Input lag

[dancardesigner]

Why do i have to explain myself.
He thought he quoted you, but he didnt, i just pointed that out.

Why would it matter who the quote was from, he bolded the bit out he thought was relevant. In that case since if what you are saying is correct, then because the quote was not written by me to which he ''supposedly'' discovered it no longer matters. In other words he was trying to dig up a quote he could critique me on for the sake of it, in which he happened to fail.

If this is true then it only backs up what i said a few post back in response to Yeti. Some people here go around trying to nitpick at people they have a personal Vendetta against. If that is the case, here and you are right then it's a big fail to Zero

That doesn't take away the fact he quoted you though and awarded you a hat also.

 

[G.T.Ace]

Why would it matter who the quote was from

He quoted me, asking if you tried other 1080p games beside GT5P to test input lag and then quoted you (or wanted to do so) saying that you (which you werent lol) dont even own a PS3.

Some people here go around trying to nitpick at people they have a personal Vendetta against.

 

[dancardesigner]

He quoted me, asking if you tried other 1080p games beside GT5P to test input lag and then quoted you (or wanted to do so) saying that you (which you werent lol) dont even own a PS3.

Fair enough, i don't know why he would think i would write about my experiences and all the posts i made if he had read the thread though, posting without reading, a big no no, explains why i have to repeat myself 100'000 times.

 

[the Interceptor]

He misread, posted a wrong conclusion, was advised of his mistake and removed his words. What's the big deal?

 

[Devedander]

Some people here go around trying to nitpick at people they have a personal Vendetta against. If that is the case, here and you are right then it's a big fail to Zero

Noooo... not around here... never... sadly it's part of forums... sometimes you get stalkers

 

[Zer0]

ROFL stupid fanboys

You never disappoint.

The post was a mistake because you both post nearly the same, even the overuse of the word "fanboy" is present on your messages. That's all sorry.

 

[Devedander]

You never disappoint.

The post was a mistake because you both post nearly the same, even the overuse of the word "fanboy" is present on your messages. That's all sorry.

Ummm I don't think I have used fanboy except for that one thread where whats his name asked if he was one... someone is projecting an expected set of actions onto me here...

 

[Tenacious D]

Like i said, if you don't see it, great for you, what you don't know can't hurt you.

Well, this is the problem. You act like there most definitely is a problem with Prologue and/or the PS3, and anyone who doesn't see it is obviously brain lagged or something. My PS3 is going into my Bravia via a good HDMI cable, and I experience no lag in any game, Prologue or otherwise. I don't play in cockpit view, though when I did, my steering wheel lined up with the controller very closely, and certainly not like the video posted earlier in the thread. If there was any lag, I wouldn't be able to control Virtua Fighter or a high speed car in Prologue, either one.

 

[dancardesigner]

Well, this is the problem. You act like there most definitely is a problem with Prologue and/or the PS3, and anyone who doesn't see it is obviously brain lagged or something. My PS3 is going into my Bravia via a good HDMI cable, and I experience no lag in any game, Prologue or otherwise. I don't play in cockpit view, though when I did, my steering wheel lined up with the controller very closely, and certainly not like the video posted earlier in the thread. If there was any lag, I wouldn't be able to control Virtua Fighter or a high speed car in Prologue, either one.

I bet i would notice the lag on your setup even though you do not, a monitor is faster than any HDTV, and i use a £150 Monster cable, best cable money can buy. You say you wouldn't be able to play. Well i can play, i can get good times, but the delay still anoys me, when trying to catch a drift or the backend of the F40 on a long sweeping corner like that one after the S bends at Suzuka. I do not feel entirely connected with the car, in Rfactor using the same svreen i do.

Did you do the test where you wip the wheel as fast as you can and look at the delay?


You say i ''act'' like there is a problem, no, i know there is a problem as far as i'm concerned, otherwise if it didn't exist why would i have dicovered it or made this thread. I honestly thought more of you could percieve it than it seems, but obviously not. The way i see it is, if it's not a problem for you, why are you posting here, it's like you and many others are trying to convince me i'm talking bull when i'm not. Why can't you just accept I and some other users see this lag. It' up to you wether you want to believe it happens on all setups, which i believe it does, i just don't think a lot of you can tell. My Pioneer TV and Dell monitor are some of the best screens money can buy, there not some mainstream crap. And as i said my monitr doesn't lag on Rfactor, so it's clearly not a slow monitor.
Some people have stated that maybe VGA/DVI is faster than HDMI. I very much doubt that as all HDMI is, is DVI with sound. I use VGA from my laptop to my monitor and DVI is newer and faster than VGA.
My monster cable can transfer data over 14 GB/s, and will be future proof for a long time to come. A cheap crappy HDMI is like just over 2GB/s i believe.

