Posts

Showing posts with the label tv review

Sony KDL-32L5000 review: input lag, deinterlacing and upscaling using the piLagTesterPRO

This 720p TV from 2010 is fast at least in progressive mode, but struggles to display images other than at 480i/p wihtout artifacts.

Image quality

Good upscaling is critical for retro gaming. Ideally, all pixels should appear equally sharp and bright (no aliasing), and angled lines should appear smooth, with no jagged, irregular steps. Also important is that the display shows most or all of the pixels it is sent. Often, this is not the case, with some number of pixels cropped from the bottom or top edges. Shockingly, these tests are relevant for modern gaming as well, because even at their native resolution many TVs have aliasing and cropping.

I attempted to adjust the set to minimize cropping and aliasing, but for many modes the only option was some cropping, or even more cropping.

resolution aliasing/image quality cropping (side, top)
480p/i none, just mild blur A- 20,20
720p noticeable aliasing B- 30,20
1080p blur, mild aliasing 20,20
1360x786 pixel perfect native resolution 0
960p nearly pixel perfect 0


It's disappointing that even by 2010 these TV panels are made with 786p  resolution rather than the 720p that they are actually going to display for 99.9% of their life, resulting in blur, aliasing, etc that's definitely visible whenever any kind of pixel art is shown. This set actually looks better at 1080p because the downscaling seems to be somewhat more effective at that resolution, with noticeable blur but less aliasing than 720p.

 

The display has 3 HDMI, 1 VGA, and 2 yPbPr input. I only tested HDMI.

This TV supports 24hz at 1080p; and it really draws at 24hz with no dropped frames or temporal distortion, so it should be good for movies.

Input Lag

I used a piLagTesterPRO to measure input lag. This device sends a frame of video over HDMI and measures how long it takes to display it. This display does not have a game mode; not even a game 'color' preset.  I toggled all the display quality settings and did not see a consistent effect on lag, however the tests reported are with every "enhancement" set to off.

 

Input Lag Test Results

I report two kinds of values. 1st response measures how long it takes for the TV to start responding (I use a 5% change in display brightness). This overly optimistic value doesn't tell how long it takes to see anything useful, but matches what other reviewers call input lag. full response is a more realistic measure of lag, and requires the display to reach 80% of full brightness. This combines both input lag and response time, and is closer to what you would actually experience in a game.

top bottom
Resolution 1st (average) full response 1st response full response scan out response time
480i 55.9 64.9 71.1 80.1 15.2 9.0
480p 22.8 31.8 38.3 47.3 15.5
720p 21.1 30.1 37.1 46.1 16.0
1080p 21.2 30.2 36.6 45.6 15.4

The set is pretty quick to start making it's first response, so long as the input is progressive, taking just ~22ms at the top of the screen. The response time is also relatively quick, at just 9ms, which makes it faster than average for Sony, even today. When interlaced content is used, however, it becomes much slower, adding two frames of extra lag (33ms).

This TV supports 960p with the same amount of lag as 720p. This is particularly interesting to retro gamers since that mode is used by the OSSC upscaler to display 480i/p with zero added artifacts. The OSSC can use this mode to display 480i with alternating scan lines and bob deinterlacing, which does a very good job of matching the visual experience of 480i on a CRT. This is the ideal way to use this screen for retro content, though if you don't mind the lag the 480i the set does a good job visually, at least.

Results compared to other displays

To allow quick comparison between many displays I've summarized the results across all the displays I've personally tested with the piLagTester Pro. Min lag is the time to the first response, measured where the screen starts drawing (typically, the top); real lag is the time to the full response, measured where drawing finishes (usually the screen bottom), i.e. input lag + scan out + response time. Numbers in red denote average values that can vary by up to 8ms between power cycles.

