origin of lag in lcd displays pricelist

Display lag is a phenomenon associated with most types of liquid crystal displays (LCDs) like smartphones and computers and nearly all types of high-definition televisions (HDTVs). It refers to latency, or lag between when the signal is sent to the display and when the display starts to show that signal. This lag time has been measured as high as 68 ms,Hz display. Display lag is not to be confused with pixel response time, which is the amount of time it takes for a pixel to change from one brightness value to another. Currently the majority of manufacturers quote the pixel response time, but neglect to report display lag.

For older analog cathode ray tube (CRT) technology, display lag is nearly zero, due to the nature of the technology, which does not have the ability to store image data before display. The picture signal is minimally processed internally, simply for demodulation from a radio-frequency (RF) carrier wave (for televisions), and then splitting into separate signals for the red, green, and blue electron guns, and for the timing of the vertical and horizontal sync. Image adjustments typically involve reshaping the signal waveform but without storage, so the image is written to the screen as fast as it is received, with only nanoseconds of delay for the signal to traverse the wiring inside the device from input to the screen.

For modern digital signals, significant computer processing power and memory storage is needed to prepare an input signal for display. For either over-the-air or cable TV, the same analog demodulation techniques are used, but after that, then the signal is converted to digital data, which must be decompressed using the MPEG codec, and rendered into an image bitmap stored in a frame buffer.

For progressive scan display modes, the signal processing stops here, and the frame buffer is immediately written to the display device. In its simplest form, this processing may take several microseconds to occur.

For interlaced video, additional processing is frequently applied to deinterlace the image and make it seem to be clearer or more detailed than it actually is. This is done by storing several interlaced frames and then applying algorithms to determine areas of motion and stillness, and to either merge interlaced frames for smoothing or extrapolate where pixels are in motion, the resulting calculated frame buffer is then written to the display device.

De-interlacing imposes a delay that can be no shorter than the number of frames being stored for reference, plus an additional variable period for calculating the resulting extrapolated frame buffer; delays of 16-32ms are common.

While the pixel response time of the display is usually listed in the monitor"s specifications, no manufacturers advertise the display lag of their displays, likely because the trend has been to increase display lag as manufacturers find more ways to process input at the display level before it is shown. Possible culprits are the processing overhead of HDCP, Digital Rights Management (DRM), and also DSP techniques employed to reduce the effects of ghosting – and the cause may vary depending on the model of display. Investigations have been performed by several technology-related websites, some of which are listed at the bottom of this article.

LCD, plasma, and DLP displays, unlike CRTs, have a native resolution. That is, they have a fixed grid of pixels on the screen that show the image sharpest when running at the native resolution (so nothing has to be scaled full-size which blurs the image). In order to display non-native resolutions, such displays must use video scalers, which are built into most modern monitors. As an example, a display that has a native resolution of 1600x1200 being provided a signal of 640x480 must scale width and height by 2.5x to display the image provided by the computer on the native pixels. In order to do this, while producing as few artifacts as possible, advanced signal processing is required, which can be a source of introduced latency. Interlaced video signals such as 480i and 1080i require a deinterlacing step that adds lag. Anecdotallyprogressive scanning mode. External devices have also been shown to reduce overall latency by providing faster image-space resizing algorithms than those present in the LCD screen.

Many LCDs also use a technology called "overdrive" which buffers several frames ahead and processes the image to reduce blurring and streaks left by ghosting. The effect is that everything is displayed on the screen several frames after it was transmitted by the video source.

Display lag can be measured using a test device such as the Video Signal Input Lag Tester. Despite its name, the device cannot independently measure input lag. It can only measure input lag and response time together.

Lacking a measurement device, measurement can be performed using a test display (the display being measured), a control display (usually a CRT) that would ideally have negligible display lag, a computer capable of mirroring an output to the two displays, stopwatch software, and a high-speed camera pointed at the two displays running the stopwatch program. The lag time is measured by taking a photograph of the displays running the stopwatch software, then subtracting the two times on the displays in the photograph. This method only measures the difference in display lag between two displays and cannot determine the absolute display lag of a single display. CRTs are preferable to use as a control display because their display lag is typically negligible. However, video mirroring does not guarantee that the same image will be sent to each display at the same point in time.

In the past it was seen as common knowledge that the results of this test were exact as they seemed to be easily reproducible, even when the displays were plugged into different ports and different cards, which suggested that the effect is attributable to the display and not the computer system. An in depth analysis that has been released on the German website Prad.de revealed that these assumptions have been wrong. Averaging measurements as described above lead to comparable results because they include the same amount of systematic errors. As seen on different monitor reviews the so determined values for the display lag for the very same monitor model differ by margins up to 16 ms or even more.

To minimize the effects of asynchronous display outputs (the points of time an image is transferred to each monitor is different or the actual used frequency for each monitor is different) a highly specialized software application called SMTT

Several approaches to measure display lag have been restarted in slightly changed ways but still reintroduced old problems, that have already been solved by the former mentioned SMTT. One such method involves connecting a laptop to an HDTV through a composite connection and run a timecode that shows on the laptop"s screen and the HDTV simultaneously and recording both screens with a separate video recorder. When the video of both screens is paused, the difference in time shown on both displays have been interpreted as an estimation for the display lag.16 ms or even more.

Display lag contributes to the overall latency in the interface chain of the user"s inputs (mouse, keyboard, etc.) to the graphics card to the monitor. Depending on the monitor, display lag times between 10-68 ms have been measured. However, the effects of the delay on the user depend on each user"s own sensitivity to it.

Display lag is most noticeable in games (especially older video-game consoles), with different games affecting the perception of delay. For instance, in PvE, a slight input delay is not as critical compared to PvP, or to other games favoring quick reflexes like

If the game"s controller produces additional feedback (rumble, the Wii Remote"s speaker, etc.), then the display lag will cause this feedback to not accurately match up with the visuals on-screen, possibly causing extra disorientation (e.g. feeling the controller rumble a split second before a crash into a wall).

TV viewers can be affected as well. If a home theater receiver with external speakers is used, then the display lag causes the audio to be heard earlier than the picture is seen. "Early" audio is more jarring than "late" audio. Many home-theater receivers have a manual audio-delay adjustment which can be set to compensate for display latency.

