How relevant is NTSC percentage to a gaming display?

[SemoB]

Hi, so I'm considering a new laptop to succeed my potentially-dead 15.6 Defiance II laptop. I have narrowed down my options to either the Vyper, Recoil II (as they both have mechanical keyboards - I've had awful issues with ghosting with my Defiance II), or the Proteus VI.

One thing I've noticed is that display specs on the website now show an NTSC percentage. I didn't know what that was at first, and upon further investigation I discovered that most average displays have about 70% NTSC, which surprised me because most models at PC Specialist have 45% NTSC, with only the Octane and Recoil having 72% within the 15.6 range.

Is this something I should be concerned about? My Defiance II's display was fantastic. Crisp and colourful and nice to look at, but going back to the specs sheet it didn't show any NTSC percentage (I'm assuming it was a different technology or something).

What I want to know is how significant is this number? Would these 45% NTSC displays be on par with my Defiance II's "15.6" Matte Full HD IPS LED Widescreen"? I'm not doing any photo editing, but I definitely want my games and films to look pretty.

Thanks.

 

[Oussebon]

If you check out this page: https://www.pcspecialist.co.uk/reviews/ it lists 4 reviews of the Recoil by various hardware magazines / websites, and also 1 of the Vyper. As far as I know the Vyper's screen is TN and the Recoil's is IPS.

The reviews also give impressions of how people found the screens.

If going with an i7 and the GTX 1060 I'd go with the Recoil most likely for the IPS screen and as it's a fair bit lighter, which would seem worth the ~£50 difference to me anyway.

 

[Tony1044]

Well every day is indeed a school day and you live and learn.

I'd never heard of the NTSC percentage. Apparently, it's basically how accurately it can reproduce colours - https://www.eizoglobal.com/library/basics/lcd_monitor_color_gamut/

CRT's used to be in the 70% region, apparently and if you're doing photography, IPS with not less than 95% is recommended.

Mind you back many many years ago when I worked as an electronics engineer, we used to be rather smug about PAL vs NTSC, one of the reasons being their lack of scan lines: 525 instead of our 625. Though they had a faster scan rate of 30 frames per second compared to our 25. We used to sniffily refer to NTSC as "Never Twice, Same Colour".

I would love to say that it was a genuinely much poorer system compared to PAL but the truth is there wasn't much between them to most folks eyes.

From what little I've just read, it would definitely appear that you're better going for IPS if you want the more natural and accurate colour representations on the whole.

Edit: What were your ghosting issues on the DII? I have a DII but went for the 4K screen. It's been the only bit of the build I generally regretted as my experience was generally that Windows is absolutely terrible at handling high DPI (well should caveat - was terrible. I reduced the resolution in the end and have stuck with it since so it might have improved). I wonder now, from your comment, if I inadvertently just opted for a better quality screen.

 

[SemoB]

Thanks both for your reply. I'm not sure why you guys are saying the Recoil II has an IPS screen. In the website configurator, there's only an option between 60Hz or 144Hz FHD Panel, both 72% NTSC. The Vyper 15 and Proteus VI both only have a 60Hz FHD Panel (1920 x 1080), 45% NTSC.

My question is whether the Recoil's display is much better than that of the other two, and if so by how much. And how either of these displays compare to my old Defiance II's FHD IPS display.

Thanks for all the extra info, Tony. As for your question regarding the Defiance II, for some reason Clevo wired their keyboard differently to any other keyboard I've ever used. I discovered this while playing FPS games where a certain combination of keys is quite common: S+D+Q (in many FPS games, that's going backwards, strafing right and quick-switching weapons at the same time). Unfortunately, Clevo wired the DII keyboard in a way that made it impossible to press those three buttons simultaneously. I've never seen it happen in any other keyboard or notebook on the market, no matter how cheap. I ended up always having to use a cheap, third-party USB keyboard whenever I wanted to play an FPS, which was very upsetting. It is definitely something I want to avoid in my future laptop.

 

[Oussebon]

PCS don't specify TN / IPS any more as they used to, they seem to just state NTSC values.

Why are you sure the Recoil does not have an IPS screen?

If you want something that compares as favourably as possible versus the old screen, I'd suggest looking at the Recoil - which as I say I understand to have an IPS screen..?

Did you read any of the reviews at all?

 

[Tony1044]

Thanks both for your reply. I'm not sure why you guys are saying the Recoil II has an IPS screen. In the website configurator, there's only an option between 60Hz or 144Hz FHD Panel, both 72% NTSC. The Vyper 15 and Proteus VI both only have a 60Hz FHD Panel (1920 x 1080), 45% NTSC.

My question is whether the Recoil's display is much better than that of the other two, and if so by how much. And how either of these displays compare to my old Defiance II's FHD IPS display.

