Input Lag ... It's more than just the monitor...

Discussion in 'Displays' started by JaguarSKX, Jul 17, 2009.

  1. JaguarSKX

    JaguarSKX [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,449
    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2008
  2. daveswantek

    daveswantek [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,231
    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Yah; No surprise to me. It looks like the people that "Feel the lag" are the ones with the cheap graphics cards.

    Add to this the fact that Human reaction time is somewhere between 250ms and 400ms.

    You can test it here: http://www.getyourwebsitehere.com/jswb/rttest01.html

    Have fun

    Dave
     
  3. SnowBeast

    SnowBeast [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,206
    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2003
    Well that was kind of neat. I got an average of .2806 Fastest was .265 :eek:
     
  4. daveswantek

    daveswantek [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,231
    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Actually; That's very good

    Dave
     
  5. RPGWiZaRD

    RPGWiZaRD [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,042
    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2009
    Interesting test, 186ms avg for me (177ms fastest). :)
     
  6. jjz-

    jjz- Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    302
    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2008
  7. Gorankar

    Gorankar [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    10,352
    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2000
    Now subtract input lag from those numbers. :)
     
  8. brumwald

    brumwald Gawd

    Messages:
    598
    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2006
    The "human reaction time" is irrelevant.
    Feeling lag has nothing to do with the reaction time.

    Devices that mimic different surfaces (like a 3D mouse with force-feedback) need to update the feedback thousands of times per second (less than one ms) for it to feel realistic - otherwise the lag is too great.
     
  9. Vega

    Vega [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,279
    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2004
    I didn't know the default Vista mouse polling rate was a piddly slow 125HZ. Gonna fix that right now, thanks for the link!
     
  10. Biges

    Biges [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,475
    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2008
    Thanks for the link.
    Also this is teh reason the input-lag of an LCD is measured against a CRT connected to the same computer :)
     
  11. Weenis

    Weenis I said WEENIS, not...

    Messages:
    4,807
    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2006
    My lowest scores were .195 and .022... and on a laptop.. hrm.. need to find a mouse :)
     
  12. psyside

    psyside 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,243
    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2009
  13. Howard Stern

    Howard Stern [H]Lite

    Messages:
    99
    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2009
    I guess this is not to bad for someone my age. 0.24020000000000002

    I have a Logitech G5 lazer mouse and have the polling set to 1000. I also have a Samsung Syncmaster 275T plus paired with an ATI 4870. I feel no lag at all when playing FPS. I play Left4Dead a lot and it is just amazing on this monitor.
     
    Last edited: Jul 18, 2009
  14. SonComet

    SonComet Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    134
    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2006
    I averaged 247ms. I am on a 3007wfp-hc and a wireless mouse (mx revolution). Not sure if that makes a difference.

    The more I try it the lower I can get. Just averaged 209ms.
     
  15. Dymlos

    Dymlos n00b

    Messages:
    47
    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2009
    Yeah, my problem with this one is that there's no penalty for accidentally going early; which caters to results that aren't accurate.

    Still, for research purposes: I've got a Logitech MX310, corded, optical, USB mouse, in Windows XP, latest mouse drivers, checked the polling and it's set to the default 125Hz, no over-clocking here.

    I'm on a Dell 2408WFP revision A02, running an Intel Core 2 Duo E6600, dual core 2.4GHz, 2GB RAM DDR2-800 CL4, and the video card is an 8800GTS 640MB Superclocked (G90).

    When I first tried I was getting ~240ms to ~260ms, when I started really hankering down I had a min of about .201 w/ an average of .227.

    I only played two sets in total.

    So in theory, if I was on a CRT and overclocked my mouse, if my current average is .227, I might expect to go down a total of ~.041 bringing my avg score to ~0.183.

    Maybe if I get really bored I'll do that to see if I get results that match my predictions.

    Would like to know if someone out there is using a high Hz CRT to see if the results make sense compared to anandtech's testing.
     