Many televisions, scalers and other consumer-display devices now offer what is often called a "game mode" in which the extensive preprocessing responsible for additional lag is specifically sacrificed to decrease, but not eliminate, latency. While typically intended for videogame consoles, this feature is also useful for other interactive applications. Similar options have long been available on home audio hardware and modems for the same reason. Connection through VGA cable or component should eliminate perceivable input lag on many TVs even if they already have a game mode. Advanced post-processing is non existent on analog connection and the signal traverses without delay.

A television may have a picture mode that reduces display lag for computers. Some Samsung and LG televisions automatically reduce lag for a specific input port if the user renames the port to "PC".

LCD screens with a high response-time value often do not give satisfactory experience when viewing fast-moving images (they often leave streaks or blur; called ghosting). But an LCD screen with both high response time and significant display lag is unsuitable for playing fast-paced computer games or performing fast high-accuracy operations on the screen, due to the mouse cursor lagging behind.

For PC monitors and smart TVs, speed largely comes down to pixel response and input lag. They’re both measured in milliseconds, and they’re at least a little interrelated – but they’re not the same thing at all.

First let’s establish the basics. In simple terms, response time (or "pixel response") describes the time taken for a display to change the colour of any given pixel, millions of which make up the overall image. Really broadly, pixel response is all about the look of a display. With a fast response time, moving images will be sharp and clear as opposed to blurry and smeared.

As for input lag, that’s a measure of the delay between signal output from a source device, such as a games console, set top box or PC, and the video image being shown on the display. And it’s all about feel. Does the screen respond quickly to your control inputs in a game? If it does, it has low lag or latency. If there’s a noticeable delay between wiggling a mouse or control pad and on-screen movement, then it probably suffers from significant lag.

Anyway, response and lag don’t apply in quite the same way to all display and panel types, be that OLED vs LCD or TVs and PC monitors (note that TVs and other screens marketed as ‘LED’ are typically LCD panels with LED backlights, not actually LED panels).

How is response time / pixel response measured and what do the numbers really mean? The most common metric of pixel response is known as grey-to-grey, sometimes abbreviated to GtG. As the name implies, it’s not a measure of the time taken for a pixel to fully transition from off to on or from black to white. Instead, GtG pixel response records the time taken to move between two intermediate colors.

What’s more, the industry standard VESA method for measuring GtG response doesn’t even record the full time taken for that intermediate transition. It actually discards the first 10% and last 10% of the transition, recording only the time taken for the middle 80%.

Shown on a graph, the pixel response of an LCD panel follows an ‘S’ curve, with a slightly sluggish immediate response, followed by that rapid middle phase, before response tails off dramatically towards the end of the transition. The net result is the time taken to fully transition from one color to another can be dramatically longer than the quoted GtG response.

There is another measure of pixel response known as MPRT or ‘moving picture response time’. It’s intended to be a better measure of actual perceived blurring based on the abilities of the human eye.

In theory, MPRT response is a direct function of refresh rate. So, a refresh rate of 1000Hz is required to achieve a 1ms MPRT pixel response. However, mitigating measures including black-frame insertion or strobing backlights can improve MPRT response to below the refresh rate of the panel and to the point where it’s typically faster than a screen’s GtG response, at least in terms of quoted specifications.

That achievement, however, comes with several caveats. For starters, those mitigating measures usually don’t work when variable refresh rate or frame synching is enabled. Moreover, screen modes intended to improve MPRT response tend to reduce vibrancy and visual punch. So, it’s often not possible with a given display to achieve the best available MPRT response while maintaining optimal performance in other regards.

The fastest current LCD panels are quoted at 1ms for GtG response and 0.5ms for MPRT response. But independent testing shows a whole different ballgame. Sources including Rtings.com and Linus Tech Tips peg full-transition pixel response from speedy OLED sets like LG C1 and CX panels at around two to three milliseconds, with the bulk of the transition (and thus the GtG equivalent performance) completed in a fraction of a millisecond.

Results for LCD technology vary a little more, probably due to methodology. But the best case scenario for an ultra-fast-IPS LCD monitor, such as the Asus ROG Swift 360Hz PG259QN, by comparison, is around 3ms for the bulk of the transition and 6ms for the full color change while other results push those two metrics out to 6ms and 10ms or more respectively. Either way, OLED is clearly faster.

The refresh rate of a screen puts a hard limit on the minimum latency or input lag it can achieve. To put some numbers on that, most mainstream monitors and TVs refresh at 60Hz or once every 16.67ms. Increase the refresh rate to 120Hz and the screen updates every 8.33ms.

In the PC gaming monitor market, refresh rates up to 360Hz are now available, translating into a new frame every 2.7ms (TVs can be a bit more complicated due to technologies like frame insertion and motion smoothing, though).

To understand why that matters, imagine for a moment playing a game with a refresh rate of just 1Hz – rather than the 60Hz or 120Hz found on a decent gaming TV. Yes, it would be absolutely horrible in terms of rendering smoothness. But you could wiggle your mouse or controller pad around for a full second and get absolutely no response on the screen. Nightmare.Running outside of game mode, the LG C1 is tragically slow at nearly 90ms, which neatly demonstrates just how much impact image processing can have.

Now, 16.67ms might not sound like a long time to wait – but should the screen require any time at all to process the signal, that latency will only increase, as those 16.67ms are also just the latency generated by your display. A PC or games console needs time to process a control input, feed it through the game engine and kick out frames in response. It all adds up.

The other part of the equation is image processing. Until quite recently, that could be death for TVs, because most sets heavily process video by default to adjust and (theoretically) improve the image, whereas PC monitors tend to run with minimal tweaks.

Happily, some TVs now offer a dedicated low-latency game mode with minimal processing. Such TVs tend to be comparable to monitors running at the same refresh rate in terms of lag. The LG C1 OLED TV has been measured as low as 5ms at 120Hz. Intriguingly, running outside of game mode, the C1 is tragically slow at nearly 90ms, which neatly demonstrates just how much impact image processing can have.

In terms of refresh rate, the fastest current PC monitors can hit 360Hz, while the highest refresh TV sets accept an input signal of 120Hz. Some TVs have higher internal refresh rates of 240Hz or more, but in terms of latency or input lag, it’s the signal refresh from the source device that matters.

