S23A550H 0ms input lag!!! Woooo

S

streetmarinee

n00b
Joined
Feb 26, 2011
Messages
39
Finally a monitor made by samsung worth buying I have seen on 2 sites that the S23A550H is 0ms input lag not many out there. Does anyone have this monitor? How do ya like it?
 
If your interested in responsive gaming... a 120hz is the only way to really go. I believe samsung's first 120hz also had zero input lag.
 
Hmnnn. probably marketing BS, but I'd like to see this "Magic Angle" in real world use.
 
There are plenty of LCD's with no input lag (neglible lag=-10ms). Streetmarinee's curent monitor has 2ms of input lag. He just likes to ignore advice given and keep coming back here to ask questions despite given recommendations for plenty of other monitors with no input lag many times over.

Most sites aren't measuring input lag properly. PRAD uses an osciloscope which is the most accurate method followed by the SMT Tool. Input lag spikes are a result of using the old inacurate methods which create higher average lag results, wich are wrong.
 
Last edited:
there will always be lag, ever hear of light years?
 
There is no such thing as 0 input lag. It always takes times to process and draw the display. Anyone claiming it's 0 is just lying for marketing.

But yes I'm sure there are some monitors with very small delays between signal input and on screen display.
 
I suspect that many or even most measurements of >1 ms of input lag are misinterpreting response time as input lag. Instead of measuring when the faintest image starts to appear, they only count a somewhat strong image as input response — and there lies far too much subjectivity.

Using moving vertical bars (i.e. Refresh Rate Multitool), you can see that the color starts to change from black to white (and vice versa) very early on, and count the earliest visible transition from black to very dark gray as the "input response" and use that to measure input lag very precisely.

On my Dell 3007WFP-HC for example, I measured input lag to be about 0.2 ms using Refresh Rate Multitool. (If I took steps to get even more precision, I expect I'd get an even lower number.) The 3007WFP-HC was thought to have 11 ms of input lag, but that measurement was made using an inaccurate and subjective technique.
 
Even if you had 120Hz monitor running at 120FPS, wouldn't it still take 8.3ms to display the next frame?
 
Last edited:
fattypants said:
Even if you had 120Hz monitor running at 120FPS, wouldn't it still take 8.3ms to display the next frame?
Click to expand...

Yes. Gamers like to ignore things like facts and logic though.

On the other hand though, even <8.3ms input lag could be detrimental as it could force input to be on the next frame.
 
I own a Dell U2408... which has some of the largest tested imput lag I've seen in monitor reviews. It seems like when I run a game with vsync at 60fps, I get ever so slight hiccups -- hiccups that don't occur with my U2311 or older 2005fpw's. I know that input lag isn't constant - where if you always had a constant level of lag, you'd always be x(ms) behind. If you get 10ms of lag, then 60ms of lag, it seems like it could explain the slight hesitations I see. I read about people complaining of lag all the time -- but does anyone ever notice it? Ghosting of slow responding panels is easily noticable, but input lag, not so much. Is this what I'm experiencing? I've only been testing it with games that can run vsync'd with plenty of headroom to spare. It seems kind consistent.
 
Input lag is consistent, the lag spikes we read about in old reviews are a result of inaccurate testing (better mehthods have only been discovered recently). Vsync adds even more lag.

There should be a massive difference between the 2408wfp even with just mouse movements unless you have the Rev02 which has 17ms- input lag.
 
Inu said:
If your interested in responsive gaming... a 120hz is the only way to really go. I believe samsung's first 120hz also had zero input lag.
Click to expand...

It does not have 0 ms input lag , its more like 5-7ms. The early Viewsonic in overdrive had around 1-3ms.
 
ckryan said:
I own a Dell U2408... which has some of the largest tested imput lag I've seen in monitor reviews. It seems like when I run a game with vsync at 60fps, I get ever so slight hiccups -- hiccups that don't occur with my U2311 or older 2005fpw's. I know that input lag isn't constant - where if you always had a constant level of lag, you'd always be x(ms) behind. If you get 10ms of lag, then 60ms of lag, it seems like it could explain the slight hesitations I see. I read about people complaining of lag all the time -- but does anyone ever notice it? Ghosting of slow responding panels is easily noticable, but input lag, not so much. Is this what I'm experiencing? I've only been testing it with games that can run vsync'd with plenty of headroom to spare. It seems kind consistent.
Click to expand...

In game mode its far more reasonable. With game mode selected its around 14-17ms.
 
