-2005, 10:59 AM

Is 8 ms Response Time a good thing..if my HDTV has this?
Also if a 37 inch tv has an 800:1 contrast ratio,will there be a good picture on the tv? and 1000 Cdm2 brightness is that good also?

PyroFusion · 12-12-2005, 12:04 PM

Response time: From what I understand, anything 12ms and under is good, the lower the number, the less "ghosting" you'll see. So, at 8ms, ghosting should be minimal. So yes, 8ms is good.

Contrast ratio: As far as these go, I'm not sure, I do know the eyes ratio is 800:1, anything above that isn't casually noticable. I don't know if the picture get's better at higher ratios.

As for brightness, don't know, you'd have to ask an lcd owner, I'm sure one will respond soon enough.

rickbbb · 12-12-2005, 03:37 PM

Thankyou for your help.You seem to know alot about tv's.I appreciate it.Happy Holidays !

Emsurfer · 12-13-2005, 01:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rickbbb

Is 8 ms Response Time a good thing..if my HDTV has this?
Also if a 37 inch tv has an 800:1 contrast ratio,will there be a good picture on the tv? and 1000 Cdm2 brightness is that good also?

Response time (EYE threshold about 16ms): measured several ways, gray-gray, black-black, and black-white. Black is fully charged and white is fully discharged. Sharp and SONY use gray to gray. Sharp is 12ms and SONY is 8ms. Samsung is 8ms, but I have heard rumors that it's black-white (black to black could be 16ms or longer). Some people on the AVS forums have tested various sets and the many of the Samsung LCDs have slower response times than they claimed. The Sharps and SONYs have been legit.

Contrast Ratio (eye threshold 800:1 about): As rbinck has replied to an earlier post by you, there's two ways of measuring this. "full on/off" or ANSI. So "dynamic contrast ratio" vs. "contrast ratio". Rough conversion is factor by 5.

SONY Bravia XBR LCD: 1300:1 / 6500:1 (hence the PQ and COST)

Sharp AQUOS: 800:1 / 4000:1

Panasonic Plasmas: either 600:1/3000:1 or 800:1/4000:1 (depending on model)

Pioneer Plasma: 800:1/4000:1

Samsung LCD: 600:1/3000:1

Brightness: LCDs typically 400-500 Cd/m and Plasmas 1000-1200 Cd/m

RSawdey · 12-13-2005, 12:30 PM

16 ms is the minimum pixel response required for a 60 Hz framerate, since 1000 / 60 = 16. Anything that's smaller is sufficient, 8 ms should be great.

zacallac7 · 10-05-2010, 02:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rickbbb

Is 8 ms Response Time a good thing..if my HDTV has this?
Also if a 37 inch tv has an 800:1 contrast ratio,will there be a good picture on the tv? and 1000 Cdm2 brightness is that good also?

I just bought a new led/lcd tv. first tv ive bought in over 10 yrs. im a HARDCORE gamer. and didnt know about all this new crap on HDs. after troubleshooting my tv and researching for about a week now iv discovered that my tv has a 5ms response time, which is NEAR average(AVERAGE:4ms) 2ms is ideal. as to your question, is 8ms good? it depends on what your doing. for standard tv sure it'll get you by. but for gaming or even high action scenes 4ms is at least what you want, again 2ms is ideal. this is a huge prob for me cuz i just bought a 1000$ tv [47" 1080p] maxed out all the settings hooked up my x360 via HDMI + my tv has a 120hz refresh rate which isnt bad; not as good as the 240hz and still slowed by the response time. ALL OF THAT OTHER STUFF(HDMI, 120hz) DOESNT MATTER IF YOUR RESPONSE TIME SUCKS. I MEAN DONT GET ME WRONG IT HELPS, A LOT, BUT IF YOUR RESPONSE TIME IS 5+ YOURE SCREWED!!!!

kharaa · 10-05-2010, 02:45 PM

Well factually speaking, even though there are other reasons I don't like to do gaming on a plasma, their pixle response is .001

literally 2000 times faster than a 2ms LCD. If you're REALLY worried about that kind of stuff, plasma is the way to go, I just don't want to stress over burn in.