Long story short, the fastest OLED TVs deliver as little as 5ms of lag, while the quickest PC monitors including the aforementioned Asus panel along with other 360Hz monitors such as the Alienware AW2521H have been clocked at well under 2ms. So while OLED wins out on pixel response, certain LCD monitors have an advantage with input lag.

For OLED TVs, it’s pretty simple. You need a modern set with true 120Hz refresh and a low-latency game mode. For now, there’s simply nothing faster in that market. Pixel response from such displays is beyond reproach, delivering a super crisp, sharp image. In fact, any blurring will largely be a consequence of the limitations of human vision. For latency, 120Hz 4K TVs with OLED are pretty darn good. For most gamers, they’ll feel very slick and responsive. But serious esports players may appreciate something a little bit quicker.

Apart from the differences discussed between GtG response and MPRT, IPS and VA panel types tend not to be entirely comparable. By that we mean that the subjective experience of a 1ms IPS panel is usually that little bit crisper, clearer and cleaner in terms of response than a VA panel. IPS, in short, tends to be faster.

What’s more, pretty much all gaming monitors offer user-configurable overdrive which can accelerate response but also introduce unwanted image quality issues such as overshoot and inverse ghosting. All those caveats aside, the latest 1ms IPS panels deliver the best performance with very low levels of blur, while 1ms VA monitors are just a little behind. The next rung down and probably the slowest you should consider for gaming is 4ms. Depending on the monitor in question, the panel type and the settings used, such screens may not differ that greatly in terms of the subjective experience. But the worst of them will have noticeably more blur than a 1ms display.

Beyond that, you’re into 7ms and beyond territory. On paper, that ought to be fine. But as we’ve seen, even the fastest LCD panels rated at 1ms can be measured at 10 times that long for real-world response. So quoted specifications should be viewed more as a tool with which to categorize screens than set expectations for actual performance.

But what of lag or latency? Most gamers will find a PC monitor with 144Hz refresh offers no noticeable lag and feels seriously slick and super quick. For really competitive esports competition there are small gains to be had from 240Hz and 360Hz displays. But for us? We’d be very happy with either a 120Hz OLED TV or a 144Hz 1ms monitor.Just want a good low-lag screen? Check out the best gaming monitors and best 120Hz TVsToday"s best gaming monitors and 120Hz TVs

LCD panel prices have risen for 4 months in a row because of your home gaming? Since this year, the whole LCD panel market has smoked. Whether after the outbreak of the epidemic, LCD panel market prices rose for four months, or the panel giants in Japan and South Korea successively sold production lines, or the Chinese mainland listed companies frequently integrated acquisition, investment, and plant construction, all make the industry full of interesting.

LCD panel prices are already a fact. Since May this year, LCD panel prices have risen for four months in a row, making the whole industry chain dynamic. Why are LCD panels going up in price in a volatile 2020? The key factor lies in the imbalance between supply and demand.

The 43 inches and 55 inches rose more than double digits in August, reaching 13.7% each, and rose another $7 and $13, respectively, to $91 and $149, respectively, in September.

For larger sizes, overseas stocks remained strong, with prices for 65 inches and 75 inches rising $10 on average to $200 and $305 respectively in September.

The price of LCDS for large-size TVs of 70 inches or more hasn’t budged much. In addition, LTPS screens and AMOLED screens used in high-end phones have seen little or no increase in price.

As for October, LCD panel price increases are expected to moderate. The data shows that in October 32 inches or 2 dollars; Gains of 39.5 to 43 inches will shrink to $3;55 inches will fall back below $10; The 65-inch gain will narrow to $5.

During the epidemic, people stayed at home and had no way to go out for entertainment. They relied on TV sets, PCS, and game consoles for entertainment. After the resumption of economic work and production, the market of traditional home appliances picked up rapidly, and LCD production capacity was quickly digested.

However, due to the shutdown of most factories lasting 1-2 months during the epidemic period, LCD panel production capacity was limited, leading to insufficient production capacity in the face of the market outbreak, which eventually led to the market shortage and price increase for 4 consecutive months.

In fact, the last round of price rise of LCD panels was from 2016 to 2017, and its overall market price has continued to fall since 2018. Even in 2019, individual types have fallen below the material cost, and the whole industry has experienced a general operating loss. As a result, LCD makers have been looking for ways to improve margins since last year.

A return to a reasonable price range is the most talked about topic among panel makers in 2019, according to one practitioner. Some manufacturers for the serious loss of the product made the decision to reduce production or even stop production; Some manufacturers planned to raise the price, but due to the epidemic in 2020, the downstream demand was temporarily suppressed and the price increase was postponed. After the outbreak was contained in April, LCD prices began to rise in mid-to-late May.

This kind of price correction is in line with the law of industrial development. Only with reasonable profit space can the whole industry be stimulated to move forward.

In fact, the market price of LCD panels continued to decline in 2018-2019 because of the accelerated rise of China’s LCD industry and the influx of a large number of local manufacturers, which doubled the global LCD panel production capacity within a few years, but there was no suitable application market to absorb it. The result of excess capacity is oversupply, ultimately making LCD panel prices remain depressed.

Against this background, combined with the impact of the epidemic in 2020, the operating burden of LCD companies in Japan and South Korea has been further aggravated, and it is difficult to make profits in the production of LCD panels, so they have to announce the withdrawal of LCD business.

business in June 2022. In August, Sharp bought JDI Baishan, a plant in Ishikawa prefecture that makes liquid crystal display panels for smartphones. In early September, Samsung Display sold a majority stake in its SUZHOU LCD production plant to Starlight Electronics Technology, a unit of TCL Technology Group. LGD has not only pulled out of some of its production capacity but has announced that it will close its local production line in 2020. According to DSCC, a consultancy, the share of LCD production capacity in South Korea alone will fall from 19% to 7% between 2020 and 2021.

It is worth mentioning that in industry analysis, in view of the fact that Korean companies are good at using “dig through old bonus – selling high price – the development of new technology” the cycle of development mode, another 2020 out of the LCD production capacity, the main reason may be: taking the advantage of China’s expanding aggressively LCD manufacturers, Korean companies will own LCD panel production line hot sell, eliminating capacity liquid to extract its final value, and turning to the more profitable advantage of a new generation of display technologies, such as thinner, color display better OLED, etc. Samsung, for example, has captured more than 80% of the OLED market with its first-mover advantage.

