Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hm. I've always thought it was more of a result of our current display technology? Digital displays buffer an entire frame before they display it. Sometimes several frames. And the refresh rate is usually 60 Hz so each buffered frame adds a delay of 16 ms. CRTs on the other hand have basically zero latency because the signal coming in directly controls the intensity of the beam as it draws the picture. Anyway, is it…
CRTs are potentially worse. It takes the electron beam 16 ms to paint the screen. If the electron beam is halfway down the screen and you change a pixel right above where the beam just painted, you'll have to wait 16 ms before you see anything change. All CRT displays attached to computers in the last 40 years were driven from memory buffers just like LCDs, and those buffers were typically only allowed to change whil…
Video game aficionados would like to have a word with you:
https://www.wired.com/story/crt-tube-tv-hot-gaming-tech-retr...
To be fair, much of this is the color and shape rendering, where pixel art had been tailored for CRTs.
Twitchy gamers do swear by “zero input lag” but are perhaps just nostalgic, difference is likely to be 8ms vs. 10ms:
“Using the industry-standard definition of input lag, 60Hz CRTs don't have 0ms input lag. 60Hz CRTs have 8.3ms of input lag…”
https://www.resetera.com/threads/crts-have-8-3ms-of-input-la...