• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Would a low input delay "gaming" TV be marketable?

I see this thread at the top of GAF just as I begin looking for a new TV for my PS4.

Does anyone have good suggestions? Looking for something with low input lag, 60 in or higher.
 
Was that Playstation TV they bundled with R3 a while back any good? It was small, but I'd consider it for a secondary TV in the bedroom or office or something if it was particularly low latency.
 
I asked this in the PS4 launch thread but nobody answered it so i figured this would be a great thread to ask in. I have my PS4 connected to my Playstation 3D display but I am wondering if it will look and play better on my Samsung BX2331(it's in Texas and will have to get it shipped to me). Any input would be awesome thanks!

Here's a link to the samsung display specs.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824001439
 
Sony seems to think so, it's one of their major brands of hdtvs.

u9UFxa5.png
 
I think this is a fairly loaded question to be asked on a gaming forum. :p But yes, low-latency TV's should be an industry standard.
 
Most people can´t even tell a difference between 30 and 60 fps, 95% of gamers probably don´t noticer or even know what input lag means.
 
LiK said:
Sony W series already has ridiculously low lag delay. The Sony W800 and W900 series in particular.
Click to expand...

My W900A should be here on Friday. The in put lag and refresh rate were selling points for me. Going from 60hz (kdl-xbr2 46) to 240hz (W900A) should be quite the leap.
 
i would be interested. but the price has to be good point.

the tv market is so abstract.... everyday new tvs are released and in certain countries certain screens are not available, which pretty much sucks.
sometimes the model number only varies by only one letter and the quality could also vary vastly or sometimes even its justa mod for a certain country.

but its likely not going to happen.
 
I'm thinking of getting a new TV pretty soon, but I don't know much about TV specs. Maybe someone here can help me out?

My current TV makes the games look a bit blurry when you move the camera fast. It hinders my view when I play Battlefield 4 because there's so much going on and when I try to move fast I just loose vision of important targets, especially if they are in dark areas. Can someone explain what this is exactly? I would like to know what particular specs affects this because that's mainly the thing I want to improve with a new TV.
 
This is why you stick with Sony TV's. They are generally all in the very very good 10ms latency range. Basically non-existent.

Samsung is getting better but they can still get pretty high in the latency category.
 
Nah, I don't think the average gamer even cares. Maybe if it was marketed in a way like our televisions are 50x faster for gaming, people might take notice, but in the end I think what matters most is size, price, specs and 'look'. And by specs I mean whether it's the latest tech, resolution, wifi, quality.
 
It sucks finding a "gaming" hdtv. For some reason most manufacturers don't even post response times. I ended up getting a low latency LED monitor and hooked up my ps4 to that. 27' 5ms 1080p 179.99 :D
 
There other issues when dealing with input lag.

Think about a normal online session on a console.

You probably have a 30fps game, which limits the responsiveness of your controls, you have input lag from the controller (typically a wireless one), then you have lag from the connection (not only accounting for your internet speed but also the distance from the servers, the way you connect, etc), and possibly input lag from your tv once everything has been sent to the display.

But yes, the less lag, the better. But games should improve elsewhere, first.

Disclaimer: I know I've been putting together different problems and different kinds of lag, but you get the idea.

Oh, and don't confuse the response time stated by the manufacturer for the actual input lag we can measure. Two different things.
 
metareferential said:
There other issues when dealing with input lag.

Think about a normal online session on a console.

You probably have a 30fps game, which limits the responsiveness of your controls, you have input lag from the controller (typically a wireless one), then you have lag from the connection (not only accounting for your internet speed but also the distance from the servers, the way you connect, etc), and possibly input lag from your tv once everything has been sent to the display.

But yes, the less lag, the better. But games should improve elsewhere, first.

Disclaimer: I know I've been putting together different problems and different kinds of lag, but you get the idea.

Oh, and don't confuse the response time stated by the manufacturer for the actual input lag we can measure. Two different things.
Click to expand...

I know you're not necessarily doing this, but it's worth a mention that sometimes you hear some people argue that input lag isn't a problem because "you can't even react that fast anyway", saying that 250ms or whatever is the average human reaction time. What these people don't realize that input lag and reaction time are not dependent on each other the way they think they are: if you react after 250ms AND see the picture 50ms later than you're supposed to, your overall reaction time is 300ms and it sure as hell is going to affect your experience.

Like I said, it's not an argument against your post, just an observation. I do agree, people should eliminate lag from every source.

Wireless controller lag is a myth on the 360, at least.