 

[G.T.Ace]

Did you do the test where you wip the wheel as fast as you can and look at the delay?

That is not a very useful test, the wheel in the cockpit view turns slower than the actual steering input you give, its not very accurate.

But like i said, i dont have input lag, i can steer precisely without problems, so it must be some kind of problem with your set-up, or otherwise i would have it too.

So, back to my question: Have you tried another 1080p game from your PS3, like WipEout HD?

 

[dancardesigner]

That is not a very useful test, the wheel in the cockpit view turns slower than the actual steering input you give, its not very accurate.

But like i said, i dont have input lag, i can steer precisely without problems, so it must be some kind of problem with your set-up, or otherwise i would have it too.

So, back to my question: Have you tried another 1080p game from your PS3, like WipEout HD?

Well you use pad for Wipeout, not Wheel afaik. I don't see how it must be my setup, as like i said i am happy with the response of my monitor when used for Rfactor, Fear etc. The output from my lappy is usually set to 1920 x 1200, but i have set to 1920x1080 and it's no slower, to be expected really.
I notice the lag in bumper and external view as well, not just the cockPit wheel. Granted you do have to wip the wheel fast to notice, but somehow the steering always feels sloppy and disconected because i'm visually expecting one thing and getting another through FFB.

I guess someone who has Rfactor, also, and can use the same screen for pc and ps3 should also test this, i'm sure you will realise the difference right away.

For anyone here reading all this and baffled by what i am on about, GRID on PC at least is a great example of bad input lag, that game is almost unplayable. Anyone with GRID on PC i think will notice this.

 

[G.T.Ace]

I don't see how it must be my setup

Because everyone would have input lag if it would be a real problem with the game.

Well you use pad for Wipeout, not Wheel afaik.

I also use a pad for GT5P.

 

[dancardesigner]

Because everyone would have input lag if it would be a real problem with the game.

I also use a pad for GT5P.

You are assuming you don't have input lag. I noticed input lag even on CRT, and that is way faster than any HD screen, though i must say, it improved it quite some.
I think those here that can't tell it lags, well to be frank, really can't tell it lags, but i'm sure i would notice it. Anyways if your using a pad, you almost certainly won't be able to tell anyway, so as far as i'm concerned you can't reall argue your point, unless you also have a wheel.

Just looking at the GRID issue i have seen mentioned before, i come across this, maybe it's what GT5 is doing, it would makes sense trying to improve framerates, after all we all know the cheap but effective shortcuts PD take, to make the game appear of higher quality than its is. Photo backdrops anyone? Anyway let's not talk about that, let's stay on topic. Here is the quote.

Are you experiencing lag in Racedriver Grid?

For example, is there a delay seen from the steering wheel on screen after you turn your steering wheel? Does the car you drive delay in any turn you make? Is there a delay when accelerating or braking when approaching a corner? If you are experiencing this it maybe do to input lag and there maybe a solution for you. One way to fix this is to reduce the amount of frames that are rendered ahead.

Frames rendered ahead defaults to 3 and can cause some input lag for some. The greater the value for frames rendered ahead = better performance in some cases. But will increase input lag. Input lag = lag from any input device (mouse, joystick, game-pad, keyboard, wheel etc.). For some the best option is setting this to 0 (if you experience a problem using 0 then use 1). By decreasing frames rendered ahead from 3 to 0 will decrease frame rates a tad but will improve input response time.

When frames are rendered ahead you are pre-rendering or pre-caching a few scenes from the CPU & driver. Which is place into a internal buffer and is processed by the GPU when the GPU finishes rendering the previous frame. This way the GPU doesn't stall the CPU. Keep in mind that the GPU is NOT PRERENDERING anything.


This is how most games are played and, if you are not experiencing any input lag problems then you do not need to change anything.

 

[angelacaine]

Wouldn't the analog sticks on a pad be better than a wheel for testing input lag? You can go lock to lock in fractions of a second, much faster than with a wheel.

 

[Devedander]

I bet i would notice the lag on your setup even though you do not, a monitor is faster than any HDTV, and i use a £150 Monster cable, best cable money can buy.

Hate to do this to ya... but monitors being better than any HDTV... not always the case (besdies "better" being subjective) there are 2ms HDTVs out there and really the display tech in both is the same - LCD panels.

I am also sorry you bought the monster cable myth... That $150? Probably wasted... I don't know what you have on that side of the pond similar, but monoprice cables have been proven to provide just a good a picture (especially with digital formats) over normal length runs as the super expensive cable.

Yes Monster cables are probably the best cable you can get, but they are about 0.0002% better (you get the idea) under normal conditions but cost about 9000% more.