From the perspective of production capacity, the launch of LCD tracks by major manufacturers in Japan and South Korea must reduce some production capacity in the short term, which to some extent induces market price fluctuations. In the long run, some of the Japanese and Korean LCD production capacity has been bought by Chinese manufacturers, coupled with frequent investment in recent years, the overall capacity is sure to recover as before, or even more than before. But now it will take time to expand the production layout, which more or less will cause supply imbalance, the industry needs to be cautious.

The LCD panel industry started in the United States and then gradually moved to Japan, South Korea, China, and Taiwan. At present, the proportion of production capacity in The Chinese mainland has reached 52% in 2020, and there are leading LCD panel products in China represented by BOE, Huxing Optoelectronics. Meanwhile, the production capacity layout of BOE, Huike, Huxing Optoelectronics, and other manufacturers has been basically completed, making industrial integration a necessity.

On the one hand, South Korean enterprises out of the LCD track, the domestic factory horse enclosure, plant expansion action. While LCDs may not sell as well as “upstart” flexible screens, respondents believe they are still strong enough in the traditional home appliance market to warrant continued investment. Zhao Bin, general manager of TCL Huaxing Development Center, has said publicly that the next-generation display technology will be mature in four to five years, but the commercialization of products may not take place until a decade later. “LCD will still be the mainstream in this decade,” he said.

On the other hand, there is no risk of neck jam in China’s LCD panel industry, which is generally controllable. In mainland China, there will be 21 production lines capable of producing 32-inch or larger LCD panels by 2021, accounting for about two-thirds of the global total. In terms of the proportion of production capacity, the Chinese mainland accounted for 42% of the global LCD panel in 2019, 51% this year, and will continue to climb to 63% next year.

Of course, building factories and expanding production cannot be accomplished overnight. In the process of production capacity recovery, it is predicted that there will be several price fluctuations, and the cost may be passed on to the downstream LCD panel manufacturers or consumers when the price rises greatly, which requires continuous attention.

This website is using a security service to protect itself from online attacks. The action you just performed triggered the security solution. There are several actions that could trigger this block including submitting a certain word or phrase, a SQL command or malformed data.

This website is using a security service to protect itself from online attacks. The action you just performed triggered the security solution. There are several actions that could trigger this block including submitting a certain word or phrase, a SQL command or malformed data.

When you"re using a monitor, you want your actions to appear on the screen almost instantly, whether you"re typing, clicking through websites, or gaming. If you have high input lag, you"ll notice a delay from the time you type something on your keyboard or when you move your mouse to when it appears on the screen, and this can make the monitor almost unusable.

For gamers, low input lag is even more important because it can be the difference between winning and losing in games. A monitor"s input lag isn"t the only factor in the total amount of input lag because there"s also delay caused by your keyboard/mouse, PC, and internet connection. However, having a monitor with low input lag is one of the first steps in ensuring you get a responsive gaming experience.

Any monitor adds at least a few milliseconds of input lag, but most of the time, it"s small enough that you won"t notice it at all. There are some cases where the input lag increases so much to the point where it becomes noticeable, but that"s very rare and may not necessarily only be caused by the monitor. Your peripherals, like keyboards and mice, add more latency than the monitor, so if you notice any delay, it"s likely because of those and not your screen.

There"s no definitive amount of input lag when people will start noticing it because everyone is different. A good estimate of around 30 ms is when it starts to become noticeable, but even a delay of 20 ms can be problematic for reaction-based games. You can try this tool that adds lag to simulate the difference between high and low input lag. You can use it to estimate how much input lag bothers you, but keep in mind this tool is relative and adds lag to the latency you already have.

There are three main reasons why there"s input lag during computer use, and it isn"t just the monitor that has input lag. There"s the acquisition of the image, the processing, and finally actually displaying it.

The acquisition of the image has to do with the source and not with the monitor. The more time it takes for the monitor to receive the source image, the more input lag there"ll be. This has never really been an issue with PCs since previous analog signals were virtually instant, and current digital interfaces like DisplayPort and HDMI have next to no inherent latency. However, some devices like wireless mice or keyboards may add delay. Bluetooth connections especially add latency, so if you want the lowest latency possible in the video acquisition phase, you should use a wired mouse or keyboard or get something wireless with very low latency.

Once the image is in a format that the video"s processor understands, it will apply at least some processing to alter the image somehow. A few examples:

The time this step takes is affected by the speed of the video processor and the total amount of processing. Although you can"t control the processor speed, you can control how many operations it needs to do by enabling and disabling settings. Most picture settings won"t affect the input lag, and monitors rarely have any image processing, which is why the input lag on monitors tends to be lower than on TVs. One of these settings that could add delay is variable refresh rate, but most modern monitors are good enough that the lag doesn"t increase much.

Once the monitor has processed the image, it"s ready to be displayed on the screen. This is the step where the video processor sends the image to the screen. The screen can"t change its state instantly, and there"s a slight delay from when the image is done processing to when it appears on screen. Our input lag measurements consider when the image first appears on the screen and not the time it takes for the image to fully appear (which has to do with our Response Time measurements). Overall, the time it takes to display the image has a big impact on the total input lag.

This website is using a security service to protect itself from online attacks. The action you just performed triggered the security solution. There are several actions that could trigger this block including submitting a certain word or phrase, a SQL command or malformed data.

One of the areas where the A-MVA panel does extremely well is in the areas of display lag and pixel response time. Just to recap, you may have heard complaints about "input lag" on various LCDs, so that"s one area we look at in our LCD reviews. We put input lag in quotation marks because while many people call it "input lag", the reality is that this lag occurs somewhere within the LCD panel circuitry, or perhaps even at the level of the liquid crystals. Where this lag occurs isn"t the concern; instead, we just want to measure the duration of the lag. That"s why we prefer to call it "processing lag" or "display lag".

To test for display lag, we run the Wings of Fury benchmark in 3DMark03, with the output set to the native LCD resolution - in this case 1920x1200. Our test system is a quad-core Q6600 running a Radeon HD 3870 on a Gigabyte GA-X38-DQ6 motherboard - we had to disable CrossFire support in order to output the content to both displays. We connect the test LCD and a reference LCD to two outputs from the Radeon 3870 and set the monitors to run in clone mode.

