Discussion in 'LCD & LED LCD TVs Forum' started by fathead82, Oct 12, 2005.
I saw recently an LCD PC Monitor with a claimed response time of 3ms. So this response time is nothing new, it might be for TV's but not PC monitors.
Lower power is nice though. I might wait a bit longer and see what develops. I hope the prices drop, even though people have been saying that they are rising.
Interesting - I knew this technology was approaching.
I suspect they are using high intensity RGB LEDs (from Luxeon and similar) and a blinking technique.
I saw a presentation about this in April during a week's training session in Boston ; CCFL technology was said to be mature and to have peaked with LED techniques being the way forward.
The reason I saw this was that my employer is making a LED controller IC that compensates for ambient light and LED aging effects and is designed for RGB backlighting schemes like this.
Chris Muriel, Manchester.
There is strong evidence (by an LCD manufacturer) to show that the human brain cannot cope with current LCD technology that a response rate less than 8ms - with faster updates the brain throws a wobbly and hence the PQ is compromised. I stumbled across this a few months back and wished that I had files it as I cannot find a link to it anymore - someone else on the forum has seen something to back this up too so I was not dreaming.
So either this new panel is flawed or something in it (the sequential processing method maybe?) avoids this visual illusion.
In the meantime, if its got a genuine response rate of <8ms its going to look cr@p, if it doesn't look cr@p then it has not got a genuine response rate of <8ms.
In this case, quicker does not always mean better.
just thought i'd put my 2 pence worth in.
the new metz lcd tv (own panel) launched any day in the uk has a speed of 7m/s.
And the current Philips 37PF9830 is 6ms - and looks great.
Was that a Viewsonic VX924 by any chance. These sub 8ms response times can be a little misleading. The actual response time here can be over 30ms (see Toms Hardware Review of VX924 ).
If you look at the actual response profile for many monitors you can find that some monitors with 16ms quotes response times actually do better than the supposedly faster ones.
It might of been, but I didn't pay much attention, these things come and go so I don't pay any attention. I did say "claimed", which is why I questioned it.
Looks really interesting, but I'm wondering if/how they will overcome the rainbow effect as seen on DLP?
This kind of technology required a very fast response rate, hence the mention of a 5ms panel.
Whilst the Inq suggests that they will introduce this technology this month, when will we actually see them in UK shops? Other sites are suggesting that sammy will go into volume production mid 2006.
I'd decided to get a sammy 32" HD LCD this quarter and I'm now thinking I should hold off a little for this new tech.
All this talk of 8ms 5ms makes me think back to the days of 'hi-fi' when frequency responses (such as 20Hz - 20KHz) were banded about and meant nothing as no mention of DB gain or loss was mentioned.
It's the same here - 8ms for what? Black to White - Grey to Grey? - then what grey? - two greys that are so close that the eye can't see the difference? In independant tests manufactures claims are always wildly optermistic anyway.
Ah well, 'spose it beats chatting about the weather.
Separate names with a comma.