EDIT: Just to touch upon the subject: I play NHL very competitively on Xbox, and I just changed my internet line to a slower, pricier one because it offers me a better route to the EA servers. It might seem weird to some, but I don't mind paying a little extra for a crisp connection in a game I play daily.
 
Madness said:
Nah, I don't think the average gamer even cares. Maybe if it was marketed in a way like our televisions are 50x faster for gaming, people might take notice, but in the end I think what matters most is size, price, specs and 'look'. And by specs I mean whether it's the latest tech, resolution, wifi, quality.
Click to expand...

See I don't think this is true because even from an average gamer stand point I would still go "what the fuck? Something is fucking up my gameplay that much!?" if I saw an ad for a TV showing what input delay is.
 
Antti said:
I know you're not necessarily doing this, but it's worth a mention that sometimes you hear some people argue that input lag isn't a problem because "you can't even react that fast anyway", saying that 250ms or whatever is the average human reaction time. What these people don't realize that input lag and reaction time are not dependent on each other the way they think they are: if you react after 250ms AND see the picture 50ms later than you're supposed to, your overall reaction time is 300ms and it sure as hell is going to affect your experience.

Like I said, it's not an argument against your post, just an observation. I do agree, people should eliminate lag from every source.

Wireless controller lag is a myth on the 360, at least.

EDIT: Just to touch upon the subject: I play NHL very competitively on Xbox, and I just changed my internet line to a slower, pricier one because it offers me a better route to the EA servers. It might seem weird to some, but I don't mind paying a little extra for a crisp connection in a game I play daily.
Click to expand...

You're completely right, lag in general is a problem.

And yes, the difference from wireless or wired controllers is negligible, the game is the main point. Some games are unresponsive no matter what. And online they become a nightmare.

Fifa. Atrocious.
 
Snapshot King said:
Getting accurate stats on TVs is a mess already, and on top of that, input lag isn't even a listed stat by manufacturers. You gotta go to displaylag to have any idea what TVs are good buys. After that, it's near impossible to find out if they've got 4/4/4 Chroma. It's a mess.
Click to expand...
Do the Sony W's have 4/4/4 Chroma?
 
a gaming TV that has input channels on its back for all consoles ranging from the Atari 2600 to the PS4 AND that makes every single game no matter the console or input look gorgeous instantly would be a dream come true.
 
They can certainly be marketable as niche, but most people will outright laugh at you if you try to convince them into buying a 32 inch TV that costs $600.
 
WillyFive said:
They can certainly be marketable as niche, but most people will outright laugh at you if you try to convince them into buying a 32 inch TV that costs $600.
Click to expand...

The point is: low-input lag usually comes from having less interpolation tech, actually lowering the cost of the panel.
 
backbreaker65 said:
Is there a link to input your tv make and model and get a latency report?
Sony Bravia KDL 60NX810
Click to expand...
google search turns turns up 40ms in game mode.

AVS Forum said:
Rock band video game has an auto calibrate with a built in sensor on the guitar, so I used the results as a good ballpark of input lag. On my plasma it was 30ms, on regular modes on my 55nx810 it was 98ms. In game mode it was 46ms. So in game mode it is only slightly higher than plasma, not enough to really notice.
Click to expand...
Best-3DTV reviews said:
This TV has a “Game Mode” that turns off a lot of processing (Local Dimming, DRC and MotionFlow) that tends to introduce additional input lag. With vanilla “Game mode”, the lag is around 30-40ms. Turning on Local Dimming separately costs you another frame, so an additional 16.67ms of input lag. This should still be very acceptable for gaming purposes. Motionflow (or Smooth mode) costs you an additional 16.67ms, but might make the lag too much depending on what type of game you are playing. DRC costs you 2-3 frames and should be kept off during video gaming. In any case, it isn’t much use for videogaming as it is primarily meant for displaying SD content so you won’t miss out on much having this turned off.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

[Delayed Input] Phil Spencer's Maximum Stealth Retirement
Opinion Business 
29
552
Rentahamster replied
Would lower than expected Switch 2 sales make Nintendo consider offering a cheaper TV-only model?
47
367
playbignbox replied
  • Poll
Would a standalone Switch 2 TV device be commercially viable?"
2
58
1K
GHound replied
Delay a favorite game ending?
15
376
Naked Lunch replied
Revealing a 3D Mario game too early would be "dangerous," former Nintendo marketing leads say: "Think about Metroid Prime 4"
Opinion Business Trailer 
32
536
Team Andromeda replied
Top Bottom