• 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.

Why no gaming TVs?

K

kasakka

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 25, 2008
Messages
3,597
So we have gaming monitors with G-Sync/Freesync, 144 Hz with the lowest response times and input lag possible with the chosen panel technology. But on the TV side we seem to have none of this. You have to look hard to find a TV that has not only great image quality but low input lag. I'm using a 1080p 50" Panasonic plasma still because it works well for gaming.

How come nobody has started marketing a TV made for gaming? With the amount of console owners out there you'd think something like that would be welcome even if it isn't over 60 Hz. Just instead of stupid "smart TV" features concentrate on providing the best experience for gaming without resorting to a Game mode that turns the image quality to crap in the worst case.

Also same thing for audio receivers. I found out that routing my audio thru my TV to my Denon receiver meant a lot less input lag than going thru the receiver -> TV.
 
Nick_Leo said:
Consoles struggle to get 60fps why would you need 144hz?
Click to expand...

That would be primarily for PC users who prefer using a big TV instead of a monitor. But mainly my point was about TVs that are tuned to work great for gaming (low response times and input lag).
 
Gaming monitors are halo products... the lovely glow of positive reviews is cast down to the lesser products and helps boost their sales too.

TVs on the other hand, the portion of TVs sold to people using them as monitors is so tiny it's not worth targeting. There is no halo strategy for that sort of TV.
 
The market isn't there. Gamers who want the lowest input lag and response time will just buy a monitor, console gamers included.
 
Some of the Vizio 4k 60z tvs can do 1080p at 120hz native input with low input lag on hdmi 2.0 hdcp 2.2. unfortunately no variable hz of course.
 
Armenius said:
The market isn't there. Gamers who want the lowest input lag and response time will just buy a monitor, console gamers included.
Click to expand...

I don't know, I think that the casual gaming society is much much larger than the hardcore one which demand lowest possible input lag.
I want a big, beautiful picture. Couldn't care less about those 0.025 seconds someone is faster than me. Our limbs don't have such fast reflexes. Only our eyes and brain.
 
Nebell said:
I don't know, I think that the casual gaming society is much much larger than the hardcore one which demand lowest possible input lag.
I want a big, beautiful picture. Couldn't care less about those 0.025 seconds someone is faster than me. Our limbs don't have such fast reflexes. Only our eyes and brain.
Click to expand...
That's what I'm saying. I think the larger casual gamer market cares more about the overall picture than an extra 10 ms of input lag, in which case they will by a TV. The gamers who want less input lag and have some knowledge on what affects it are just going to buy a monitor, anyway.
 
When you get into 1:1 motion capture and quick, precise movements, like the ps3 move for example, you start to see how horrible something like 46ms input lag on a tv is. I used to have a ps3 move setup on my samsung b7100 1080p va tv and the input lag made quick draw gun games unplayable to me. The targeting reticle was so far behind my arm and my aim, and the VA screen ghosted the reticle on ultra fast motion to boot. The games I'd play had several quick-draw gun shootouts as well, where you were supposed to hold the gun at your side and draw fast like a gun slinger. The input lag was game breaking. Putting the same games on my old 34" widescreen hdmi input (1080i / "720p") sony xbr960 CRT tv was like night and day.
I don't have my ps3 move set up right now but my new tv has 16ms input lag in game mode which is very low for a tv. For pc on the tv when I choose to, it can also do 1080p gaming at 120hz native input off of a hdcp2.2 / hdmi 2.0 capable video card.
 
Last edited:
Why does it have to be a "gaming TV?" I have a 4K TV from Seiki that does 1080p @ 120Hz with <20ms lag. Unless you're expecting the world, you should be able to find most of what you're looking for in a TV if you don't confine yourself to "gaming products."
 
TVs all use post-processing, that's why you have to put them in game mode to even approximate reasonable latency, they're not a good fit for low latency. Many hardcore console gamers actually play their games on computer monitors for the lower latency.
 
Some models of TVs have been doing well in terms of input lag, recently, so I think some manufacturers are paying attention. According to the site below, looks like the Vizio D series achieved an input lag of 13.5ms, the lowest I've ever read about for a LCD TV and quite a good result. There's also some Samsungs there with about 20ms of input lag. A good result for an LCD as well.

The Best Gaming TVs - Spring 2016: Reviews
 
Last edited:
Quix said:
TVs all use post-processing, that's why you have to put them in game mode to even approximate reasonable latency, they're not a good fit for low latency. Many hardcore console gamers actually play their games on computer monitors for the lower latency.
Click to expand...

This is what the OP is talking about. I would definitely be interested in a TV with say a dedicated chip and software for lower latency with all post processing ON.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top