The reference Monitor is an HP LP3065, which we have found to be one of the best LCDs we currently possess in terms of not having display lag. (The lack of a built-in scaler probably has something to do with this.) While we know some of you would like us to compare performance to a CRT, that"s not something we have around our offices anymore. Instead, we are looking at relative performance, and it"s possible that the HP LP3065 has 20ms of lag compared to a good CRT - or maybe not. Either way, the relative lag is constant, so even if a CRT is faster at updating, we can at least see if an LCD is equal to or better than our reference display.

While the benchmark is looping, we snap a bunch of pictures of the two LCDs sitting side-by-side (using a relatively fast shutter speed). 3DMark03 shows the runtime with a resolution of 10ms at the bottom of the display, and we can use this to estimate whether a particular LCD has more or less processing lag than our reference LCD. We sort through the images and discard any where the times shown on the LCDs are not clearly legible, until we are left with 10 images for each test LCD. We record the difference in time relative to the HP LP3065 and average the 10 results to come up with an estimated processing lag value, with lower numbers being better. Negative numbers indicate a display is faster than the HP LP3065, while positive numbers mean the HP is faster and has less lag.

It"s important to note that this is merely an estimate - whatever the reference monitor happens to be, there are some inherent limitations. For one, LCDs only refresh their display 60 times per second, so we cannot specifically measure anything less than approximately 17ms with 100% accuracy. Second, the two LCDs can have mismatched vertical synchronizations, so it"s entirely possible to end up with a one frame difference on the time readout because of this. That"s why we average the results of 10 images, and we are confident that our test procedure can at least show when there is a consistent lag/internal processing delay. Here is a summary of our results for the displays we have tested so far.

As you can see, all of the S-PVA panels we have tested to date show a significant amount of input lag, ranging from 20ms up to 40ms. In contrast, the TN and S-IPS panels show little to no processing lag (relative to the HP LP3065). The BenQ FP241VW performs similarly to the TN and IPS panels, with an average display lag of 2ms - not something you would actually notice compared to other LCDs. Obviously, if you"re concerned with display lag at all, you"ll want to avoid S-PVA panels for the time being. That"s unfortunate, considering S-PVA panels perform very well in other areas.

Despite what the manufacturers might advertise as their average pixel response time, we found most of the LCDs are basically equal in this area - they all show roughly a one frame "lag", which equates to a response time of around 16ms. In our experience, processing lag is far more of a concern than pixel response times. Taking a closer look at just the FP241VW, we can see the typical one frame lag in terms of pixel response time. However, the panel does appear to be a little faster in response time than some of the other panels we"ve tested (notice how the "ghost image" isn"t as visible as on the HP LP3065), and we didn"t see parts of three frames in any of the test images.

After the initial article went live, one of our readers who works in the display industry sent me an email. He provides some interesting information about the causes of image lag. Below is an (edited) excerpt from his email. (He wished to remain anonymous.)

PVA and MVA have inherent drawbacks with respect to LCD response time, especially gray-to-gray. To address this shortcoming, companies have invested in ASICs that perform a trick generically referred to as "overshoot." The liquid crystal (LC) material in *VA responds sluggishly to small voltage changes (a change from one gray level to another). To fix this, the ASIC does some image processing and basically applies an overvoltage to the electrodes of the affected pixel to spur the LC material into rapid movement. Eventually the correct settling voltage is applied to hold the pixel at the required level matching the input drive level.

It"s very complicated math taking place in the ASIC in real time. It works well but with an important caveat: it requires a frame buffer. What this means is that as video comes into the panel, there is a memory device that can capture one whole video frame and hold it. After comparing it to the next incoming frame, the required overshoot calculations are made. Only then is the first captured frame released to the panel"s timing controller, which is when the frame is rendered to the screen. As you may have already guessed, that causes at least one frame time worth of lag (17ms).

Some companies discovered some unintended artifacts in their overshoot calculations and the only way they saw to correct these was to allow for their algorithm to look ahead by two frames instead of one. So they had to up the memory of the frame buffer and now they started capturing and holding not one but two frames upon which they make their complex overshoot predictions to apply the corrected pixel drive levels and reduce gray-to-gray response time (at the expense of lag time). Again, it works very well for improving response time, but at the expense of causing lag, which gamers hate. That in a nutshell is the basis of around 33ms of the lag measured with S-PVA.

Not every display uses this approach, but this could account for the increase in display lag between earlier S-PVA and later S-PVA panels. It"s also important to note that I tested the Dell 2408WFP revision A00, and apparently revision A01 does not have as much lag. I have not been able to confirm this personally, however. The above also suggest that displays designed to provide a higher image quality through various signal processing techniques could end up with more display lag caused by the microchip and microcode, which makes sense. Now all we need are better algorithms and technologies in order to reduce the need for all of this extra image processing -- or as we have seen with some displays (particularly HDTVs), the ability to disable the image processing.

The LG 27-inch UltraGear OLED QHD gaming monitor might appear as your standard display at first glance, albeit with an extremely impressive screen. After spending some time with it, though, I can now more fully appreciate the persistent introduction of OLED to the gaming monitor market in recent years.

At 27 inches, the UltraGear OLED QHD is finally an OLED gaming monitor at a common size for desks. After having some hands-on time with the screen at LG’s campus in New Jersey, I’ve come to understand the brand’s effort to provide total gaming solutions for all sorts of gamers, not only in terms of display size but also in terms of accessibility.

In recent years several brands have brought more OLED displays from the TV market to the gaming monitor market while simultaneously inundating TVs with many gaming features. Still, as a leader in the OLED display market, LG has hit a milestone by releasing its own high-quality OLED gaming monitors. The brand is already collaborating with other companies to use its 27-inch OLED panel on new products.

The crowdfunded brand Dough (formerly known as Eve) recently announced its own Spectrum ES07E2D gaming monitor, featuring a 27-inch 240Hz OLED panel manufactured by LG. Meanwhile, Asus has teased plans to announce its 27-inch ROG OLED gaming monitor at CES 2023. Suffice it to say — LG is far from the only player in the game.

In comparison to the 45-inch UltraGear OLED curved WQHD gaming monitor, which was also showcased, the 27-inch UltraGear OLED might not have the razzle-dazzle of the 800R curved display. But when it comes to a familiar size that the average gamer will be comfortable with, it’s the more attractive offering.

