A Semi-accurate Look into Fermi

[Solus Corvus]

So why did both of you comment on my opinion then? My post wasn't directed at either of you in the first place Seems like you care to me *blush*.

But yeah, if you figure your reflexes are up to 120Hz refreshes then go for it.

It's not just about reflexes. No matter what you do there is going to be some input lag and network lag. Your brain compensates for this by predicting/extrapolating and a good player will also consciously employ anticipatory tactics. If you can reduce the input (and network) lag then your brain doesn't have to anticipate as far in advance and long gaming sessions are less mentally fatiguing.

Another point is that motion in 120hz appears smoother and you can also enable vsync to eliminate tearing while still incurring a smaller input lag hit.

[STaRGaZeR]

So why did both of you comment on my opinion then?

Comment? I laughted at it. That was so stupid . The more you talk about reflexes and input lag the more we see you have no clue about motion in a monitor. This is not about games only. Do yourself a favor and go get one if you can before writing another post like that.

[m.fox]

and you can also enable vsync

That will need a really fast card to work properly.

Damn, we just can't get perfection for relatively small ammount of money. Almost every gamer on this site would want less 100+ fps console ports and more Crysis-visual level games. That means more strain on the hardware and that leads to lower fps -> 120Hz VSynced not gonna happen without serious perfomance penalties.

[trinibwoy]

It's not just about reflexes. No matter what you do there is going to be some input lag and network lag. Your brain compensates for this by predicting/extrapolating and a good player will also consciously employ anticipatory tactics. If you can reduce the input (and network) lag then your brain doesn't have to anticipate as far in advance and long gaming sessions are less mentally fatiguing.

Another point is that motion in 120hz appears smoother and you can also enable vsync to eliminate tearing while still incurring a smaller input lag hit.

Agreed but how do you determine what constitutes a noticeable lag? When someone says that a monitor with a 15ms input lag is too slow it would be nice to see some actual evidence that human beings can benefit from less input lag when playing a video game on a 2D screen. So far the only evidence offered is that someone claims they can see/react faster than other people - a claim with is a bit useless without support.

Does anyone know what the "input lag" is on our eyes? i.e the time it takes for our brains to process and resolve the information our eyes receive?

@StarGazer, go troll someone/somewhere else plz.

[Solus Corvus]

That will need a really fast card to work properly.

Damn, we just can't get perfection for relatively small ammount of money. Almost every gamer on this site would want less 100+ Hz console ports and more Crysis-visual level games. That means more strain on the hardware games and that leads to lower fps -> 120Hz VSynced not gonna happen wihtpout serious perfomance penalties.

That's not really a reason not to get a 120hz monitor. It sounds more like a reason why we need faster hardware. So bring it on ATI and Nvidia!

[trinibwoy]

Does anyone know what the "input lag" is on our eyes? i.e the time it takes for our brains to process and resolve the information our eyes receive?

Gonna reply to my own question here after looking around a bit. Nothing conclusive but the closest thing I found was a reference to saccadic movement - basically it's the movement of our eyes to lock onto something in our field of vision. Unfortunately all the professional literature seems to be pay-per-view

Anyway, it seems it takes our eyes ~200ms to lock onto something that enters our FOV, say a baddie rounding the corner in your favorite FPS. Now that's just eye-movement, it doesn't consider reaction time after our eyes have refocused. So given that it takes 200ms for our eyes to physically refocus on an object, is the 15ms lag on an LCD really going to make a big difference?

[trinibwoy]

Oh, here's a neat little way to test it out. If anyone has both a CRT and an LCD could you play with this and see if your scores are better on the CRT? It's a visual reaction time test. Obviously network latency would factor in but that should be constant regardless of which monitor you use. Average is 215ms.

http://www.humanbenchmark.com/tests/...time/index.php

[Manicdan]

input lag is very noticable when its too high, everytime you move the mouse, you can see how long it takes the screen to update that movement. i think i notice anything beyond 50ms as very freaking annoying, and below 20ms as acceptable. but it does very from person to person. when im watching a MKV file and the sounds dont sync up, i would spend however long it takes to realign them or i couldnt stand to watch it.

[Tim]

Oh, here's a neat little way to test it out. If anyone has both a CRT and an LCD could you play with this and see if your scores are better on the CRT? It's a visual reaction time test. Obviously network latency would factor in but that should be constant regardless of which monitor you use. Average is 215ms.

http://www.humanbenchmark.com/tests/...time/index.php

Enough with the monitors already. lol

[Helloworld_98]

since this has become a thread on 3D screens,

I want HAWX in 3D! ideally on a huge screen, it would be amazing flying at 2000KM/h between the buildings!

[trinibwoy]

Enough with the monitors already. lol

Why!? We have like 4 Fermi threads on the first page of the news section. It's ironic given that there's no new info to talk about. Maybe we really should rename this one .

[Serra]

We have reached the limit on the number of pages in a news thread without a single post that is on topic, closing thread. Feel free to open a new thread regarding panels and input lag to continue the discussion in another area.