4 ms vs 1ms response time

[guest555]

I am currently using an 1080p 60hz 7ms IPS monitor.
I am looking at buying a 1440p 144hz 4ms VA monitor.
Is the difference in response time noticeable to you guys?
Also, I was thinking about getting a 1ms monitor with everything else the same, but those are much more expensive. Is a 1ms monitor worth it or not? I don't know much of an improvement it will be.

 

[d10s]

I went from a 1ms TN to a 4ms IPS monitor and i'm very happy with it and don't notice much of a difference, i need a good response since i play online games often. If you want the 1440p 4ms va monitor i would say go for it.

 

[Solandri]

Unfortunately, response time isn't generally comparable between brands. Some companies use 0%-100% pixel brightness, some use 10%-90%, some use a different standard to measure the time, some use best-case (usually going from 0% to 100% is faster than 100% to 0%, or the other way around, I don't recall exactly), others use worst-case. There are also tricks used to decrease response time which can result in degraded image quality during motion (e.g. overshooting to try to get the pixel to the proper new color faster).

If you assume the response time is an accurate measure of the 0%-100% pixel change time, 1 / response time will let you compare it to the refresh rate. 7 ms = 1000 ms per second / 7 ms = potentially 143 Hz. 4 ms = potentially 250 Hz. 1 ms = potentially 1000 Hz. So unless your eyes are extremely sensitive (I can see flicker up to about 1200 Hz, though it's easy to ignore past about 300 Hz - very annoying in rooms with old-style fluorescent lights), I doubt you'd notice any difference between 4 ms and 1 ms.

 

[iamacow]

I don't see how response time can be faster the the refresh rate. Yes it "could" go that fast, but than why isn' the monitor that fast. Hence why its all marketing and no screen can do 1000hz. 240hz is the current limit, or 4.16ms per frame. The human reaction time is avg 250ms. So really anything below 8ms you won't notice. 16ms was a issue 10 years ago because even though they said 16ms, it still was ghosting. So it wasn't truely 16ms, refresh.

 

[k1114]

Response time has to be faster than frame time because it needs some frame hold time. That's why an actual 16ms still ghosts. Reaction time is irrelevant because you can react to an image with ghosting. But let's not complicate this more. The number can't be trusted so the only option is reviews about ghosting.