DisplayYear made (TV?)Native Resnative min lagnative real lag480i real lag480p real lag720p real lag1080p real lagnative response timenative scan out
Vizio VO370M20101080p2.523.683.049.047.024.35.4715.67
TCL 40S32520211080p6.527.360.629.027.927.76.0014.83
TCL 49s40320184k6.130.276.830.930.330.78.0016.13
AOC/Envision G19LWK2010900p3.131.239.538.738.437.815.5012.60
Dell E2211H20141080p3.033.634.734.534.133.815.0015.57
Panasonic TH-58PE75U2008720p28.034.034.034.034.034.06.000.00
Dell 1907FPc20081024p3.034.035.934.815.0016.00
Panasonic TH-42PX75U2008720p28.034.034.034.034.034.06.000.00
Panasonic TH-50PZ80U2008720p28.034.034.034.034.034.06.000.00
Corprit D157 (hdmi)20211080p3.134.534.934.834.633.916.2515.13
Samsung S27C23020141080p2.936.036.636.136.118.1014.97
Vizio E470VL (vga)20111080p22.039.039.039.039.09.008.00
Samsung LN32D4032012720p20.941.258.942.440.740.75.5014.83
TCL50s42320214k14.042.075.042.042.042.013.0015.00
Dell U2410 (sRGB)20101080p20.542.862.445.043.143.16.1316.13
ACER AT326520121080p19.543.862.745.343.843.88.0016.27
sony XBR 43X800D20174k24.544.346.546.044.644.75.0014.83
Element elst5016s20171080p21.445.163.546.445.145.38.0015.73
Sony 32L50002010720p21.145.780.147.346.145.69.0015.63
RCA L40FHD4120101080p20.346.665.048.047.046.09.6816.63
Sony 40VL130 (game)20081080p22.847.366.349.047.347.39.0815.43
Polaroid FLM-373B2007720p28.049.082.049.049.049.07.0014.00
Philips 42PFL3603D/F720091080p29.050.084.050.050.050.05.0016.00
Sony KDL-40V300020081080p22.250.168.450.650.549.811.0016.93
LG 42LC2D2006720p28.350.654.650.850.46.3015.95
GPX TDE3245W2016720p28.051.0102.051.051.051.08.0015.00
Sony KDL-46EX40020101080p28.052.087.052.052.052.08.0016.00
Toshiba 40L2200U20141080p30.056.074.056.056.056.010.0016.00
Vizio E261VA2012720p19.359.061.160.459.258.925.0014.67
LG 32DL655H2012720p35.059.0105.859.059.059.09.0015.00
Emprex HD 32022007720p27.066.0126.051.050.062.024.0015.00
Samsung LN32B3602010720p37.660.062.161.860.560.18.0014.40
Vizio VO22L FHDTV10A2008720p28.061.094.061.061.061.018.0015.00
Vizio E261VA2007720p28.062.095.062.062.062.018.0016.00
Samsung P2570HD20101080p37.062.062.062.062.062.010.0015.00
Sharp LC-C3234U2009720p33.064.683.666.664.615.0016.60
Samsung LN46B61020121080p53.066.082.066.066.066.05.008.00
LG 42PT35020121080p63.567.785.968.967.767.74.200.00
Mitsubishi LT-4614420081080p51.068.075.068.068.068.09.008.00
Toshiba 46L5200U20131080p55.071.089.076.071.074.08.008.00
Sony 40S20L12007720p48.472.090.172.973.49.6014.00
Samsung LN46C63020121080p54.572.190.790.388.572.310.007.63
SANYO DP507492010720p67.075.0103.094.079.075.07.001.00
Samsung HP-T425420111080p69.775.794.176.075.75.001.00
LG 47LW6500-UA20121080p66.680.7149.7149.081.780.92.2711.83
Vizio E470VL (hdmi)20111080p69.086.0128.095.095.086.09.008.00
Vizio xvt4735v20111080p67.688.688.889.288.688.69.0012.00

This list is sorted by real lag for each display's native resolution and max refresh rate (usually 1080p60 but some sets are 720p60, and other monitors support > 60hz). Thus sorted this TV does pretty well, being in the upper 3rd of models I've tested, and about as fast as commonly available options today, like Sony's XBR line, but not as fast as stand-out models like the TCL S325 range or the Panasonic Plasma's that are so hard to find in good condition today.

 

Conclusion

This is a middle of the line TV with disappointing image quality at 720p and 1080p, and lots of lag for interlaced content. So I would not seek it out, for sure. But if you happen to have it already, it will do the job for Xbox 360/ps4 games just fine, and is at least pretty fast for progressive content.

Other models

I tested the 32L5000 which is the 32" version. There seems to be a 26" version: KDL26L5000.  I think the larger sets in this "line" were 1080p, and have a different model number series all together.

LG 32DL655H review: input lag, deinterlacing and upscaling using the piLagTesterPRO

This 720p TV from 2012 is the most mediocre TV ever, with variable input lag, aliasing, and in general very little to recommend it for gaming, retro or otherwise.