There’s only so much that can be done in terms of design by a company that isn’t gaming-specific. It’s clear that LG put a lot more effort into the display quality of the UltraGear OLED QHD; however, if you had to describe the design, it would be sleek and simple. The 27-inch display is mounted on an adjustable and detachable base that is also 100 x 100 millimeters VESA compatible, so you can mount it on a wall.

However, it has tilt, height, swivel, and pivot adjustments and a height range of 110 millimeters. The adjustment mechanism is circular, which makes for easy moving; however, it is manual. The monitor comes in a simple dark color option, but it does include an RGB hexagon lighting pattern in the rear for a little bit of gaming flare.

An interesting feature of the 27-inch UltraGear OLED QHD is that it comes with a stand-alone dedicated remote, which directs you to a game dashboard. This accessory allows you to see which features are turned on or off during gameplay, and you can also adjust settings as you desire.

Specs such as frame rate and refresh rate are readily displayed, and you can see the variable refresh rate change in real time as well. There are a number of different built-in features such as various care for the OLED display, a gaming mode, gaming adjust, input settings, and other general features.

The UltraGear OLED QHD features a solid input setup including two HDMI ports, one DisplayPort 1.4 port, one headphone out 4-pole sound and mic port, one USB 3.0 up-stream port, two USB 3.0 down-stream ports and a SPDIF out port. Most ports are located in the rear below the adjustment mechanism, while the headphone jack is located on the underside right of the monitor.

While the monitor does not include built-in speakers, LG showcased its own UltraGear gaming speakers during the demo, which include a number of settings, such as USB, Bluetooth, fps, RTS, EQ, 3D gaming sound, and DTS. The UltraGear OLED QHD supports DTS HP:X audio for headphones and microphones, as well as SPDIF out for speaker connections.

This setup likely helped with the overall thin and near-borderless design of the LG UltraGear OLED QHD, but also makes audio accessories a necessity for this peripheral.

One thing I can say is that the images truly don’t do the LG UltraGear OLED QHD justice in terms of the quality of the display. The monitor uses the same OLED panels already seen on LG OLED TVs, and we’ve all seen how good gaming is on those screens. LG noted that the inclusion of DisplayPort 1.4 is one of the primary differences between its OLED gaming TVs and its new OLED gaming monitors.

Overall, I found the blues of the water shown on the displays to truly demonstrate the color depth and accuracy. Demos showed many seabound game scenarios, which have many similar color tones. Still, the distinct contrast between the blues of the water, and the greys and metals of the ships and fighter planes was apparent.

The racing game demos showed the brightness and color range. Reds were sharp and racing car blacks were distinct. Even the details on neighboring cars were not lost while focusing on what would be the main player.

Additionally, in comparison to the laptop connected to the monitor, which gave off a glare, and the LG UltraGear OLED QHD, which remained in a deep black, when transitioning to the all-black screen with the LG UltraGear branding, further demonstrated the color accuracy of the display.

Even if gaming is the primary use case for a high refresh rate, it also allows for more productivity-focused tasks, such as fluid web scrolling. LG said the LG UltraGear OLED QHD response time is much faster that its LG OLED TVs and 100 times faster than the average LCD TV. This feature also aids in drastically reducing input lag and motion blur compared to LCD monitors.

The exact specifications for the display include a 26.5-inch flat 2560x 1440 resolution OLED panel with a 240Hz refresh rate, a 16:9 aspect ratio, and a 0.03ms GtG response time. It also has a color gamut of DCI-P3 98.5%, a contrast ratio of 1,500,000:1, a color depth of 1.07 billion colors, a pixel density of 110.8 pixels per inch (PPI), in addition to a typical brightness of 200 nits and a peak brightness of 800 nits at HDR 10.

HDR is obviously a huge benefit of moving to OLED and is a great example of something conventional IPS just can’t replicate. With a peak brightness of 800 nits and the fantastic contrast of OLED, you’re bound to get some decent HDR performance out of this thing, even if it doesn’t get quite as bright as the Alienware 34 QD-OLED. Gaming in HDR is something most PC gamers still haven’t experienced, and it makes a huge difference to the visual quality of games that support it.

Viewing angles on the UltraGear OLED, meanwhile, range from 178 degrees left to right and 178 degrees up and down. The display is also coated with anti-glare and low-reflection treatments to reduce the blue light bar allowing for reduced eye strain and discomfort and longer gaming.

The 200 nits of typical brightness seems a bit low, however, especially if you happen to have your PC set up near a window. We’ll have to wait to test it ourselves to get a feel for it, though.

While I didn’t get to test out hands-on gameplay myself on the UltraGear OLED QHD, LG did have members of their partner esports team Evil Geniuses on hand to show off their gaming skills and to share their experiences playing on displays. They demonstrated playing Valorant on the 27-inch and 45-inch curved models respectively, giving their opinions of the gaming performance.

I found it most interesting that the gamers were easily able to detect each other within the gameplay while being fully immersed in the game and not having to move their heads around too much. The Evil Geniuses members relayed a similar sentiment, explaining the displays solve common issues where high refresh rates or frame rates on a display might equal diminished resolution and vice versa. They found the new LG UltraGear OLED models helped them stay more focused on their gameplay without having to worry about imperfections on the displays.

LG also noted that the latest high-end graphics cards such as the Nvidia RTX 4090 are expected to pair well with the UltraGear OLED QHD, supporting features such as its high resolution and fast frame rates simultaneously. This will allow gamers to maintain picture quality and gaming performance at the same time.

It is clear that the LG 27-inch UltraGear OLED QHD is for gamers or even game enthusiasts. Its HDR performance and numerous gaming features make it fairly stacked as one of the go-to options for 2023. Even still, its $1,000 price is a great value proposition for those who intend to multitask and use the peripheral for not only gaming but for professional work or schoolwork as well.

I would have liked to see some additional features included, such as built-in speakers and more USB ports, but many of these challenges can be addressed with accessories that PC gamers already own.

The LG UltraGear OLED gaming monitor series consists of 27-inch flat and 45-inch curved models, which are currently available for preorder ahead of CES 2023 in January exclusively at LG.com. The gaming monitors come with the offer of expedited two-day shipping, and a free gaming pad, valued at $200.

The best 4K gaming monitor makes way more than games look great. It"s a big upgrade to any system that has the garphics card to power it. But games in particular make the best argument for the swap to 4K, showcasing how vivid modern games can look at such a high resolution. For those of you who want to make the leap, the 4K monitors below are the ones that are well built to not only deliver a great picture but do it with a high refresh rate too.

