Answers.Body: <p>At 14ms, you can still get an effective 71 frames per second.  It should be fine for working with video.  The frames might not show up exactly at the start of their time interval, but it still should be ok.  </p>
  
  <p>Faster response is still better, but it isn't going to be critical for anything other than really high frame rate gaming.  5ms is very VERY fast for a high end screen.  Cheap screens go faster because they use simple techniques that are fast and cheap but produce (greatly) inferior image quality.  Better screens like IPS and PVA are by nature slower and the last time I was seriously in the market (which was a couple years ago), 6 to 8ms was considered fast for an IPS or PVA.  sub-5 is completely unnecessary.  14ms is probably on the slower end, but should still be fine.  Even 20ms would likely be ok, though it might start getting more noticeable.</p>
  
  <p>As far as if ghosting would be an issue, at 71 refreshes per second, a frame won't be able to off by more than 1/3 or so of a frame.  That's 1/90th or so of a second, so would be pretty minor.  It might make for a slight stutter, but isn't that likely to be noticeable.  I think most of the arguments against it come from the faster is better mantra and the twitch reflex crowd.  You might or might not be able to notice the difference, but it shouldn't be a significant problem and I'd personally much rather have a good quality display with a slower refresh than a display I can only view from one exact angle and even then have color differences from the angle of one eye to the other, but have "crisp" frame rendering.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2013-06-17T15:03:34.107Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2013-06-17T15:03:34.107Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: AJ Henderson
Body: <p>I was considering buying an IPS LCD monitor (<a href="http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=24-005-364" rel="nofollow">this one</a>; though <strong>the question is generic</strong>).</p>
  
  <p>It lists the response time of 14ms.</p>
  
  <p><strong>How do I judge if that is enough?</strong></p>
  
  <p>I am slightly concerned since some of NewEgg reviews for that monitor mention issues with playback of movies, but I'm not sure if their attributing the problems to the response time is the correct call. Researching online (TomsHardware forums, Yahoo answers, some other forums) keeps giving contradictory answers, some say don't go above 5ms, some say 14 is enough unless you do FPS sensitive high end games.</p>
  
  <p>The intended usages of the monitor include light fare (productivity, web browsing, Youtube, some light gaming where FPS isn't an issue; and - what seems to be the most taxing to me LCD wise - watching movies encoded as DivX or MP4, with resolutions between 720p and 1080p).</p>
  
  <ul>
  <li><p>Is there danger with ghosting or any other image issues due to 14ms response time given such usage patterns?</p></li>
  <li><p>What other things may need to be considered that would either mitigate or exacerbate the response time?</p></li>
  </ul>
  
  <p>A second sub-question is whether this response time will become a serious problem if the user of LCD becomes interested in some light video editing (it's a child, so nothing professional).</p>
  
Tags: <monitors><performance>
Title: How do I decide if 14ms response time in IPS LCD monitor enough?
UserDisplayName: DVK
ThreadText: # How do I decide if 14ms response time in IPS LCD monitor enough?
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2013-06-16)
  
  I was considering buying an IPS LCD monitor ([this one](http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=24-005-364); though **the question is generic**).
  
  It lists the response time of 14ms.
  
  **How do I judge if that is enough?**
  
  I am slightly concerned since some of NewEgg reviews for that monitor mention issues with playback of movies, but I'm not sure if their attributing the problems to the response time is the correct call. Researching online (TomsHardware forums, Yahoo answers, some other forums) keeps giving contradictory answers, some say don't go above 5ms, some say 14 is enough unless you do FPS sensitive high end games.
  
  The intended usages of the monitor include light fare (productivity, web browsing, Youtube, some light gaming where FPS isn't an issue; and - what seems to be the most taxing to me LCD wise - watching movies encoded as DivX or MP4, with resolutions between 720p and 1080p).
  
  * Is there danger with ghosting or any other image issues due to 14ms response time given such usage patterns?
  * What other things may need to be considered that would either mitigate or exacerbate the response time?
  
  A second sub-question is whether this response time will become a serious problem if the user of LCD becomes interested in some light video editing (it's a child, so nothing professional).
  
  **Tags:** monitors, performance
  
  
  ---
  
  ## 1 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_1 on 2013-06-17. Score: 3 | Accepted answer
  
  At 14ms, you can still get an effective 71 frames per second. It should be fine for working with video. The frames might not show up exactly at the start of their time interval, but it still should be ok.
  
  Faster response is still better, but it isn't going to be critical for anything other than really high frame rate gaming. 5ms is very VERY fast for a high end screen. Cheap screens go faster because they use simple techniques that are fast and cheap but produce (greatly) inferior image quality. Better screens like IPS and PVA are by nature slower and the last time I was seriously in the market (which was a couple years ago), 6 to 8ms was considered fast for an IPS or PVA. sub-5 is completely unnecessary. 14ms is probably on the slower end, but should still be fine. Even 20ms would likely be ok, though it might start getting more noticeable.
  
  As far as if ghosting would be an issue, at 71 refreshes per second, a frame won't be able to off by more than 1/3 or so of a frame. That's 1/90th or so of a second, so would be pretty minor. It might make for a slight stutter, but isn't that likely to be noticeable. I think most of the arguments against it come from the faster is better mantra and the twitch reflex crowd. You might or might not be able to notice the difference, but it shouldn't be a significant problem and I'd personally much rather have a good quality display with a slower refresh than a display I can only view from one exact angle and even then have color differences from the angle of one eye to the other, but have "crisp" frame rendering.
  
  
  ---
  
  