LCD milliseconds more visible with DVI?

RaptorZX3 · Post by **RaptorZX3** » Sat Jun 30, 2007 12:11 am

i think the response time (Millisecond) is more visible on your monitor when you use DVI instead of Analog don't you think?

my monitor is a Samsung Syncmaster 730b 17" 8ms.

Post by **NeilBlanchard** » Sat Jun 30, 2007 5:29 am

Hello,

There might be something else causing this -- like non-compliant video card spec? If anything, using the DVI input should be faster.

jhhoffma · Post by **jhhoffma** » Sat Jun 30, 2007 8:52 am

The analog input would most likely be more susceptible to color innacuracies and ghosting, which may mask some of the timing issues associated with digital displays.

DVI has been proven to be sharper and more accurate given the same source. Make sure the timings are set properly. Are you using the driver specifically made for your display or just the general windows Plug & Play monitor driver? Slight timing differences in the refresh rate may cause some studdering as the image is not being passed along at a perfect match for what the monitor needs to display.

RaptorZX3 · Post by **RaptorZX3** » Sat Jun 30, 2007 12:52 pm

it's at 60Hz, using the latest NVidia's drivers for my video card.

edit 1: i activated the advanced option, and i switched DVI connector on my card (using the one on the right now), and i noticed that on this one i have the 75Hz available, as well at 60Hz (the one i use) i think there's no apparent way to see which connector is the "primary" one on the dual-DVI Nvidia-chipped video cards.

edit 2: strange, the 75Hz option disappeared after i closed the Nvidia control panel and opened it a few minutes later

Arvo · Post by **Arvo** » Sat Jun 30, 2007 1:22 pm

LCD monitor response time doesn't depend on input signal source at all - it characterises just LCD "crystals" inertia.

On newer models, where RTC (Response Time Compensation) is used, there could be possible that different inputs trigger different RTC profiles and thereby response time could be differ for VGA and DVI inputs - but Syncmaster 730B doesn't have RTC for sure.

Well, if your VGA signal has different gamma and brightness levels than DVI signal (depends on VGA card DAC and other analogue parts quality), then it is quite possible that same image sequences behave differently - if brigtness of same scenes is different for VGA and DVI. Response time depends on brightness change - less difference between subsequent images brightness yields bigger response time (voltage change is less and LCD "crystals" rotate slower) and vice versa.

davidrees · Post by **davidrees** » Sat Jun 30, 2007 4:09 pm

I use an LCD at work (two actually) but I still prefer a nice NEC 22" CRT at home.

Once I started noticing the response characteristics, there is no way I could use an LCD for gaming.

Kinda wish I could, but to each his own...

RaptorZX3 · Post by **RaptorZX3** » Sat Jun 30, 2007 6:07 pm

i checked on some websites about 8ms monitors...they say there's no noticeable ghosting but tearing when switching from bright color (white) to dark color (black).

but i guess there's tearing if you move a window really fast around.

i heard even 0ms monitors have ghosting (extremely unnoticeable, but i guess there's a way to see if there's ghosting or not by monitoring the hardware in question).

you get tearings sometimes on your LCD monitor too?

bonestonne · Post by **bonestonne** » Sat Jun 30, 2007 6:56 pm

60hz is actually the same rate that a flourescent light cycles in america [europe is 50hz] at...70+hhz is better for your eyes. especially if you have sensitivity to light or you wear glasses.

RaptorZX3 · Post by **RaptorZX3** » Sat Jun 30, 2007 7:31 pm

but i heard the refresh rate is not important anymore in LCD monitors and that i should set it as low as possible.

i heard that with the newer GeForce card series, they are somewhat "locked" to use the lowest refresh rate for LCD monitors (or is that only for DVI connection?)

Arvo · Post by **Arvo** » Sun Jul 01, 2007 2:50 am

I think we should clear a bit, what causes ghosting and other effects on LCD screens. But instead of quoting tens of pages of valuable information, you should read it yourself:

Contemporary LCD Monitor Parameters: Objective and Subjective Analysis

To find more good articles, google for Oleg Artamonov

Das_Saunamies · Post by **Das_Saunamies** » Sun Jul 01, 2007 4:01 am

Switched from a 19" top-notch CRT, Samsung Syncmaster 959NF, to a 17" 8ms TFT, Viewsonic VP171s. Both worked for me in gaming, no ghosting or tearing or oddities that would bother me in any way or hamper performance(I had an Eizo Flexscan with bad ghosting and a sluggish and dull Compaq generic before this one, so I've had comparisons). The 959 was excellent, but wore my eyes out when I had to do long essays or layout sessions, this TFT I can use for precision work all day, if need be.

I initially had to use the TFT on the VGA lead, and image quality was certainly poorer. Everything was less sharp and vibrant than it is with DVI. I've used a Ti4800(VGA+DVI), a 6800 LE(DVI) and a 7800GT(DVI) with the display. Every time I've used the latest drivers, both for the card and the display, and everything is just perfect. I can't read text when scrolling as well as I could with the CRT(no surprise there), but otherwise this TFT is just as good or even better. And there certainly was a difference between VGA and DVI, but in DVIs advantage -- I haven't noticed any refreshing difficulties either way.

RBBOT · Post by **RBBOT** » Sun Jul 01, 2007 6:25 am

60hz is actually the same rate that a flourescent light cycles in america [europe is 50hz] at...70+hhz is better for your eyes. especially if you have sensitivity to light or you wear glasses.

Only on a CRT where there is a beam scanning down the screen which may get in sync with the lights. It makes no difference at all to eye strain on an LCD.

RaptorZX3 · Post by **RaptorZX3** » Sun Jul 01, 2007 3:17 pm

maybe the response time is more visible when you're playing a game windowed instead of full-screen?