Thanks for all the extra info, Tony. As for your question regarding the Defiance II, for some reason Clevo wired their keyboard differently to any other keyboard I've ever used. I discovered this while playing FPS games where a certain combination of keys is quite common: S+D+Q (in many FPS games, that's going backwards, strafing right and quick-switching weapons at the same time). Unfortunately, Clevo wired the DII keyboard in a way that made it impossible to press those three buttons simultaneously. I've never seen it happen in any other keyboard or notebook on the market, no matter how cheap. I ended up always having to use a cheap, third-party USB keyboard whenever I wanted to play an FPS, which was very upsetting. It is definitely something I want to avoid in my future laptop.

I didn't mention any specific model as having or not vhaing an IPS display. I said if you want better colour representation then it would appear that IPS is the better choice.

Ah that is interesting - in terms of keyboards they should be n-key rollover. This is where each key is scanned independently. I've had some issues with my DII "caching" the keys very quickly so I end up moving forwards (usually) after I've lifted the key, but I've never noticed it being limited to two keypresses before.

 

[SemoB]

Thanks again for the replies.

Sorry, I thought that IPS and NTSC were two separate technologies, hence assuming if a display shows an NTSC value then it is not IPS. I'm not very savvy to the technical side of screens. Yes, I have read several reviews on the Recoil and the Vyper (haven't been able to find any for the Proteus VI). The Recoil seems to be viewed favourably. I haven't seen any reviews focusing particularly on the display. I am inclining more favourably towards the Recoil for having a better display and a mechanical keyboard, though gutted to be missing out on the Proteus' GTX 1070.

Does either of you chaps have an idea what % NTSC the DII has, by any chance?

Tony, I'm pretty sure at least my DII did not have n-key rollover as I was in talks with PCS about this particular issue for several months when I first got mine (late 2015). I'd be interested to know if you are actually able to press the aforementioned three buttons simultaneously on your DII. I use en.key-test.ru to check this myself. The keys are S, D and Q simultaneously.

Also yes I started having that caching issue you described towards the end of my DII's life. It didn't do it before, and then it only started doing it with the W key, so I assumed something must have melted or broke that damaged the W key's mechanism.

Thanks.

 

[Tony1044]

Thanks again for the replies.

Sorry, I thought that IPS and NTSC were two separate technologies, hence assuming if a display shows an NTSC value then it is not IPS. I'm not very savvy to the technical side of screens. Yes, I have read several reviews on the Recoil and the Vyper (haven't been able to find any for the Proteus VI). The Recoil seems to be viewed favourably. I haven't seen any reviews focusing particularly on the display. I am inclining more favourably towards the Recoil for having a better display and a mechanical keyboard, though gutted to be missing out on the Proteus' GTX 1070.

Does either of you chaps have an idea what % NTSC the DII has, by any chance?

Tony, I'm pretty sure at least my DII did not have n-key rollover as I was in talks with PCS about this particular issue for several months when I first got mine (late 2015). I'd be interested to know if you are actually able to press the aforementioned three buttons simultaneously on your DII. I use en.key-test.ru to check this myself. The keys are S, D and Q simultaneously.

Also yes I started having that caching issue you described towards the end of my DII's life. It didn't do it before, and then it only started doing it with the W key, so I assumed something must have melted or broke that damaged the W key's mechanism.

Thanks.

I think some of this is typical IT industry hijacking other industries meanings.

NTSC was the broadcast TV standard for North America, Canada and a handful of other countries, set back in the day before LCD screens, when Cathode Ray Tubes ruled (CRT).
NTSC was 525 lines (the vertical resolution - think the 'Y' resolution in pixels of a modern LCD) and 30 frames per seconds redraw (refresh).

PAL was the European broadcast standard - 625 lines at 25 frames per second.

Simplified, a TV picture was drawn by bending a beam of light to scan from (as you looked at the screen) the top left corner to the top right. The beam was then cut off, and it would move down a line to draw again from left to right. For NTSC this was all 525 lines 30 times a second.

As each beam hit a phosphorescent pixel it would cause it to glow. In order to get colour, three beams were used to simultaneously hit three phosphour dots - one that was red, one green and one blue

By altering the intensity of each of the beams, you could change how intensely each of the RGB colours glowed, and by virtue of that create all colours in the spectrum.

I am going out on a logical limb here and would imagine that in a perfect world, you would want 100% natural colour representation. That was never entirely going to happen - got closer and closer with grills, masks and other such techniques but you still got bleeding etc.

In actual fact it was a bean of electrons, not light, but you get the idea.

Since that article I linked to suggested that most CRT's could hit around 70-72% of perfect rendition, then for some reason LCD/LED manufacturers have started to use this as a standard of how closely their panels can get to this figure.

