you are wrong...
let me prove you what i meant.
you are right that refresh rate draw the entire resolution at once...the progressive scan, non interlace one that is.
Pixel Response time is the same...
The part where you are wrong is per pixel drawing....
The pixel Response, like refresh rate, draw the entire resolutions, all the vertical and horizontal resolutions at once! If an LCD screen had a resolution of 1024 x 768, it draw all the 786,432 pixels at once.
I think you are the one wrong about the per pixel...how is that going to work? drawing 1 pixel at a time? imagine, the 786,432 pixels...or about 7.8 hundred thousand of pixels...how long would that take? If that is the case, it will take crazy fast speed to finish it....
when you say pixel goes to black or white, i know what you are talking about...you are talking about the pixels changing color or how long it take to change which is the definition of pixel response time. Again, not per pixel....if changing per pixel....again...not possible...it actually all pixels changing at one time and how fast it chang per second...
hence the ms = mili seconds...
what is mili?
milli = thousand
milli second = thousandth of a second...
so, if an LCD have a 30 ms. That means 3 hundredth of a second...
so, it take 3 hundredth of a second for the pixel response time to change color or frame(which is pretty much the same as refresh rate)., again the entire resolutions, not just one pixel at a time...
how to convert that 3 hundred of a second to make finish it in 1 second?
In another word, how many 3 hundredth of a second does it take for it to equal 1 second....
so 3 hundredth of a second..you know where to place the decimal I hope...
.03 or if you are confuse, 0.03
do this: 1/.03
or .03 is divided by 1 = 33.3...Hz...
I just rounded it down to 33 Hz....
another way to find the answer that takes a long time is, just add .03 + .03 over and over again until it reach 1.00 or just 1...the time it take to add the .03 to equal 1 will be how many times it "refresh per second." Or frame per second....
which is again, about 33 1/3 times to reach 1 second...or 33 1/3 Hz....
so, in 1 second, the LCD can change the entire resolution to different color 33 1/3 times...
me, i simplify by saying it, LCD have a refresh of 33 1/3 Hz per second...
Unfortunately, a guy told me, this refresh rate "Hz" or you would called it "pixel response time" doesn\'t sync with the framerate...and this 33 1/3 Hz is slow...as it doesn\'t sync...making it good for watching 16 frames per second video...this is the biggest reasons why many people see color drabs, smear and motion blur, as the refresh rate isn\'t fast enough.
This is usually the case with 1st generation of LCD which have aobut 30 ms.
Their later generation LCD have improve upon this...to 25 ms which is 40 Hz and 20 ms which is 50 Hz...I believe I see some 20 ms LCD back in year 2001, that time, is pretty fast for its day...then from 20 ms to 16 ms, I believe I see this last year in 2003 where some LCD have reach 16 ms which is 62.5 Hz...now this year, down to 12 ms...or 83 1/3 Hz...i rounded it down to 83 Hz....maybe next year down to 10 ms and if this continue, we may get to see 8 ms in 2006 and I think anything beyond 6 ms is NOT NECESSARY.
so, I think 8 ms is great as have the refresh rate of 125 Hz, which is perfect to watch 60 frames per second...remember it doesn\'t sync...double that...
if you want faster frame rate, 72 fps, then 7 ms is close enough....
and again 1 ms is overkilll...Under 1 ms...too much....you are talking about over 1000 Hz...such as 2,000 hz.....too much....Again, NOT NECESSARY.