NCX said:
Input lag is consistent, the lag spikes we read about in old reviews are a result of inaccurate testing (better mehthods have only been discovered recently). Vsync adds even more lag.

There should be a massive difference between the 2408wfp even with just mouse movements unless you have the Rev02 which has 17ms- input lag.
Click to expand...

Okay then. I've got an A01 revision, but I should point out I bought it from the Dell outlet store a month ago (it was made in 12/2008). For living in a tiny apartment, I have way too many monitors already, but all of my monitors are SIPS or e-IPS and I wanted to try out a more modern VA -- vastly superior to my 2002/3 Samsung 173t with its 25+ms response times. I like the 2408wfp quite a lot in most respects. I haven't noticed much lag in mouse movements. I suppose my understanding of input lag is largely based on improper testing methods so if you're saying newer methods yield consistent lag times, then something else is largely to blame. I had heard at one point that some of the 2408's problems could be corrected by firmware updates at the factory, so Dell may upgrade them before sending them to the outlet store. I can't say that I've seen the perceptible lag of my mouse cursor when using the 2408, but I also can't say how smart it is to spend $400 on a 3yr old monitor.
 
This is pretty good news no? Doesn't the 550 have a scaler? And isn't it likely its the same scaler used in the SA850?
 
NCX said:
Input lag is consistent, the lag spikes we read about in old reviews are a result of inaccurate testing (better mehthods have only been discovered recently)..
Click to expand...

Got a link or can you explain this more?

When I try clone mode between my monitors the lag difference between them is not consistent, and varies between 1-2 frames.
 
Antipode said:
When I try clone mode between my monitors the lag difference between them is not consistent, and varies between 1-2 frames.
Click to expand...
Clone mode is not guaranteed to be synchronized. In fact, if both monitors are not running at the same resolution and the same exact refresh rate using the same exact timing parameters, it's not possible for them to be synchronized. Either you need to use a splitter, or you need to use a program where you can easily see the desynchronization like the Refresh Rate Multitool. That program will synchronize to one monitor, and if the monitors are not exactly synchronized, you will see a line of tearing on the other monitor. If you take a picture when the line of tearing drifts off the screen, the results should be consistent.

That's not the only factor. The biggest problem is people keep using timers in one part of the screen, which presents two more problems:

1. Timer programs are not synchronized with the refresh rate and are not guaranteed to update at any particular interval, especially Flash-based timers like the Flatpanels.dk timer, which tends to update erratically. I've seen pictures where the timer didn't update for 20-30 ms, which is enough to miss an entire frame. The least erratic timer I've seen is Virtual Stopwatch, but using that doesn't solve the clone mode desynchronization or the next problem.

2. Both CRT and LCD monitors refresh from top to bottom, and having a timer in one part of the screen doesn't let you see where each screen is refreshing. If you take a picture right when the CRT has refreshed the timer, the LCD will appear to be one frame behind when it's really only a few milliseconds behind due to pixel response times. Combine that with clone mode desynchronization and erratic timers and you'll get inconsistent results that may show one to two frames more lag than there really is.

The Refresh Rate Multitool solves all of those problems and is the best way to test lag without needing a splitter or expensive equipment. Each bar represents one frame.

I used a slightly different method using splitters and synchronized timers instead of bars, and I've found most monitors lag close to an exact number of frames, so numbers like 5 ms and 12 ms don't make sense unless you want to include response times. Results like that are usually due to inaccurate testing. The only exceptions I ran into were the NEC 2490/2690, which were slightly ahead of two frames (maybe around 28 ms), but those monitors are a lot more complicated than most other monitors.

There are plenty of monitors with no lag. By no lag, I mean the monitor doesn't buffer frames. Response times are still a factor though.


Godmachine said:
In game mode its far more reasonable. With game mode selected its around 14-17ms.
Click to expand...
The only monitor where game mode actually makes a difference is the Dell U2410, which actually has no lag in game mode. It has one frame of lag in other modes.
 
Last edited:
Thanks Toasty.

SMT Tool, no Splitter

HP2509pinputllag002.jpg
 
The SMT Tool was meant to be used without a splitter, but the problem is the numbers tear and jumble together, making it very hard to interpret the results. You have to find the latest number on both monitors to determine the lag, but I can't even read the latest number. It's also easy to misunderstand the results because the latest number won't necessarily be in the same position on both monitors. Even some of Prad's own reviews used the tool incorrectly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top