• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Which Response times matter.

TheBlueChanell

TheBlueChanell

Supreme [H]ardness
2FA
Joined
Apr 15, 2005
Messages
4,658
I was wondering....what response times matter. I read the vp191b vs. vx924 thread and the vx has a 4 ms gray to gray and 5 ms typical. and the 191 has 8ms gtg and a 20 ms typical. Would the 20 ms ghost and trial. or does the gray to gray only matter. My point here is why not pay 50 bucks more for the 924 if it has a GTG cut in half and a Typical thats 4 times faster. What im trying to get here is the real reason why the vp191 is better than the Vx924. Sorry about all the jibberish and if i was unclear.
 
the response times as quoted by the manufacturers are only ever the BEST case response time for a TFT. Just because they list it as 4ms G2G instead of 8ms G2G doesn't mean it is twice as fast. You need to consider the response time measured across the whole range . Take a look at this graph:

vx924_latency.gif


the old way of measuring response times before the days of "overdrive" technologies was to emasure the speed at code 255. This was always tranditionally the fastest transition. If you look at that graph, the VP191B would be an old style 15ms panel, and and the VX924 would be a 10ms panel. However, this is no longer a desirable marketing figure as they have achieved faster response times across grey transitions which they want to portray in their specifications.

While the VX924 does offer a response time as low as 4ms in some transitions (on the left hand side), the response time is a lot slower across some changes. If you compare the graph of the VX924 to an old non-overdriven TN film panel, the graphs shape overall is quite simialr, except they have managed to lower the response time a little in some changes. The good thing about the VP191B is that the response time is low across ALL transitions, being constantly below 15ms!! When considering a monitors performance oyu need to consider the response time across all changes, and the Vp191B overall, comes out on top.

It is handy that places like THG and BeHardware conduct independent tests such as this as we can then get comparisons of one screen to anther. Basically don;t always rely on the specs listed. If the VX924 was more consisently lower across all changes it might be faster, but as it is, the VP191B would be faster overall :)

hth
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top