TV Dilemma. HELP!

[vivster]

SvennoJ said:

vivster said:

Reaction time has nothing to do with the perception of continuous motion. That's why it's easy for a trained eye to notice a difference between 5ms and 15ms. The difference between 33ms and 10ms is huge.

I notice the difference when I switch tvs playing GT Sport. I have to adjust my brake points and turn in points slightly, yet after a couple races I'm tuned in to the new display lag and just as fast as before, doesn't matter which way I switch. It also doesn't matter for reacting to sudden incidents, those extra 20 ms don't do anything for that. You tune in to the display lag, as long as it's not too high your brain will filter it out just like it matches up audio with visual stimuli up to a certain delay.

Display lag also has nothing to do with perception of motion, refresh rate, image retention, ghosting / motion clarity all have to do with that. Hence rtings is such a good site to check out tvs.

Racing games are a bad example. They're probably by far the easiest to adjust to input lag out of all the genres. Your moves are long planned ahead and there is little reacting. Those 20 or even 10ms of delay matter in games where you have to make split second decisions and fine movements every second, like shooters and Rocket League. Those milliseconds add up. I already notice how sluggish I am on a 120Hz display with over 10ms delay vs a 144Hz display with 1ms. I couldn't even imagine playing at 30ms delay without noticeably deteriorated performance. I can see that when I turn on vsync by accident.