Image quality

Good upscaling is critical for retro gaming. Ideally, all pixels should appear equally sharp and bright (no aliasing), and angled lines should appear smooth, with no jagged, irregular steps. Also important is that the display shows most or all of the pixels it is sent. Often, this is not the case, with some number of pixels cropped from the bottom or top edges. Shockingly, these tests are relevant for modern gaming as well, because even at their native resolution many TVs have aliasing and cropping.

resolution   


480p/i 480i cropped but decent upscaling A-480p cropped with noticeable softness AND ringing, noticeably less good than 480i, but no aliasing. B-
720pbad aliasing at 720p (supposed native) but no cropping if selecting just scan. Allowing cropping does not improve the aliasing, just changes it. Seems to have an "intelligent" upscaler which converts 1-pxiel wide lines gray blur some of the time but not always. C+
1080pAlthough above the native resolution this actually looks a bit better than 720p.
I attempted to adjust the set to minimize cropping and aliasing.

The display has 2 HDMI ports. I neglected to check if it has more as it's such a terrible TV. Likewise I'm not bothering to upload a photo of it's upscaling results. 

Input Lag

I used a piLagTesterPRO to measure input lag. This device sends a frame of video over HDMI and measures how long it takes to display it. This display does not have a game mode; just a game 'color' preset that does not impact lag at all. I toggled all the display quality settings and did not see a consistent effect on lag, however the tests reported are with every "enhancement" set to off.

Complicating things significantly, this is yet another display that does not actually sync refresh to the input signal - instead it fills its own internal frame buffer from the video input and then draws that with an additional delay that is randomly determined each time you turn on the set or switch inputs, and slowly changes over time.  Take one example, input lag for 720p can vary from 28.4ms to 43.0ms. What you get seems to be entirely up to chance. It can't even properly synchronize the display of this buffer with the refresh rate of the input: it drifts out of sync every 10 seconds or so and has to drop or double a frame, no matter what the input refresh rate (60 or 59.94). Who knows what actual refresh rate this junk uses.

I've elected to report the average lag values here, since that seems fairest, but there's no right answer; for more discussion of this issue see the above link. It's worth noting however, that this kind of changing lag is the hardest for your brain/hands to adapt to. I'd much rather have an extra 16ms of fixed lag added to the display than one like this where sometimes the extra lag is 0, and sometimes it's 16ms.

 

Input Lag Test Results

I report two kinds of values. 1st response measures how long it takes for the TV to start responding (I use a 5% change in display brightness). This overly optimistic value doesn't tell how long it takes to see anything useful, but matches what other reviewers call input lag. full response is a more realistic measure of lag, and requires the display to reach 80% of full brightness. This combines both input lag and response time, and is closer to what you would actually experience in a game.

top bottom
Resolution 1st resp. min 1st resp. (average) full response 1st response full response
480i 74.8 81.8 90.8 96.8 105.8
480p 28 35.0 44.0 50.0 59.0
720p 28 35.0 44.0 50.0 59.0
1080p 28 35.0 44.0 50.0 59.0

The 1st response min column shows the lowest lag measured over several minutes, but as discussed above this is far from typical and so instead all the rest of the columns refer to the average lag. 

ALSO: That's some really slow deinterlacing. At least the response time is reasonable, at 9ms.

Results compared to other displays

To allow quick comparison between many displays I've summarized the results across all the displays I've personally tested with the piLagTester Pro. Min lag is the time to the first response, measured where the screen starts drawing (typically, the top); real lag is the time to the full response, measured where drawing finishes (usually the screen bottom), i.e. input lag + scan out + response time. Numbers in red denote average values that can vary by up to 8ms between power cycles.