Unless you have a 150FT HDMI run right under a microwave tower, you won't see the difference between monster and monoprice (or most decent generics).

You kind of have to think twice about a company that touts gold plated optical cables

Some people have stated that maybe VGA/DVI is faster than HDMI. I very much doubt that as all HDMI is, is DVI with sound. I use VGA from my laptop to my monitor and DVI is newer and faster than VGA.
My monster cable can transfer data over 14 GB/s, and will be future proof for a long time to come. A cheap crappy HDMI is like just over 2GB/s i believe.

Note I did suggest testing with different inputs was not really a good test, not because HDMI is faster, but because of how your display handles them. Certain inputs may go through more processing and scaling than others, this is where delay is introduced. Definitely try an HDMI/DVI adapter and see if the results on the same input are the same for PC and PS3.

And again, hate to say it, but the Monster cable thing? It's great that it can handle 14GB/s, I am not sure what generic cables can do (most of them don't bother wasting money testing and marketing stuff like that) but really the monster claims don't matter... Even if you could carry 3000GB/s it wouldn't matter if the format only uses 1.4GB/s... futureproof is nice, but when you can get good generics for $3-10, you could keep buying the current generics every years for 15 years before breaking even.

Sorry, I just have a thing about Monster and Bose... they are two of the biggest rippoffs out there preying on those who buy marketing over real world performance so I feel obliged to put my 2 cents in

 

[yeti]

Wouldn't the analog sticks on a pad be better than a wheel for testing input lag? You can go lock to lock in fractions of a second, much faster than with a wheel.

No - because the game slows this down for a pad input.

I.e. it knows that you physically cannot turn the wheel that quickly - so it turns it at a set rate...

This is an attempt to level the playing field between pads/wheels.

C.

 

[NLxAROSA]

I am also sorry you bought the monster cable myth... That $150? Probably wasted... I don't know what you have on that side of the pond similar, but monoprice cables have been proven to provide just a good a picture (especially with digital formats) over normal length runs as the super expensive cable.

Exactly, just do a search on HDMI cable reviews or check the better AV sites. They all show the same thing: below a length of about 10 metres there is NO difference in quality between any HDMI cable (e.g. a 2 metre 100 euro cable has no benefit over a 10 euro cable of the same length).
The same is not true if you start to increase distance however, so you still may need a better cable if you need to cover a larger distance.

Still, for 99% of the users, any cable will do.

 

[dancardesigner]

Exactly, just do a search on HDMI cable reviews or check the better AV sites. They all show the same thing: below a length of about 10 metres there is NO difference in quality between any HDMI cable (e.g. a 2 metre 100 euro cable has no benefit over a 10 euro cable of the same length).
The same is not true if you start to increase distance however, so you still may need a better cable if you need to cover a larger distance.

Still, for 99% of the users, any cable will do.

It's an 8 foot cable, and don't worry, i didn't pay the full £150 rrp, i got mine for £30 including shipping across the pond.

The reason to buy this cable is, well it's not a myth what they claim, just maybe some of the tech isn't needed for such a short cable, but the thing is, this thing is future proof. When the next technology arrives this cable will still have enough bandwith to cope. To put things into perspective i had a crappy £10 cable and i think that had just under 3 GB/S bandwith, then i moved up to a fully gold plated £30 cable. Can't remember the bandwidth of that one, then the Monster 1000, with 14.9 GB/S bandwidth.

Now i read a few reviews, and some technical explanations of some people who don't even have the cable, but claim it's a waste of money. They told all this technical jargon about how any decent gold plated cable has more than enough bandwidth to cope and how because the signal is digital not analogue then there is no loss of data. Well some of that technically might be true, but these are only the basics.

Let me tell you, there was a deffinate improvement from my decent quality fully gold plated cable. Anyone that says there won't be a difference probably doesnt own one. Bear in mind this i noticed with only an 8 footer as well, for long wall installations the difference will be even more noticeable.

Don't get me wrong it wasn't a night and day improvement, the sharpness improved ever so slightly, and there seemed less ghosting and blurring of edges. Where you notice it the most, is in contrast and saturation, the blacks were much, much deeper, and the colours more vivid. It was very noticeable. To be honest, it probably makes as dramatic an improvement as going from a Samsung television to a Pioneer.

So for anyone who doesn't belive in the Monster cable myth, well let me tell you, if you can pick one up of Ebay for about £30 or infact i saw a website the other day doing it for about the same price. It's the top of the range M1000, and believe me you will be kissing my feet. Especially if you have a top of the range TV or monitor and you want to get the best out of what you paid for. Is it worth £150, maybe, not sure wether i would have paid it, but for longer cables, most definately so, or if you want the absolute best in picture quality, believe me people it's not a myth.

