Games & input lag.
- Thread starter Mr Deap
- Start date
Ah. I can relate, and it's the reason why Sharp cashed in and created "gaming models" with "Viper mode" at 32" and 37" models. All it basically does is minimizes post processing to eliminate lag as much as possible; I think the only remaining pp is the upscaling.
My own set (40" XBR4) has a game mode that does just that too. In fact, I have that set on all sources to avoid any pp artifacts, and as I mentioned earlier, very few games stuck out and I had to switch to a CRT to notice them.
However with say.. 120Hz mode on or any pp, the lag was was definitely there.
Too true. All the more depressing that so many 120 Hz displays are touted as being good for games due to less lag...
Yeah, but in most shooters, the manner in which input lag affects your gameplay operates on a different mechanism than internet lag.
For example, in COD4, if you play on a CRT TV with no input lag whatsoever, then you'll see the gun firing as soon as you press the button. If you play on a DLP, plasma, or LCD, then you'll notice or feel that the actual firing of the gun is delayed a bit from when you actually press the button. This results in feeling of general unresponsiveness.
Networking lag, is different. In COD4, networking lag will have no effect on the time between when you press the button and when you visually see the gun firing on screen. What it will affect is that the enemies might take a second or so to actually fall down and die, after you shot him. That's networking lag.
I wouldn't say that networking lag renders input lag inconsequential, because it's almost an apples-to-oranges thing. They both affect your sensation of lag and unresponsiveness in a different way, so the effect is only compounded if you're unfortunate enough to suffer from both input lag and network lag at the same time.
Too true. All the more depressing that so many 120 Hz displays are touted as being good for games due to less lag...
Can frame interpolation be turned off on most 120Hz displays?
The way network lag affects gameplay changes quite a bit depending on the actual game. For instance, when I play NHL, there is a big delay between an input and when my skater actually moves on the screen. As described above, latency might be hidden very well in an online shooter or other game. Still, input lag is not a big issue on newer tvs. I have a friend with a DLP where the input lag is noticable. I'm just saying that for the most part, network lag will have a far greater impact on play than input lag, which for the most part will not be visible to the user.
Multithreaded game engines also usually have more input to screen lag than single threaded game engines. To get max power out of the current console platforms, multithreading is required.
Usually you are processing game logic and physics on one (or several threads) at the same time as you are rendering (separate render & render setup & culling thread). The rendering must be done using last frame game state, as the current frame game state is not ready yet (physics and game logic threads are processing it on different threads).
Single threaded game game loop:
1. Process input
2. Process game logic & physics
3. Render frame
Multithreaded game loop:
1. Start rendering graphics by using last frame finished game state in it's own thread(s)
2. Process input
3. Process game logic & physics (usually in multiple threads)
(4. Graphics thread is finished around here and updates the visible frame independently on game logic & physics)
5. Synchnonize threads
With the multithreaded setup you get slightly longer input lag. The maximum input lag equals the time it takes the graphics chip to render the frame.
Usually you are processing game logic and physics on one (or several threads) at the same time as you are rendering (separate render & render setup & culling thread). The rendering must be done using last frame game state, as the current frame game state is not ready yet (physics and game logic threads are processing it on different threads).
Single threaded game game loop:
1. Process input
2. Process game logic & physics
3. Render frame
Multithreaded game loop:
1. Start rendering graphics by using last frame finished game state in it's own thread(s)
2. Process input
3. Process game logic & physics (usually in multiple threads)
(4. Graphics thread is finished around here and updates the visible frame independently on game logic & physics)
5. Synchnonize threads
With the multithreaded setup you get slightly longer input lag. The maximum input lag equals the time it takes the graphics chip to render the frame.
I agree. And in many cases the situation hasn't been getting better, but worse (with more sophisticated image scaling/"improvement" techniques). The only hope are dedicated "game" modes.
I find it amazing that (well-reviewed!) monitors are being sold with lag approaching 80ms.
Back when I was a div1 Quake 3 player, having my network lag go from 50 ms to 70 ms was sufficiently debilitating that I resigned from the team. Essentially, it dropped me from decent div1 to div2 quality.
On the other hand, playing WoW, I could go away and fetch coffee in the middle of a fight without affecting the outcome.
Moral: The demands of the game decide how critical lag is for gameplay.
Reasonable extention: Games that are designed so as to be more tolerant of lag, also leave less room for skill building based on precise control, which is a critical component of all physical games.
Last edited by a moderator:
Yup. My friend has an old (~5yrs) Westinghouse LCD, doesn't even have DVI in, but it doesn't have any discernible lag. I guess back then they didn't have all that postprocessing going on. So despite the panel's atrocious response times (ghosting is insane!) it's the only LCD I can play Halo on without getting smashed.
From my experience the newer the TV, the worse the lag, but maybe that's starting to change.
That's the opposite of my experience. My parents ~3 year old Panasonic Plasma has ~160 ms input lag (no game mode); my ~2 year old Vizio LCD has ~80 ms lag (also no game mode); my brother's ~1.5 year old Samsung DLP has ~20 ms lag (in game mode); and my brand new Sharp LCD has ~0 ms lag (in game mode).
What's frustrating to me is that it's very nearly impossible to find out what a display's input lag is, unless you buy it and test it yourself. I got unlucky on the Vizio (but that was never my primary gaming TV, while I still had my Sony XBR CRT), and I looked forever until I found the 52" Aquos that had the least lag.
Yep that's the main problem. Seems like some manufacturer would start advertising this, but maybe people just don't know (or don't care)
. Was hoping rhythm games like Rock Band would bring this issue into the mainstream but that doesn't seem to be happening.The Sharp actually have lag, the video on youtube is actually misleading(test done in 480i, which is actually 45ms which is mesured by an AVS forum member). The only way to get that 0ms is to use the VGA input which most HDTV get no lag at all, but the picture look horrible.
On HDMI with the Vyper engine, the D64U get 15ms of lag in 1080P via HDMI.
In big a games offline can actually add an extra 15 to 30ms of lag due to the process games logic.
Also in big a GPU with weak fillrate can add extra lag if the resolution & polygons are too high?
So the more it is multithreaded, the weaker the GPU, the more chance you will see lag.
on a CRT but on a flat panel (like in the killzone 2 video test) is 166ms/200ms for Halo3 and others (200ms for GTA4, skate. 200/266ms for Harry potter)
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/3725/measuring_responsiveness_in_video_.php?page=3
Last edited by a moderator:
Depends on netcode. Some games will not show you firing a gun and the bullet hitting before the server "confirms" the shot.
Others (most online fps games) will show your gun firing, but bullets hitting once server has confirmed the shots.
KZ2 will show your gun firing and bullets hitting instantly, regardless of your lag to other players\servers (i say players\servers because my experience suggest that KZ2 is actually pure P2P netcode - which means that you have different lag to every player).
Okay I've never played a game like that, that I know of.
From my experience I think that's what Halo 3 does. Not P2P but with guns firing and bullets hitting regardless of network lag.
But as far as input lag when you're looking and walking around and such, network lag should not impact that at all in any FPS games, correct?
200 ms is crazy lag! Like playing through treacle. And I'm shocked that 50 ms is considered good for a music game. Actually recording music on computer, 10 ms is bad! 50 ms lag between playing a note and hearing the result is unplayable, yet that's the standard of music games?! Having said that, I've played a taster of GH and it felt pretty good. But then I also remember feeling the timing was out.
See, you do appreciate precision control!
I'll reinforce your message though, anyone who has been involved in "live" music would.
correct (but what you see- as in where other players are and the action thats happening will ofcourse be affected by network lag)