DisplayYear made (TV?)Native Resnative min lagnative real lag480i real lag480p real lag720p real lag1080p real lagnative response timenative scan out
Dell E198FPb20081024p2.720.439.035.05.0012.70
Planar PLN220020211080p2.422.624.123.322.922.85.0015.17
Samsung 2494sw20111080p2.822.726.526.526.58.0013.30
Vizio VO370M20101080p2.523.683.049.047.024.35.4715.67
Dell S199WFP2009900p3.624.228.527.827.327.18.0012.60
Dell E228WFP20101050p3.024.226.526.75.0016.90
LG W1953T2010768p2.625.628.728.710.0013.00
Dell U2410 (game)20101080p4.026.262.228.326.526.56.0016.20
TCL 40S32520211080p6.527.360.629.027.927.76.0014.83
TCL 49s40320184k6.130.276.830.930.330.78.0016.13
AOC/Envision G19LWK2010900p3.131.239.538.738.437.815.5012.60
Dell E2211H20141080p3.033.634.734.534.133.815.0015.57
Panasonic TH-58PE75U2008720p28.034.034.034.034.034.06.000.00
Dell 1907FPc20081024p3.034.035.934.815.0016.00
Panasonic TH-42PX75U2008720p28.034.034.034.034.034.06.000.00
Panasonic TH-50PZ80U2008720p28.034.034.034.034.034.06.000.00
Corprit D157 (hdmi)20211080p3.134.534.934.834.633.916.2515.13
Samsung S27C23020141080p2.936.036.636.136.118.1014.97
Vizio E470VL (vga)20111080p22.039.039.039.039.09.008.00
Samsung LN32D4032012720p20.941.258.942.440.740.75.5014.83
TCL50s42320214k14.042.075.042.042.042.013.0015.00
Dell U2410 (sRGB)20101080p20.542.862.445.043.143.16.1316.13
ACER AT326520121080p19.543.862.745.343.843.88.0016.27
sony XBR 43X800D20174k24.544.346.546.044.644.75.0014.83
Element elst5016s20171080p21.445.163.546.445.145.38.0015.73
RCA L40FHD4120101080p20.346.665.048.047.046.09.6816.63
Sony 40VL130 (game)20081080p22.847.366.349.047.347.39.0815.43
Polaroid FLM-373B2007720p28.049.082.049.049.049.07.0014.00
Philips 42PFL3603D/F720091080p29.050.084.050.050.050.05.0016.00
Sony KDL-40V300020081080p22.250.168.450.650.549.811.0016.93
LG 42LC2D2006720p28.350.654.650.850.46.3015.95
GPX TDE3245W2016720p28.051.0102.051.051.051.08.0015.00
Sony KDL-46EX40020101080p28.052.087.052.052.052.08.0016.00
Toshiba 40L2200U20141080p30.056.074.056.056.056.010.0016.00
Vizio E261VA2012720p19.359.061.160.459.258.925.0014.67
LG 32DL655H2012720p35.059.0105.859.059.059.09.0015.00
Emprex HD 32022007720p27.066.0126.051.050.062.024.0015.00
Samsung LN32B3602010720p37.660.062.161.860.560.18.0014.40
Vizio VO22L FHDTV10A2008720p28.061.094.061.061.061.018.0015.00
Vizio E261VA2007720p28.062.095.062.062.062.018.0016.00
Samsung P2570HD20101080p37.062.062.062.062.062.010.0015.00
Sharp LC-C3234U2009720p33.064.683.666.664.615.0016.60
Samsung LN46B61020121080p53.066.082.066.066.066.05.008.00
LG 42PT35020121080p63.567.785.968.967.767.74.200.00
Mitsubishi LT-4614420081080p51.068.075.068.068.068.09.008.00
Toshiba 46L5200U20131080p55.071.089.076.071.074.08.008.00
Sony 40S20L12007720p48.472.090.172.973.49.6014.00
Samsung LN46C63020121080p54.572.190.790.388.572.310.007.63
SANYO DP507492010720p67.075.0103.094.079.075.07.001.00
Samsung HP-T425420111080p69.775.794.176.075.75.001.00
LG 47LW6500-UA20121080p66.680.7149.7149.081.780.92.2711.83
Vizio E470VL (hdmi)20111080p69.086.0128.095.095.086.09.008.00
Vizio xvt4735v20111080p67.688.688.889.288.688.69.0012.00


This list is sorted by real lag for each display's native resolution and max refresh rate (usually 1080p60 but some sets are 720p60, and other monitors support > 60hz). As you can see you have to scroll way down to find TVs as bad as this one and that's not even considering the variable lag issues. 

Conclusion

This would be a poor choice for gaming of any type. It's fine as a TV watching TV shows or movies though.

Panasonic TC-26LX50 input lag and deinterlacing review

I tested this 2006 HDTV with the PiLagTesterPRO; here are the results in brief:

Despite being heavy like a plasma screen, it does not draw the whole screen top from bottom instantaneously. It is in fact a LCD with a regular scan out speed of 15ms.

It features adaptive zero lag deinterlacing meaning the interlaced modes are exactly the same speed as progressive modes. All supported video modes had the same lag: 27 milliseconds to the top of the screen and 42 milliseconds at the bottom. Response time was about 8 milliseconds.

All of the modes had some degree of cropping and or aliasing although 480i/p was notable for having the least of this. Native resolution is supposedly 1366 x 768 pixels, but it does not advertise this resolution and will not accept it if you enter it as a custom mode.