Also this thread is 5 years old. :P

zacallac7 · 10-05-2010, 03:20 PM

TO: rickbbb. sorry i forgot to ask a major ?... it depends is it an lcd, plasma????

kharaa · 10-05-2010, 03:21 PM

zacallac7, he made this thread over 5 years ago... lol

**rbinck** · 10-05-2010, 06:51 PM

Equating pixel response times to gaming response is somewhat humorous to me. The TV gets a new frame every 16ms assuming 720p or 1080p is the output format from the game. So having any response greater than 16 ms will keep up with the game. 120hz or 240 hz refresh still updates a new frame every 16 ms. While there may be some placebo effect of a 2 ms pixel response, there is no advantage for gaming. A bigger problem for gaming is the latency delay of the video processors, which can be up to 200 ms!

kharaa · 10-05-2010, 09:17 PM

rbinck i recall the issue of pixel response is involving ghosting? I recall when LCD's first became big, for computers. there were complaints of ghosting, and you had to have one at 12 ms or lower, to really not have an issue.

BrianO · 10-05-2010, 09:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kharaa

rbinck i recall the issue of pixel response is involving ghosting? I recall when LCD's first became big, for computers. there were complaints of ghosting, and you had to have one at 12 ms or lower, to really not have an issue.

In theory a pixel response time of 16 ms is the maximum response time that can support a refresh rate of 60 Hz. In practice it needs to be a little lower because of the variation in response times of the individual pixels that make up the panel.

However, a refresh rate of 60 Hz is not recommended for computer monitors because interaction with room lights that are operating at 60 Hz causes fatigue-inducing flickering when looking at static images. So most monitors and video cards allow the refresh rate to be increased to eliminate the flickering. A refresh rate of 72 Hz goes a long way to eliminate this problem but requires a refresh rate of 13.9 ms (1000/72) or less. 12 ms is far enough below that to compensate for the pixel-to-pixel variation. So that is why 12 ms or less was recommended for LCD monitors.

BTW, my LCD monitor is set to 70 Hz because that is the highest rate that my video card supports at the resolution and colour depth I am using. I could increase the rate to 75 Hz if I were to reduce either the resolution or colour depth, but I choose not to do so.

Having said that, why the heck are we reviving a 5-year old thread?

TwoPlusTwo · 10-05-2010, 09:59 PM

As a Super Street Fighter 4 player, here's my

...

No matter what TV you have, there will be some lag from the source.

From the TV's end, high-quality plasma generally rules in response time though.

If lag is a concern, buy a good plasma...

kharaa · 10-05-2010, 10:26 PM

There should be a way to turn off ALL video processing, LCD or Plasma, it's so annoying that they don't.

s2mikey · 10-06-2010, 08:30 AM

I supose 8ms is just fine but as usual with these TV-specs: It might not mean much at the end of the day. Im sure there are sets out there with higher response times than others that end up performing better overall. I dont put a lot of stock in these numbers since in many cases(not all) they end up being just numbers to help sell TVs.

Like the infamous 100,000:1 contrast ratios on some LCDs. The sets might have 1000,000:1 contrast ratios yet the contrast actually sucks when you view the TV. What gives?

12-12-2005, 10:59 AM	#1
rickbbb High Definition is the definition of life. Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 2,156	Is A Response time of 8ms A Good Thing? Is 8 ms Response Time a good thing..if my HDTV has this? Also if a 37 inch tv has an 800:1 contrast ratio,will there be a good picture on the tv? and 1000 Cdm2 brightness is that good also?

12-12-2005, 03:37 PM	#3
rickbbb High Definition is the definition of life. Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 2,156	PyroFusion Thankyou for your help.You seem to know alot about tv's.I appreciate it.Happy Holidays !

