Anything that can be done about the touchscreen latency?

[Asterra]

If it's not noticable under normal means it simply doesn't matter.

What matters to a given individual eventually is not a relevant datum. Once one maker catches on to something that is a legitimate improvement that not even the most painstaking "I don't see it" claims can deny, it'll become the norm. That's how we get 4K when 1080p is legitimately "good enough" for most people.

 

[Mike Dee]

What matters to a given individual eventually is not a relevant datum. Once one maker catches on to something that is a legitimate improvement that not even the most painstaking "I don't see it" claims can deny, it'll become the norm. That's how we get 4K when 1080p is legitimately "good enough" for most people.

Poor analogy....4K is visually a tremendous leap from 1080P

What I'm saying is I can't visually see any lag at all, so it is theoretically impossible for me to see an improvement from zero lag. If you want to measure it in frames....knock yourself out. It's not my cup of tea.

 

[Asterra]

Poor analogy....4K is visually a tremendous leap from 1080P

To the vast majority of living rooms (the TV market), it absolutely is not. A better argument could be made for HDR.

What I'm saying is I can't visually see any lag at all

Frankly impossible. You swipe your finger to scroll a page up and down. If the page doesn't follow your finger with frame-perfect precision (and no smartphone does), then its response will have an easily-discernible springy quality. Easily discernible. At best, you are subconsciously taking that springy quality for granted. And sure, that's what most people in fact do -- take limitations for granted until improvements are made. I say good luck in the future, when smartphones have long crushed this particular problem, getting somebody to be happy with 120ms of latency on their swipes and presses.

 

[Mike Dee]

To the vast majority of living rooms (the TV market), it absolutely is not. A better argument could be made for HDR.


Frankly impossible. You swipe your finger to scroll a page up and down. If the page doesn't follow your finger with frame-perfect precision (and no smartphone does), then its response will have an easily-discernible springy quality. Easily discernible. At best, you are subconsciously taking that springy quality for granted. And sure, that's what most people in fact do -- take limitations for granted until improvements are made. I say good luck in the future, when smartphones have long crushed this particular problem, getting somebody to be happy with 120ms of latency on their swipes and presses.

Wrong on both counts as far as I'm concerned. Your best bet is to find a device that does what you want it do

 

[chanchan05]

I wondered if anyone would ask this. There's a quite straightforward way of measuring the true latency. And by "true" I mean latency that hasn't been artificially faked with predictive algorithms. For the sake of accuracy, you might want to record yourself performing the following action.

Find any page that can be scrolled up and down. Now scroll it up and down without removing your finger from the screen. Find the rhythm that causes the screen's scrolling cadence to be the exact opposite of your finger's cadence -- i.e. it has hit the "up" peak when your finger is at the "down" peak, and vice-versa. Now, if you understand exactly how long a second is, you can count-slash-approximate how many times you scroll up/down during the course of one second while maintaining this rhythm. In the case of the S10+, this results in a tad over 4 times per second -- meaning each up/down sequence takes a bit less than 250ms. Cut that in half and you have your latency.

Otherwise you can just record yourself interacting with the phone in this manner and then count frames. Less convenient, but useful for anyone not confident in the technique or their estimation of a second's length.

I've used some devices where the latency of the touchscreen is too low to make this method practical, but the S10+ makes it all too easy.

To be honest this method is very unreliable IMO. Not to mention some people seem to say they have different experienced that you have. Maybe you could try to use WALT.

 

[Asterra]

To be honest this method is very unreliable IMO. Not to mention some people seem to say they have different experienced that you have.

Sure, as I stipulated, anyone who doesn't have a strongly accurate sense of the timing of a second, or timing in general, may be better off counting frames. A background in compositing can help. It's just what I use in a pinch.

Not to mention some people seem to say they have different experienced that you have.

In my experience, when push comes to shove, such people are unwilling to offer the video evidence to back up their impressions.

 

[mustang7757]

Sure, as I stipulated, anyone who doesn't have a strongly accurate sense of the timing of a second, or timing in general, may be better off counting frames. A background in compositing can help. It's just what I use in a pinch.



In my experience, when push comes to shove, such people are unwilling to offer the video evidence to back up their impressions.

Do you have a screen protector on ?
My suggestion would be to turn on screen sensitivity.

 

[Asterra]

Do you have a screen protector on ?
My suggestion would be to turn on screen sensitivity.

Yeah, I've fiddled with sensitivity. And while I do have a protector on, it's the factory specimen -- almost too thin to even detect.

Oh well. I've pretty much concluded that it is what it is. This was a hasty purchase that I didn't have much say in in the first place. Smartphones aren't really in a state this year where it makes sense to shop by latency; I'd have to wait until next year or who knows when. It's just kind of disappointing how bad it is on the S10+.

 

[mustang7757]

Yeah, I've fiddled with sensitivity. And while I do have a protector on, it's the factory specimen -- almost too thin to even detect.

Oh well. I've pretty much concluded that it is what it is. This was a hasty purchase that I didn't have much say in in the first place. Smartphones aren't really in a state this year where it makes sense to shop by latency; I'd have to wait until next year or who knows when. It's just kind of disappointing how bad it is on the S10+.

I can recommend One Plus devices , but I don't know if that's your cup of tea.

 

[mustang7757]

Yeah, I've fiddled with sensitivity. And while I do have a protector on, it's the factory specimen -- almost too thin to even detect.

Oh well. I've pretty much concluded that it is what it is. This was a hasty purchase that I didn't have much say in in the first place. Smartphones aren't really in a state this year where it makes sense to shop by latency; I'd have to wait until next year or who knows when. It's just kind of disappointing how bad it is on the S10+.

One more thing I don't know if you are aware in accessibility it has touch settings, can set to custom little shorter then 3 provided.

 

[chanchan05]

Sure, as I stipulated, anyone who doesn't have a strongly accurate sense of the timing of a second, or timing in general, may be better off counting frames. A background in compositing can help. It's just what I use in a pinch.



In my experience, when push comes to shove, such people are unwilling to offer the video evidence to back up their impressions.

Personally, I'm one who will say that if there is any latency at all on my phone, it's at a level that's small enough to be below my threshold level. It's like how people say for example they find one set of headphones not lous enough, and yet here I am using the same set of headphones at less than 50% because for me higher is already too loud.
Would it be nice to have better latency devices? Sure. But I'd take better battery life through more efficient chips. I'd take no blemish screen and no motorized cameras first. I'd take faster charging first. I'd take higher storage first, Etc. There are more things I'd rather see them work on improving first rather than 'waste' time trying to do something I don't really think or feel as something urgent. It's really low on the list of things that majority of people want to improve on their devices.

 

[criminal_bg]

jus reading up on the ASUS Rog phone 2 and they said "Asus claims the display has 1ms of response time after registering an input"

" In order to meet its users’ needs, Asus equipped the ROG Phone 2 with a 240Hz touch sampling rate. This means the display will scan for input 240 times per second, thereby lowering response times."

as well the refresh rate was increased...mayb other phone makers could do this "The ROG Phone 2 has the first 120Hz AMOLED panel in any Android phone"

would this be the type of response the OP is looking for???