  16. mnewxcv

    mnewxcv [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,476
    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2007
    0.225 avg, not bad i guess, i could do better with a new mouse, this dell sucks!
     
  17. MrGuvernment

    MrGuvernment [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    19,170
    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2004
    that test is useless if you just keep clicking, i hit .016 on one....


    avg 0.199
     
  18. mnewxcv

    mnewxcv [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,476
    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2007
    i hit .011 on one by doing that
     
  19. mathesar

    mathesar [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,585
    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2005
    Try this one it doesnt allow clicking before turning green: http://www.humanbenchmark.com/tests/reactiontime/index.php

    Although monitor input lag & human reaction time are two different things this test will have better results on say a CRT's 0ms vs. LCD with 50ms input lag simply because the Green will technically appear sooner on the CRT (or an LCD with low input lag etc.)
     
    Last edited: Jul 18, 2009
  20. notsane

    notsane Gawd

    Messages:
    583
    Joined:
    May 23, 2007
    I have the Samsung 305T and it is a damn nice monitor for $999. There is input lag (so I've read) but I am not sensitive to it. I am a gamer and do not find that lag is a hinderance. I don't normally say things like this, but I finish in the top 3 almost every round in TF2. I wouldn't blame lower performace on input lag :).
     
  21. vjcsmoke

    vjcsmoke [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,511
    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2006

    I tried that test. The monitor DEFINITELY makes a difference.
    I've got two monitors connected to my video card, a Samsung 215TW and a Viewsonic VP912b.

    Average test time for the Samsung - 339.4 MS
    Average test time for the Viewsonic - 270.4 ms

    That's a difference of 70ms!
     
  22. mnewxcv

    mnewxcv [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,476
    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2007
    your high either way
     
  23. vjcsmoke

    vjcsmoke [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,511
    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2006
    The point is that there is a clear difference based on monitor used alone. The monitor input lag issue is clearly not imaginary.

    Besides...

    If we take the baseline human lag as 250 ms and add device lag, those results are within human norms. Certainly some humans will have faster than normal reflexes, but that's not even the point of the post.
     
  24. mnewxcv

    mnewxcv [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,476
    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2007
    but us [H]ard folk arent normal humans :D
     
  25. vjcsmoke

    vjcsmoke [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,511
    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2006
    Ok, mr. cyborg. :p Take the same test in the link quoted, specify the monitor(s) and or mice you used and show us your results!
    I used a wireless Microsoft Natural Mouse 6000. Default windows vista refresh rates. I'm not even sure how you 'overclock' mouse polling.
     
  26. Betauser

    Betauser 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,739
    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2003
    yup.. useless... :(

    0.08460000000000001
     
  27. mahdiy85

    mahdiy85 [H]Lite

    Messages:
    118
    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2008
    yup, this little "human reaction" test isn't perfect. If the monitor lags quite a bit, the program will already register some good time going by before the green light appears for you to see. Not to mention if you have a wireless/slow mouse.
     
  28. ihira

    ihira Gawd

    Messages:
    904
    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2007
    Great article.

    As a FPS (and fighting game) player I always seek the lowest input possible without compensation.
    I always thought LCDs had the biggest impact on input lag but I didn't know about the CPU and GPU times.

    Of corse some of those contributing factors are out of out control unfortunately.
    The best settings I can do right now is
    -Use CRT or fast LCD. Currently using a VX922. Planning to upgrade to a BenQV2400W.
    -use a mouse with high responce times or change USB pollrate. I use a MX518 with pollrate of 500hz = 2ms input lag.
    -NEVER use Vsync. Using Vsync adds a noticable amount of input delay and I personaly cannot stand it even on slow paced single player games.
    -I also reduced max render frames from 3 to 1 after reading this article.
     
  29. Greenwit

    Greenwit Gawd

    Messages:
    679
    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2005
    .196 avg on a ten year old CRT monitor (NEC multisync at work) and a whatever bare bones vid card they choose to put in these rigs. No clickclickyclicky. :)

    .185 avg. on my LG TN
     
    Last edited: Jul 20, 2009