It has 6 A/V inputs, including:

3 composite video (2 rear, 1 front)
3 S-video (2 rear, 1 front)
2 HD-compatible component video (accepts 1080i/720p/480p/480i signals)
1 HDMI digital audio/video input

I only tested HDMI. 

The tuner is analog only. Shocking in a set from 2006!


Sony KDL-40V3000 TV Review: upscaling, deinterlacing and input lag for retro gaming

Sony 40V3000 review: input lag, deinterlacing and upscaling using the piLagTesterPRO

This 1080p TV from 2008 has great upscaling, minimal aliasing, and excellent deinterlacing (if a bit slow) and in general has a lot to recommend it for retro gaming or otherwise, though it's lag isn't the lowest by a significant margin. 

Image quality

Good upscaling is critical for retro gaming. Ideally, all pixels should appear equally sharp and bright (no aliasing), and angled lines should appear smooth, with no jagged, irregular steps. Also important is that the display shows most or all of the pixels it is sent. Often, this is not the case, with some number of pixels cropped from the bottom or top edges. Shockingly, these tests are relevant for modern gaming as well, because even at their native resolution many TVs have aliasing and cropping.

I attempted to adjust the set to minimize cropping and aliasing.

resolution appearance cropping (side, top)
480i soft in both horizontal and vertical directions 20 pixels cropped left/right
480p soft but no aliasing or jaggies 20 pixels cropped left/right
720p mild jaggies but no aliasing no cropping
1080p perfect no cropping
960p very mild aliasing no cropping







480i is notably soft, with 1-pxiel checkerboards rendered as gray, and surprisingly, vertical lines one pixel wide also appearing as gray. But 45 degree lines look amazing with zero jagged edges. So while the upscaling + deinterlacing does cause the input to look a little soft, it does a great job within that limitation. 480p, meanwhile, looks sharp with all the pixel detail maintained.

Other than being a bit softer than a CRT, this is perhaps the best looking rendering of 480i content I've seen in a LCD TV. Too bad it's a bit slow to do it, as will be discussed below.

Viewing angles are wide - I suspect VA or IPS. 

The display has 2 HDMI, VGA, 2 yPbPr inputs, and s-video.

Input Lag and refresh rates

I used a piLagTesterPRO to measure input lag. This device sends a frame of video over HDMI and measures how long it takes to display it. This display has a game mode. Turning game mode on helped reduce input lag. I toggled all the other display quality settings as well, but did not see any further improvements, however the tests reported below with every "enhancement" set to off.

This TV supports 24hz at 1080p; and it really draws at 24hz with no dropped frames or temporal distortion, so it should be good for movies. It's maximum refresh rate is 60hz.

Input Lag Test Results

I report two kinds of values. 1st response measures how long it takes for the TV to start responding (I use a 5% change in display brightness). This overly optimistic value doesn't tell how long it takes to see anything useful, but matches what other reviewers call input lag. full response is a more realistic measure of lag, and requires the display to reach 80% of full brightness. This combines both input lag and response time, and is closer to what you would actually experience in a game.

topbottom
Resolution1st responsefull response1st responsefull response
480i40.051.057.468.4
480p22.533.539.650.6
720p22.433.439.550.5
1080p22.233.238.849.8
960p22.433.439.650.6

All progressive video modes have the same lag: the first response is 22ms after the signal is sent to the tv, and the full response (aka response time) takes an additional 11ms. The response time varies by up to 5 ms depending on what the transition is -  black to white is faster than gray to gray. I'm reporting something like the median here.

The screen takes a full 16.6ms to scan out, matching the refresh rate exactly. Interlaced modes are an additional 17.5ms slower.

This TV supports 960p. This is particularly interesting to retro gamers since that mode is used by the OSSC upscaler to display 480i/p with zero added artifacts. The OSSC can use this mode to display 480i with alternating scan lines and bob deinterlacing, which does a very good job of matching the visual experience of 480i on a CRT.  This might be worth using in an action game since it would save you 16ms of lag, but in general the built in deinterlacing looks a lot better.

Results compared to other displays

To allow quick comparison between many displays I've summarized the results across all the displays I've personally tested with the piLagTester Pro. Min lag is the time to the first response, measured where the screen starts drawing (typically, the top); real lag is the time to the full response, measured where drawing finishes (usually the screen bottom), i.e. input lag + scan out + response time. Numbers in red denote average values that can vary by up to 8ms between power cycles.

This list is sorted by real lag for 480i content, since that's where this TV is most likely to be of interest.

