Need some advice with input lag/information

[Th3-Hunter333]

Ok i have a few questions regarding input lag.

Can a bad monitor be a direct cause of input lag? (while framerate is well into the 100+ range)

I have purchased the asus vg248qe already (144hz/1ms response time) and was wondering if this would indeed fix some input lag ive been suffering from with my old 4 year old lg flatron (lg flatron ew224) monitor ive had for way to long

Also when my framerate starts dipping below 100 with my current monitor, it almost feels like input lag increases

I also run a logitech g502 (1000hz polling rate) with exact 1:1 ratio measured with the mouse movement recorder from mark c mouse fix

 

[Suzuki@1473780084@1473780163]

nope. input lag isnt related to the response time, or the refresh rate. however, 144 hz = 6.9 ms each frame stays on screen, so if you can push a high fps then the monitor will display them in nearly 1:1 meaning making everything feel more responsive. if you push 60 fps on a 144 hz monitor, the monitor (provided the fps never change for the sake of the example) is doubling the frames, so itll display the frame on screen 2.4x longer instead (2.4x in a row, rather than 1x 1x 1x). this is why you feel like its getting less responsive. the electronics used internally are still the limiting factor though.

 

[Th3-Hunter333]

I dont have the 144hz asus monitor shipped in yet is why i was asking before it arrives to my house (i will be running this monitor on the rig in my signature)

so drops to 60 frames while running on this 144hz monitor will still remain to "feel" like input lag?

 

[Suzuki@1473780084@1473780163]

the difference is negligible. even if you push 60 fps, itll still feel responsive, i was just trying to explain worst case scenario comparing the two most popular... 60 and 144. playing games on my projector and my monitor isn't night and day which people want you to believe, especially the gamers and the manufacturers who educate the gamers into thinking theyre experts at the subject.

the problem is no necessarily input lag. if someone comes from a 10 ms 60 hz, and start using a 10 ms (i know there are lower than 10 ms) 144 hz monitor, the ability to display more frames, making the game feel smoother, and way more "accurate" when aiming, and due to the fact that you get 2.4x less ghosting, and 0 ghosting (crt clarity) if you use lightboost (provided you push 100+ fps), then that is only adding to the problem. 10 ms is still 10 ms, its just placebo.

though thats not the worst thing about this. whats worse is that majority of gamers and your 'average consumer' alike, they think that response time = input lag, which is obviously not the true, theyre completely different specs. the way manufacturers push lower is better, is using still frames, or slow motion video, pro reviewers do the same, theyre hilariously bad at their job. so no wonder the whole display industry is upside down, when not even the manufacturers want to explain whats really going on.

lower numbers sell more monitors, thats just the way it is. its not true, but we cant do anything about it. the display market as a whole, including the tv market, is completely upside down because of the manufacturers covering up every single spec which actually matters, with fake or misleading numbers.

 

[Th3-Hunter333]

I think i understand you and must thank you greatly.

What advantages would i actually see when i get this asus monitor though (with 144fps which i will try to maintain with my gtx 970) other than "looking" better and smoother.

I really want more responsive gameplay more than anything

 

[Suzuki@1473780084@1473780163]

according to https://www.monitornerds.com/asus-vg248qe/

its got a input lag of 13 ms, and im assuming average. you wont be able to tell the difference between it, and a crt, which is basically 0 in laymans...

your in game latency (online), mouse, keyboard latency, is going to matter a lot more. a lot of people probably dont know this, but they should be using a usb to ps2 adapter for their keyboard, the mouse is borderline but gaming mice are fine.

you should report back after you received your new monitor, i, and probably others would be interested in knowing your first hand experience.

 

[Th3-Hunter333]

I will definitely be reporting back when i get the new monitor since you request it and i imagine you are right in saying others may want to see this

I will also try to be as clear and informative as possible when i do for accuracy

 

[Th3-Hunter333]

Just leaving a follow up review for you to see and whoever else would like to see this and ill be as thorough as i can

I finally got it and had my own little tweaking and fiddling around with settings and such
Ive tested 60hz on it 144hz and 120hz (light boosted), also played around with various icc profiles and reshade framework

Can i tell the difference between my old monitor and 144hz? Yes, by MILES.

Some people ive seen around of other reviews say that they didnt really notice the difference, it was literally night and day for me (keep in mind i have a more than capable rig of maintaining high framerate so mileage varies greatly with different setups)

Who would you recommend this to?

First off do NOT get this for a console, just dont (you can NOT use this monitors major selling point of having 144hz/1ms with a console)
I agree to many of the people that the color "correction" (if that is the right term here) is off a bit and doesnt look as sharp as IPS but as i said above i use reshade framework/icc profiles/digital vibrance/etc etc to rectify its lack of "pretty colors"

For people wanting that zero motion blur/1ms response time in mostly first person shooters (or other fast paced games) look no furthur, no joke this monitor is crystal clear (especially with light boost)

Overall, i was very impressed with this monitor but then again this is my very first 144hz monitor as i have lived with 60hz all my life so for me this is a major step up