While you"ll want a top-end GPU to get the most from a 4K monitor, even the Nvidia GeForce RTX 3060 Ti(opens in new tab) and AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT(opens in new tab) can be surprisingly capable when it comes to 4K. Especially if you don"t feel the need to run at max settings. And as GPU supply returns to normality—something that is starting to finally become the norm—we might actually have some next-gen cards on the way, too. And those should pretty much all be 4K-capable.

In most cases, you"re going to want a VA or IPS panel, with a refresh rate above 60Hz, and some form of frame-syncing capability—either G-Sync or FreeSync. You also need to decide whether to up-size with one of the best gaming TVs(opens in new tab) instead, for deeper immersion. If you have space, that is.

Spending that little more on one of the best 4K gaming monitors is certainly worth it, especially when you consider it should see you through a decade of action-packed, next-gen gaming. It"ll be able to produce breathtaking visuals for all those years, spanning many iterations of your Theseus’ ship of a PC. Think of it as a long-term investment, basically, but one that you also get to enjoy today.

Why you can trust PC GamerOur expert reviewers spend hours testing and comparing products and services so you can choose the best for you. Find out more about how we test.

The LG UltraGear is the first 4K Nano IPS 1ms gaming monitor capable of properly showing off your next-gen GPU. This 4K 27-inch HDR monitor boasts a 144Hz refresh rate and 1ms response time—wild for a 4K monitor.

What is most impressive about this LG is the Nano IPS tech that offers a wider color gamut and stellar viewing angles. Offering both 10-bit color and a very impressive 98% coverage of the DCI-P3 gamut, the 27GN950 is a seriously high fidelity monitor. LG reckons it’s as good for content creation as it is for gaming, and we"d tend to agree.

To that, you can add compatibility with both Nvidia’s G-Sync and AMD’s FreeSync adaptive refresh, a slick slim-bezel design, and LG’s Sphere Lighting 2.0 RGB visual theatrics. Oh, and the minor matter that, you know, this is a 4K IPS monitor that runs at fully 144Hz refresh.

But what of the actual real-world experience? This is an awfully pretty panel. LG’s default calibration is virtually faultless, with impeccable detail in both black and white scales. Beyond the strict metrics, it’s a seriously vibrant and punchy display in terms of image quality on the Windows desktop.

Hop in game and it’s just as impressive. We’ll never tire of the buttery smooth goodness that is 144Hz. But combined with the crazy-sharp detail that comes with the 4K pixel grid, well, it’s pretty special. The catch, of course, is that you’ll need one heck of a GPU to make the most of the 144Hz refresh while running at 4K, though that just got a little more realistic with the latest graphics cards from both Nvidia and AMD.

The most obvious shortcoming, compared to similar but even pricier screens, involves HDR implementation. The 27GN950 does support HDR, including local dimming, and comes complete with VESA’s DisplayHDR 600 certification. However, the local dimming comprises just 16 edge-lit zones. This is a much more convincing monitor taken as a really excellent SDR panel. As an HDR display, it"s disappointing.

The LG UltraGear 27GN950-B bags you a terrific panel with exquisite IPS image quality and, despite the lesser HDR capabilities, beautiful colors and contrast in your games too. G-Sync and Freesync support ensure stable pictures and smoothness in games, and the speedy refresh rate and response times back this up too.

A close cousin of the Acer Predator X27, itself once the top of this pile, the XB273K is a seriously excellent 4K monitor. It harnesses everything the X27 does, trading off very little to rehouse it in a far cheaper chassis.

Now often found sitting around the $1,000 mark, it is immediately more tempting than the Acer X27, and the only real change is in the HDR; the XB273K has a slightly lower quality of HDR. But that"s about it. And considering the still nightmarish state of HDR gaming on PC, that"s not a huge miss.

With the privacy shields setup (reducing screen glare and reflection), I booted up some games to get testing. The glorious Assassin’s Creed Odyssey is just that: glorious. The whole game is incredibly vivid and has the crispest of image qualities to boot; no blurred or smudged edges to see and each feature looks almost perfectly defined and graphically identified. Particular highlights are the way water effects, lighting, reflections, and sheens are presented, but there is equal enjoyment to be had from landscape features, the people, and urban elements. All benefit from a widespread excellence in color, contrast, shades (and shadows), and tones.

Going darker, I turn to Metro Exodus, and am immediately greeted with great picture quality. Any scene or view from Artyom’s perspective is fantastically clear and well presented. The contrast is particularly strong with colors punching through the greys and blacks. The smaller details are equally as good, down to clothing detail, skin tone and complexion, and facial expressions once again. Exodus’s predecessor and cousin, Metro Redux proved that the Acer Predator XB273K handles near-total dark environments very well indeed. There is an immersion-heightening quality to the blacks and grays of the Metro and those games certainly don’t feel five years old on the XB273K.

Playing Apex Legends on the XB273K, at max settings, seamlessly traversing and smoothly running around Kings Canyon is one of the best Apex Legends experiences I’ve had when it comes to monitors. Not only did the image quality from the other games remain, but the speed and smoothness of the monitor provides me with a wonderful, smooth picture at 144Hz. The speed of the screen means that there is no loss in quality even when you’re spinning on the spot frantically trying to find your enemies, or flitting between shots in cover.

Whatever game you play, you"re going to enjoy excellent picture quality, with terrific color vibrancy, contrast, and depth; the 144Hz refresh rate means it"s excellent for competitive shooters too. G-Sync offers the best adaptive sync technology, an impressive array of ports covers you, and overall it offers such a well-rounded overall experience you"ll have zero regrets.

4K has been a prohibitively expensive venture in PC gaming for many years now. That comes down to a simple truth: it"s a helluva lot of pixels to be moving around all at once. Pixel pushing power equals money—you need a graphics card capable of the task and a gaming monitor able to display the final result to experience 4K at its best. And neither has come cheap for the longest time.

That"s all starting to change, though, as the Gigabyte M28U proves by its superb value and excellent 4K feature set. Not only is this a great monitor for PC gamers either, as support for HDMI 2.1 makes it a great option for Xbox Series X and PlayStation 5 owners too.