 

[Kinetic]

Your parents have got alot more money than sense..

it's ridiculous to even pay 30 quid for a HDMI cable, especially for 8 foot.

your a moron

 

[dancardesigner]

Your parents have got alot more money than sense..

it's ridiculous to even pay 30 quid for a HDMI cable, especially for 8 foot.

your a moron

What a pathetic dig. Like i said it's definately noticable. Your just jealous.

 

[Schmo]

Hate to do this to ya... but monitors being better than any HDTV... not always the case (besdies "better" being subjective) there are 2ms HDTVs out there and really the display tech in both is the same - LCD panels.

I am also sorry you bought the monster cable myth... That $150? Probably wasted... I don't know what you have on that side of the pond similar, but monoprice cables have been proven to provide just a good a picture (especially with digital formats) over normal length runs as the super expensive cable.

Yes Monster cables are probably the best cable you can get, but they are about 0.0002% better (you get the idea) under normal conditions but cost about 9000% more.

Unless you have a 150FT HDMI run right under a microwave tower, you won't see the difference between monster and monoprice (or most decent generics).

This man is right. The only thing you buy with the Monster Cable is the name and a lifetime warranty. Sure they are good cables, but unless you plan on swinging from a tree with them, Monoprice cables are great alternative.

I have both, a Monster Cable (came free with TV) and multiple Monoprice cables and a switcher. And the Monoprice ones are Identical.

 

[dancardesigner]

This man is right. The only thing you buy with the Monster Cable is the name and a lifetime warranty. Sure they are good cables, but unless you plan on swinging from a tree with them, Monoprice cables are great alternative.

I have both, a Monster Cable (came free with TV) and multiple Monoprice cables and a switcher. And the Monoprice ones are Identical.

Do all you peole deliberately go against anything i said. Did you completly miss my post?

There is definately a difference, i know, i have one, i don't just go off what some reviewer says.

Anyway he is also not entirely correct from a technical perspective either, i don't know where he got his info but actually the cheapest unplated cable, does not meet the bandwidth requirements to meet full 1080p.

Is your cable the M1000?

 

[Cheshyrkat]

What a pathetic dig. Like i said it's definately noticable. Your just jealous.

Ive done comparisons with cables and honestly you see what you want to see. Ive used the uber expensive monster HDMI cable (friend bought it not knowing any better when he picked up his PS3) and we compared it to the cables I pick up from monoprice on his 40" sammy and needless to say he took the cable back.

 

[dancardesigner]

Ive done comparisons with cables and honestly you see what you want to see. Ive used the uber expensive monster HDMI cable (friend bought it not knowing any better when he picked up his PS3) and we compared it to the cables I pick up from monoprice on his 40" sammy and needless to say he took the cable back.

What are these monoprice cables. Are they gold plated.

Also was it the M1000.

As there are a whole range of pricepoints in the monster cable range?

 

[Schmo]

Do all you peole deliberately go against anything i said. Did you completly miss my post?

WTF are you talking about. I agreed with you.
My post started with, this man is right. I quoted your post, making you the man.

 

[Kinetic]

that's because the difference between the cables is so small it's un-visable to the human eye. This guys just saying it to try and justify, wasting that much on a cable

 

[dancardesigner]

WTF are you talking about. I agreed with you.
My post started with, this man is right. I quoted your post, making you the man.

No you didn't look back at who you quoted.

 

[Maggot666PL]

The reason to buy this cable is, well it's not a myth what they claim, just maybe some of the tech isn't needed for such a short cable, but the thing is, this thing is future proof. When the next technology arrives this cable will still have enough bandwith to cope.

When the next format arrives it will have new cables, so you will just have to throw your cable away anyway. Or hook it up to your fridge.

And I'm sorry to say, but you just can't see differences you described with a digital cable. With a faulty cable you could see pixels missing, whole areas having one of the basic colours screwed up, flicker etc. You discard the "technical mumbo-jumbo", throwing only "future-proof bandwidth" in return. You don't travel more comfortably in a bus, than in a normal car just because it's bigger. It would need to have more comfy seats too, at the very least (and be like those coaches bands travel in, so you won't picture the public transport and jump on me ; )).

It's like with this whole "better tasting organic food".

And how about connecting the PS3 like it was suggested before?

 

[dancardesigner]

£30 aint a waste, and yet again i notice it. If you can't afford one it's not my problem.

OMFG why do people keep saying i can't see what i describe. I can. Maybe you all have crap perceptions. Are you calling me a lyer?

 

[Kinetic]

It is a waste. paying 30 quid for a cable with no visible difference from one thats say 8quid, thats officially a waste, as for the comment, i doubt you could afford one either, mummy and daddy probably paid for that one.