45% seems way off the mark, if I am honest. That kind of suggests that colour rendition wouldn't be anything to write home about. Of course the low percentage may well be made up for by things like better contrast and brightness.

70-ish% seems to be an acceptable figure and I'd again guess this is considered acceptable because it's what we accepted as normal for CRT's, and I would imagine that by calibrating the screen you could get even higher if you were doing professional photography etc.

TN (or Twisted Nematic) screens and IPS screens work by applying a voltage to twist LCD crystals in the display to allow or shutter light but they vary in the the way they twist the crystal and that IPS panels keep them in the same plane as the light to give brighter screen with better contrast and wider viewing angles and in this case better colour reproduction.

And if memory serves me, (o)LED screens do away with all of this and apply power to coloured LEDs that are laid down in a grid - again each pixel being a red, green and blue LED.

 

[Oussebon]

My question is whether the Recoil's display is much better than that of the other two, and if so by how much. And how either of these displays compare to my old Defiance II's FHD IPS display.

Which Defiance II? (they were 14", 15.6", 17.3")

I can't immediately find anything about the 15.6" but for the 14" one, it apparently had the LGD046D panel (https://hexus.net/tech/reviews/laptop/90962-pc-specialist-defiance-ii-14/)

Hexus didn't do reviews of the panels back then, but other laptops with this panel posted results of:
Coverage: 94% sRGB, 69% NTSC, 72% AdobeRGB; (https://www.ultrabookreview.com/13349-msi-gs43vr-review/)
92% sRGB, 71% aRGB: https://hexus.net/tech/reviews/laptop/103537-razer-blade-2017/?page=7

Versus the panel on the Recoil:
96% sRGB, 73% AdobeRGB: https://bit-tech.net/reviews/tech/laptops/pc-specialist-recoil-ii-review/6/
97% sRGB: https://www.hwupgrade.it/articoli/p...l-ii-pochi-fronzoli-tanta-sostanza_index.html
And, according to PCS, 72% NTSC. So it should compare favourably to a 14" Defiance II.

And you can see various other info about the screen and luminosity etc in those reviews. Since obviously it's not just colour reproduction metrics that will make up your experience of using it but things like brightness, response time, whether you love matte or glossy screens...

If you go to Device Manager > Monitors, right click the monitor, go to Properties > Details > Hardware IDs does it give you a model number for your Defiance II's panel?

You can also phone PCS and ask what panel model they use for the recoil 60hz screen.

 

[SemoB]

Thanks for your explanation, Tony. That's some very interesting stuff! So basically PAL is higher resolution, lower framerate than NTSC. From what you said then it is probably worth it to trade the 8GB graphics card for a better looking display.

Oussebon, it is the 15.6 Defiance II. Those numbers are really useful. Unfortunately, I can't check the Device Manager on my Defiance II as it is currently fried and being sent to PCS for repair/replacement. I'm just preparing myself for a worst-case scenario of total motherboard replacement, in which case I will just buy a new machine, and hence exploring my options early in anticipation.

 

[Oussebon]

If and when PCS have the Defiance you could ask them what panel model it has. I'm sure they'd be happy to look at it (especially in the context of it potentially informing a fresh purchase from them). Or pop the screen out yourself and look.

So basically PAL is higher resolution, lower framerate than NTSC.

This might risk confusing matters tbh. As the panels you're looking at will all be 1080p and 60hz (frames per second), which is what resolution and refresh rate mean in the context of buying a gaming PC/laptop.

 

[Tony1044]

Thanks for your explanation, Tony. That's some very interesting stuff! So basically PAL is higher resolution, lower framerate than NTSC. From what you said then it is probably worth it to trade the 8GB graphics card for a better looking display.

Only back in the day when we had CRT - nowadays, with things like HD, 4K etc, it's all a moot point and largely irrelevant again with LCD displays.

The key is the % value - the higher the % NTSC, the closer the panel is to being able to display natural colouring.

 

[ubuysa]

I've been watching this thread with some curiosity, like Tony1044 I well remember the days of PAL, NTSC and SECAM and I found it curious that a standard developed for an analog CRT-based TV encoding system (NTSC) should somehow be relevant in these modern days of digital displays. It seems that it's not, well not as an analog TV encoding standard anyway.

Because of my curiosity about all this I've done some reading, and I found this site very useful. It would seem that when the NTSC colour encoding standard was developed (back in 1953) part of that process was to establish the range of colours that the human eye can see, and this colour range (I'm sorry, NTSC was developed in the USA, so that should be color range) has become the accepted standard colour gamut against which all displays are still measured.

I've found this thread quite interesting actually, history is full of strange twists of fate and it's really quite amazing that the colour gamut chosen for an analog TV encoding standard from the 1950's should remain the standard against which all future displays would be measured.

Thanks for this thread!