DisplayYear made (TV?)Native Resnative min lagnative real lag480i real lag480p real lag720p real lag1080p real lagnative response timenative scan out
Panasonic TH-58PE75U2008720p28.034.034.034.034.034.06.000.00
Panasonic TH-42PX75U2008720p28.034.034.034.034.034.06.000.00
Dell E2211H20141080p3.033.634.734.534.133.815.0015.57
Corprit D157 (hdmi)20211080p3.134.534.934.834.633.916.2515.13
AOC/Envision G19LWK2010900p3.131.239.538.738.437.815.5012.60
sony XBR 43X800D20174k24.544.346.546.044.644.75.0014.83
LG 42LC2D2006720p28.350.654.650.850.46.3015.95
Samsung LN32D4032012720p20.941.258.942.440.740.75.5014.83
TCL 40S32520211080p6.527.360.629.027.927.76.0014.83
Vizio E261VA2012720p19.359.061.160.459.258.925.0014.67
Samsung P2570HD20101080p37.062.062.062.062.062.010.0015.00
Samsung LN32B3602010720p37.660.062.161.860.560.18.0014.40
Dell U2410 (game)20101080p4.026.262.228.326.526.56.0016.20
Dell U2410 (sRGB)20101080p20.542.862.445.043.143.16.1316.13
ACER AT326520121080p19.543.862.745.343.843.88.0016.27
RCA L40FHD4120101080p20.346.665.048.047.046.09.6816.63
Sony 40VL130 (game)20081080p22.847.366.349.047.347.39.0815.43
Sony KDL-40V300020081080p22.250.168.450.650.549.811.0016.93
Toshiba 40L2200U20141080p30.056.074.056.056.056.010.0016.00
Mitsubishi LT-4614420081080p51.068.075.068.068.068.09.008.00
TCL50s42320214k14.042.075.042.042.042.013.0015.00
TCL 49s40320184k6.130.276.830.930.330.78.0016.13
Polaroid FLM-373B2007720p28.049.082.049.049.049.07.0014.00
Samsung LN46B61020121080p53.066.082.066.066.066.05.008.00
Vizio VO370M20101080p2.523.683.049.047.024.35.4715.67
Sharp LC-C3234U2009720p33.064.683.666.664.615.0016.60
Philips 42PFL3603D/F720091080p29.050.084.050.050.050.05.0016.00
Sony KDL-46EX40020101080p28.052.087.052.052.052.08.0016.00
Vizio xvt4735v20111080p67.688.688.889.288.688.69.0012.00
Toshiba 46L5200U20131080p55.071.089.076.071.074.08.008.00
Sony 40S20L12007720p48.472.090.172.973.49.6014.00
Samsung LN46C63020121080p54.572.190.790.388.572.310.007.63
Vizio VO22L FHDTV10A2008720p28.061.094.061.061.061.018.0015.00
Samsung HP-T425420111080p69.775.794.176.075.75.001.00
Vizio E261VA2007720p28.062.095.062.062.062.018.0016.00
GPX TDE3245W2016720p28.051.0102.051.051.051.08.0015.00
SANYO DP507492010720p67.075.0103.094.079.075.07.001.00
Emprex HD 32022007720p27.050.5126.051.050.08.5015.00
Vizio E470VL (hdmi)20111080p69.086.0128.095.095.086.09.008.00
LG 47LW6500-UA20121080p66.680.7149.7149.081.780.92.2711.83


While it's not the fastest on the list, there are many TVs that are far worse for 480i content. And of the generally available TVs, you can only get up to 16ms faster without resorting to bob deinterlacing.

Plus those faster ones don't look as good as this TV does at 480i. So if you care about how things look more than how much lag there is, this is the gold standard, in my opinion.

Conclusion

This is a great choice for slower-paced retro gaming. For RPGs it's perfect. Even less twitchy action games would be ok. But it's certainly slower than the best performing TVs at showing deinterlaced content. That said it looks fantastic so maybe you'd be willing to tolerate a little lag for a top-notch picture. For progressive content it also looks very good, but the lag is not so competitive with modern TVs.

Other models

I tested the 40v3000, which has been hypothesized to be the same as the 40VL130, with the differing model numbers due to do one being a costco-only rebadge. But wait! I've also tested the 40VL130. The results were roughly identical, and differ only because I use a better method for measuring response time than I did when I reviewed 40VL130 over 2 years ago. So yes, they are the same. I guess I've been doing this a while...

 Based on model numbers I would expect the 46VL130 and 46V3000 to also perform the same. 

 

 

 

Email me

Name

Email *

Message *