10-05-2010, 06:51 PM	#10
rbinck Administrator Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Katy, Texas Posts: 15,603	Equating pixel response times to gaming response is somewhat humorous to me. The TV gets a new frame every 16ms assuming 720p or 1080p is the output format from the game. So having any response greater than 16 ms will keep up with the game. 120hz or 240 hz refresh still updates a new frame every 16 ms. While there may be some placebo effect of a 2 ms pixel response, there is no advantage for gaming. A bigger problem for gaming is the latency delay of the video processors, which can be up to 200 ms! __________________ www.highdefinitionblog.com www.BlogOfHawaii.com

10-05-2010, 09:59 PM	#13
TwoPlusTwo 2x GTX Titan SLI Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Academia Posts: 6,940	As a Super Street Fighter 4 player, here's my ... No matter what TV you have, there will be some lag from the source. From the TV's end, high-quality plasma generally rules in response time though. If lag is a concern, buy a good plasma... __________________ Pioneer Kuro Elite PRO-101FD, HP ZR30w 30" 1600p Monitor, 7.1 Surround Sound Equipment, Gaming PC, Playstation 3. Harmony One Remote. Currently Playing: Metro Last Light (PC) , Far Cry 3 Blood Dragon (PC) Steam ID: NonTensorial

10-06-2010, 08:30 AM	#15
s2mikey Flat Panel Luvr Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Upstate, NY Posts: 1,415	I supose 8ms is just fine but as usual with these TV-specs: It might not mean much at the end of the day. Im sure there are sets out there with higher response times than others that end up performing better overall. I dont put a lot of stock in these numbers since in many cases(not all) they end up being just numbers to help sell TVs. Like the infamous 100,000:1 contrast ratios on some LCDs. The sets might have 1000,000:1 contrast ratios yet the contrast actually sucks when you view the TV. What gives? __________________ Pioneer KURO 5080HD Sharp LC32D4U LG BD-570, Sony BDP-S360, PS3 120GB Toshiba A30 & A2 Sony STRDG810/All Polk Speakers Harmony 510 remote Antennas Direct DB4

12-12-2005, 12:04 PM	#2
PyroFusion High Definition is the definition of life. Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 102	Response time: From what I understand, anything 12ms and under is good, the lower the number, the less "ghosting" you'll see. So, at 8ms, ghosting should be minimal. So yes, 8ms is good. Contrast ratio: As far as these go, I'm not sure, I do know the eyes ratio is 800:1, anything above that isn't casually noticable. I don't know if the picture get's better at higher ratios. As for brightness, don't know, you'd have to ask an lcd owner, I'm sure one will respond soon enough.

12-13-2005, 12:30 PM	#5
RSawdey Mr. Wizard Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Ferndale, Michigan Age: 65 Posts: 5,981	16 ms is the minimum pixel response required for a 60 Hz framerate, since 1000 / 60 = 16. Anything that's smaller is sufficient, 8 ms should be great.

10-05-2010, 03:20 PM	#8
zacallac7 What is HD? Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 2	TO: rickbbb. sorry i forgot to ask a major ?... it depends is it an lcd, plasma????

Similar Threads to Is A Response time of 8ms A Good Thing?
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Deciding on a good 32" LCD	Prism250	Flat-Panel TVs	31	09-25-2009 12:13 PM
If plasma is so good then.....	Jman03	The High Definition Lounge	73	06-29-2009 11:07 AM
GFM brand 26" LCD HDTV - opened up a new world for me!	sartor	Flat-Panel TVs	68	04-21-2009 12:17 PM
Ok...I have a LOT of questions.	Pancho BLD	The High Definition Lounge	10	12-10-2007 05:00 PM
The ABC's of LCD TVs	zedd	Flat-Panel TVs	67	03-12-2006 05:05 AM
Need major helping picking a CRT and resolution issues..	EddieDZ	Direct-View (tube) TVs	22	02-04-2006 04:54 PM
which company is best? sony, samsung, or sharp?	mcchiefkins	Flat-Panel TVs	8	11-30-2005 10:54 PM