Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

kdum8

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Sep 8, 2006
919
12
Tokyo, Japan
With response times surely the faster the better right?
If so then why do the ACD's only have a typical response time of 14 ms,
whereas these two much cheaper models have response times of 2ms and 5ms respectively. Is response time that important, I am unfamiliar with the difference that it makes...?:confused:

MAG 22"
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=8241084&st=MAG&lp=2&type=product&cp=1&id=1168044601867

ACER 22":
http://www.officedepot.com/ddSKU.do?id=AL2216Wbd

The Apple displays use the superior (for color accuracy) S-IPS panel. The displays you listed most likely use the cheaper TN based panels.

You can read more about panel types here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TFT_LCD

The S-IPS panels have always suffered from lower response times. However, you get a much better panel, able to produce more colors and in my opinion, looks crisper.

Unless you are going to be doing gaming, I wouldn't worry about the response times of the ACD's.

-Kevin
 
And wait just 24 more days, and an ACD update (likely, but not certain) may improve the response time :)
 
Response time reduces ghosting: when there is fast action on the screen you will notice ghosting if the screen is unable to update itself fast enough. It will appear as tearing across the screen.

The Apple Cinema Display is still capable of displaying over 70 Frames Per Second, so you should not worry about it.

As already have been pointed out, the Apple Cinema Display uses a S-IPS panel which is far superior to the faster and cheaper TN panels (which most of the time only gives you 6-bit colors, resulting in bad dithering performance).
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.