Within its four slim bezels, the Gigabyte M28U contains a 28-inch IPS panel. The IPS panel tech delivers exceptional color depth and clarity, and performs well in most other regards, especially viewing angles. Most especially black and white levels, where even the slightest dip in contrast was noticeably discernable on-screen during testing. That clear delineation in black levels is awfully impressive for an IPS, too, especially one without a seriously impressive contrast spec such as this. The M28U is rated to 1,000:1, and there is also a touch of that tell-tale IPS glow around the edges on dark images, though neither is all that noticeable while gaming.

This monitor is also rated to DisplayHDR 400, though its brightness is the fairly standard 300 cd/m2. I wouldn"t consider its HDR capabilities a big deal either way, and I definitely wouldn"t recommend you pick up this monitor specifically for its HDR capabilities. It"s not going to show off everything HDR has to offer. Not to mention HDR on Windows PCs is still not that fun an experience.

The M28U offers a rich canvas for gaming not just in picture quality, however, but also in response and refresh rate. With response times of 2ms MPRT and 1ms GTG, the M28U is quite quick.

The big sell though is the 144Hz refresh rate, as you no longer have to forgo high frame rates for the full-fat 4K resolution. The key thing here is having a GPU capable of driving such high frame rates in most games, which is no simple feat. AMD"s Radeon RX 6900 XT managed just fine in my experience, but when I was testing the Asus GeForce RTX 3070 Noctua OC Edition, I found it was often struggling at 4K with high presets enabled—you really want to get all that detail on the screen, as well.

What makes the M28U an even bigger deal is that it"s actually rather affordable. It"s still quite a lot of money to throw down on a monitor alone, but considering what other 4K monitors with this sort of feature set are going for, it"s as close to a steal as you"re going to get at 4K.

The LG 27UL650 is a solid 4K gaming monitor you can often find for under $500. This IPS panel display has improved color and contrast over its predecessor and offers lower input lag for gaming too.

If you do more than gaming, then this LG displays sports deliciously precise color accuracy and VESA HDR 400 too, making watching movies and editing a worthwhile endeavor. It boasts an sRGB 99% color gamut, which means your colors really are spot on.

The only real downside is the standard 60Hz refresh rate, which means it isn"t a great option if you like your shooters to be of a competitive nature. There"s nothing wrong with 60Hz for plenty of games, but we simply demand smoother frame rates from our screens these days, and that includes 4K panels.

There is another downside for gaming here, and that is that this monitor has no built-in speakers, so you"ll have to invest in a good pair of headphones and/or desktop speakers, as well. But generally, we"d recommend that over pretty much any tinny display speaker anyway.

LG claims this is "virtually borderless" too, which is a bit of a stretch, but the bezels on the top and sides are reasonably thin. It"s got a phat ol" chin though. Still, if you really want to hurt your graphics card, hooking up a couple of these side by side will certainly give you an impressive amount of screen space.

Overall, this monitor does boast decent color accuracy and at an affordable price. Just be mindful that there are smoother panels out there. They just demand a lot more from your bank account for the privilege.

After a rocky start with its ill-fated foray into the world of tablets, Eve has smashed it out of the park with the Spectrum ES07D03. It"s a beautifully designed gaming monitor, with a stunning LG panel, and all the features you could possibly want from a modern screen. That"s the result of a crowd-designed creation process for the Spectrum, and it certainly looks like it"s paid off.

Except for those wanting decent HDR. With a peak luminance of 750cd/m2, and a little local dimming in its backlighting array, I was hoping for a little more pizazz in my HDR scenes. Sadly, that"s still a struggle for PC gaming and its monitors. But everything else the Eve Spectrum does has blown me away. The LG Nano IPS panel is superb, with vibrant colors, and great motion, and I"m a little bit in love.

The LG nano-IPS Oxide display is the heart of the Spectrum and is the key to the stellar visual experience the monitor itself provides. There are precious few panel manufacturers on the planet, and LG is undoubtedly one of the best. This latest nano-IPS display is an 8-bit + A-FRC screen, and one that can deliver 4K resolutions at 144Hz. For the professionals out there, it"s rated with a color gamut that covers 98% DCI-P3 and 100% of the sRGB color space.

The Spectrum also rocks HDMI 2.1 support so it can deliver its full 144Hz promise across PC and next-gen console at 4K, something you previously needed a DisplayPort connection to do.

Running around a camp in Assassin"s Creed: Valhalla(opens in new tab), dimly lit by flickering torches and campfires, it was almost impossible to see what the hell was going on. Valhalla actually also highlighted the issue again with the animated saving logo looping over a black screen, causing the bleeding effect to be even more noticeable.

Like any 4K/144Hz screen you could mention, the price tag is potentially prohibitive. But gaming monitors are investments, and this is a screen that will outlast your current PC, and potentially your next one too. So it"s always worth spending what you can possibly afford on a new screen.

Perhaps a little obvious, but packing lots of top-end features into a display means it’ll come with a high price tag. The Asus ROG Swift PG27UQ is an incredible display but it doesn"t come cheap. That money does net you more features than any other display here and perhaps that"s enough to set it apart.

As well as the ridiculously clear, bright and detailed images that the PG27UQ’s 4K and HDR-enabled 27-inch display shows off, this monitor also incorporates Nvidia G-Sync tech, making this an absolute behemoth of a screen. Though we do wish the contrast was slightly better on this nearly perfect screen.

On the back, it’s a bit lean on the connections, but you should have everything you need: present are an HDMI 2.0 input, DisplayPort 1.4, 3.5mm audio, and two USB 3.0 ports. It’s also an incredibly well-designed bit of kit with the stand effectively funneling cables, as well as looking cool. I especially like the ROG eye that shines on the surface wherever you put the monitor.

The HDR and Quantum Dot IPS display make this monitor a standout from the rest of the crowd. Enabling HDR gives the graphics a noticeable dynamism in any resolution, though it sees the most benefit at 4K. Shadows are generally not too dark. Brightly lit scenes are not blown out. The PG27UQ excels especially well with gritty games like Metro Exodus and Outlast 2 with the HDR turned on—and honestly, the lighting looks just as good compared to ray tracing in some instances. But depending on the in-game lighting, some finer details will be too dark to make out. Brightly colored games are where this monitor really shines.

IPS displays in general allow you to view the screen from off-angle without the color quality being affected, but throwing Quantum Dot