News Samsung announces 1ms monitor

a response time of 0.001, because that is so much better than 0.002.

jeez this is stupid, no ones going to notice any difference, hell its debatable if you could really notice any difference below 0.010, the human eye is by no means perfect, its has limitations.

just a silly marketing ploy, manufacturers are desperate to make their products look better than their competitors, so they quote specs like these to fool the people who don't know better.

 

I am far more interested on its input lag than its response time. When I am playing an FPS I don't really care if there is a little blur, but it really bites when I see everything 100ms after it happened.

 

And we are talking about a

monitor here.

My only point is that there is a tendency in these forums to say: "yes but Produkt XX is much better (at 3-4 times the price)" when it comes to monitors.
I miss al low-cost monitor shootout

OT: is Hazro even sold in europe?

 

+2

 

not sure, it's featured on tftcentral.co.uk, so i guess it's being sold in UK.

 

I was very hardcore played Counter strike tournaments for years (was good enough to play the likes of team 3d but never beat them). for a long time I argued that flat screens weren't as good, and I think back circa 2004ish they weren't. However once they came out with dvi and hdmi connections they started pulling ahead. As someone who is still a hardcore FPS player I would personally rather play on a modern large flat screen at HD rez then a top of the line CRT as lugging around a 23 inch crt would be beyond practical.

I think the the ghosting issue is moot on modern good quality monitors human reaction time is 15ms I can't say that 1-2ms is the difference between me winning and losing when strategy, a good mouse and keyboard will go much further.

Also with a high resolution monitor with a digital connection I'll often stand very far back and be able to pick up movement I would miss on a smaller or non digital CRT

I wouldn't go back to my 20 inch crt's from my 23 inch flat screen. even tho the contrast was better.

 

ha, I see what you did there...

 

I don't get the obsession with speed. Mine is way higher than that and yet doesn't give me ANY problems at all. A far bigger concern should be getting these monitors out without dead pixels, stuck pixels, backlight bleed, and image retention. I want to see the quality of that improve with future screens.

 

Thats why I buy online...
Get it sent home and send over full screen black, white, etc.
You'll notice dead pixels immediately and can send it back with NO REASON AT ALL.
(As "dead" or "stuck" pixels are no valid reason for RMAing)
Try doing that in a shop

 

I don't feel the need to defend technology that works, and as for flicker, that's what 100Hz in Windows XP is for...for some reason you needed to faff about in Vista and 7 to force the mode to appear.

I know what will happen, they'll solve all the tech issues with current TFTs then we'll get the OLED and SED monitors out as the next big thing with their own brand new set of problems, it's the old tech merry-go-round...