# 2ms vs 5ms



## Noir (Apr 18, 2008)

Guys can i find a BIG difference on lcd that have 2ms and the one use 5ms in a game or movie?
I've consider to get a 19 inch samsung 953bw which has 2ms or 22 inch samsung 223bw which has 5ms? I got a good price for those lcds and the price isn't too far, the only thing that make me think is the difference in response time between those two lcds.


----------



## Geoff (Apr 18, 2008)

I honestly wouldn't pay more then $10-$20 more for the 2ms version, as you won't be able to see a difference between the two visually.


----------



## adarsh (Apr 18, 2008)

As said by [- OMEGA -], you will not notice much difference between a 2ms and 5ms refresh rate.

A 2ms will give you a faster fps than 5ms but this is not very noticeable.


----------



## ThatGuy16 (Apr 18, 2008)

2ms is suppose to be better for gaming, to prevent ghosting. But about all 5ms monitors are just as well, as long is its not a "cheapo"


----------



## hermeslyre (Apr 18, 2008)

adarsh said:


> A 2ms will give you a faster fps than 5ms but this is not very noticeable.



Response timings don't affect the FPS of anything, as far as I know. The refresh rate dictates FPS capping though..


----------



## Computer_Freak (Apr 18, 2008)

so what more refresh rate (more Hz) the less or more the FPS will be?

5ms isnt bad, but if the price diff is small rather get the 2ms


----------



## hermeslyre (Apr 18, 2008)

Computer_Freak said:


> so what more refresh rate (more Hz) the less or more the FPS will be?



What the refresh rate is set at, 60hz for most LCD monitors, is the maximum FPS  the screen is able to render per second. It's not apparent to some because of frame switches and apps like FRAPS. Just to be clear, FRAPS shows the user how many frames the card is capable of producing, not what you're currently seeing on the screen.


----------



## mrjack (Apr 18, 2008)

Basically anything below 12ms is good for gaming and as long as it's under said 12ms you won't notice any differences really even if you get a 2ms instead of a 5ms LCD.


----------



## hermeslyre (Apr 18, 2008)

mrjack said:


> Basically anything below 12ms is good for gaming and as long as it's under said 12ms you won't notice any differences really even if you get a 2ms instead of a 5ms LCD.



I would agree here. I've never used a tighter response timing than the ol' 12ms I have, but I don't have any complaints. Everything looks great, even fast motion.


----------



## Computer_Freak (Apr 18, 2008)

FRAPS shows what its capable of....

so then GPU will perform worse than the reviews....



12ms..... i would have thought thats too much. ah well


----------



## The_Other_One (Apr 18, 2008)

I think my 17" is about 7-8ms and I think it's fine.  As long as you run LCDs at their native resolution and they have about 8ms or higher response times, I doubt you'll see any difference.


----------



## Computer_Freak (Apr 18, 2008)

what happens if you run at less that native?


----------



## hermeslyre (Apr 18, 2008)

Computer_Freak said:


> FRAPS shows what its capable of....
> 
> so then GPU will perform worse than the reviews....
> 
> 12ms..... i would have thought thats too much. ah well



Not really, you just can't see all the frames the card is capable of. I dunno about you, but I've never had a problem with the 60fps cap on 60hz monitors, even in fast game like UT.. It's the same with the response time. Faster is supposed to be better, but you'd be surprised at what point you _actually_ start noticing ghosting etc.



Computer_Freak said:


> what happens if you run at less that native?



The monitor attempts to reproduce that resolution, oft times with less than perfect results. Native is the resolution it would look absolutely best on.


----------



## Computer_Freak (Apr 18, 2008)

oh ok cool

see one thing i hate is:

My bud has a 19"

at 1280x1024 windows is tiny but games are ok (still small)


----------



## Noir (Apr 19, 2008)

From what i've read your opinion is it best if i just choose the 22" with 5ms instead 19" with 2ms?
If i choose the 22" the native res will be 1680x1050 pixel, can my card handle it in many games like crysis, dirt, assasins creed or even the upcoming grid and mass effect? The impact of having higher res quite big in a game isn't (as now i can play on all high in crysis in my old 15" crt at 1024x768 pixel, i doubt that i still can use that setting in higher res?


----------



## Noir (Apr 19, 2008)

[-0MEGA-];953081 said:
			
		

> I honestly wouldn't pay more then $10-$20 more for the 2ms version, as you won't be able to see a difference between the two visually.



About the price between the 19" and 22" it take around $25 more to get the 22".
As said before, the 19" got 2ms and the 22" got 5ms, so which one is more reasonable?


----------



## Vizy (Apr 19, 2008)

the 22 incher. the ms wont matter at all.


----------



## The_Beast (Apr 19, 2008)

I get no ghosting with my 5 ms monitor and it isn't exactly the most expensive monitor out there 

it's a HP w1907


----------



## Noir (Apr 19, 2008)

The_Beast said:


> I get no ghosting with my 5 ms monitor and it isn't exactly the most expensive monitor out there
> 
> it's a HP w1907



I doubt that, in my country i can get a 22" from samsung or viewsonic for a price of that lcd.


----------



## evil-xxx (Apr 19, 2008)

yep,as other say there's no big difference.


----------



## Noir (Apr 19, 2008)

So the 22" with 5ms instead the 19" with 2ms then?


----------



## Geoff (Apr 19, 2008)

Noir said:


> So the 22" with 5ms instead the 19" with 2ms then?


Absolutely!  You will be much happier with a 22" 5ms then you would with a 19" 2ms.


----------



## Noir (Apr 19, 2008)

Yeah, just a slight concern that my vga couldn't handle to play games in native res that 22" got, but i am happy enough to have a big screen.
:-D


----------



## Noir (Apr 20, 2008)

Oh my it seems the samsung lcd 223bw that im gonna buy shipped only with analog cable, so its not a dvi cable isn't.
Is a dvi cable that expensive?


----------



## fortyways (Apr 20, 2008)

There should really be a sticky about how SAMSUNG DOESN'T MAKE ANY 2MS PANELS.

The "2ms" version is just marketed differently, they're both the same worthless Samsung crap. Please search the forum if you'd like a more in-depth explanation.

Seriously, a response time isn't like a byte or hertz or something you can add up and use as a reliable figure.


----------



## Noir (Apr 20, 2008)

Can u link me about that subject? Im interest to learn more about it.


----------



## diduknowthat (Apr 20, 2008)

Noir said:


> Oh my it seems the samsung lcd 223bw that im gonna buy shipped only with analog cable, so its not a dvi cable isn't.
> Is a dvi cable that expensive?



Nope, they're very cheap.


----------



## Noir (Apr 23, 2008)

At last i've ordered a 22' samsung 223bw and it will be delivered this night.
I dont want to argue anymore but its it true that there are several samsung panel? S, A, and .C quality? I've seen a review of a samsung 226bw that use one either of those panel, i hope mine isnt a 'lottery' panel.


----------



## Noir (Apr 24, 2008)

I've got the lcd in my room now, and notice how much space it can save now.
Usually i'd got eye strain because i never used to lcd panel but this one quite different, it feels the same i use my old crt no eye strain and quite impress how large the screen is, i can work without always scrolling around 
Generally im satisfied with my new lcd.
Ok then, this thread is closed thanx all to your opinion and input.


----------

