Video summary

Лучшие 1LCD Проектор для Игр до 200$ ( input lag тест аппаратом )

Main summary

Key takeaways

Product Review

Summary (best 1LCD gaming projectors under ~$200)

The reviewer focuses on input lag for gaming and does not deeply compare color rendering. He measures delays using a dedicated test device plus an optical HDMI cable, then compares results across multiple 1LCD models—grouped by resolution/price.

He distinguishes two types of latency behavior:

  • Fixed latency: stays the same across repeated measurements
  • Variable latency: changes depending on measurement position/conditions, often showing “jumps”

Key takeaway: for gaming, fixed and low delay is preferred.

Key measurement findings / methodology

  • Input lag is reported roughly in the ~20–60 ms range, depending on model and mode.
  • Using the test device can produce different results on some models (variable latency).
  • He compares optical HDMI vs copper HDMI (1-meter copper):
    • No meaningful difference in measured input lag
    • He recommends optical HDMI mainly for reliability/usage with consoles/PC, not because it reduces lag.

Best models by price band (as stated)

Up to ~$70 (mostly 480p and entry-level 720p)

  1. Younger M4 (480p) — ~34–35 ms, fixed

    • Approx. price: $50+ (varies by exchange rate)
    • Pros: fixed, relatively low lag for the class; “interesting device”
    • Cons: 480p limits overall performance (color/brightness not praised)

  2. BT-2 (Father Rome sub-brand, 1LCD 480p) — ~28–33 ms, variable by height but generally low

    • Pros: first time he saw such “quality” for 1LCD; quiet; high overall quality
    • Cons: color rendering not very good; price mentioned $100–110 (even though discussed here)
    • Use-case note: he expects 720p models to have better color rendering

  3. M7 — ~21–30 ms, but unstable/variable

    • Pros: average can be around ~30 ms, best near the center
    • Cons: latency instability matters to him

  4. 90 — mentioned as ~24–30 ms (also unstable)

    • Exact model name unclear
    • Cons: unstable; needs more study

  5. M4 Plus (2633 mentioned) — ~33 ms, stable

    • Pros: stable “fixed-ish” behavior; solid midpack for lag

  6. BlitzWolf — ~26–33 ms

    • Pros: “good readings”
    • Cons: he doesn’t recommend for consoles like PS4/Xbox One due to alleged 60 Hz handshake/compatibility issues
    • Advice: consider waiting/review updates if you’re buying for consoles

Recommendation within this band: He highlights M4 (480p, fixed lag) and M4 Plus (stable) as safer gaming choices. Variable-lag models can still average well, but are less ideal.

~$100 (720p class) — “more serious” gaming/movies

He describes these as stable, with no fixed latency changing—and claims they work at 60 Hz across Xbox 360 / Xbox One / PS4 / PC.

  1. Hockey 3 (720p) — ~24–30 ms (avg around ~31 ms)
  2. T8 — ~18–26 ms (around ~26 ms “normal indicator”)
    • He later hints he may confirm whether it’s top-end
    • Mentions possible communication problems
  3. E500 — ~18–26 ms (avg around ~26 ms), stable

Overall for ~$100: He calls them “3 cool devices” for gaming and movies and advises buyers (especially in Ukraine) to purchase with a warranty/guarantee.

>$100 but up to ~$150–$200 (best performers mentioned)

  1. UJI 600 — ~20–30 ms average, but unstable/variable

    • Pros: among the best ideas for latency; center around ~30 ms
    • Cons: can be lower or higher depending on conditions

  2. T3 — ~20–28 ms, described as very good

    • Pros: strong brightness and color rendering; “awesome”; suitable for presentations too
    • Cons: no explicit gaming drawback mentioned (frames positively)

  3. YOU G600 (also referenced as his long-time favorite) — ~22–30 ms, with 30 ms being real

    • Pros: reliability story—he dropped it twice and it kept working
    • Cons: no lag-specific downside emphasized

His “leader” claim for this category: For 720p gaming, he points to UJI 600 / T3 / and/or YOU G600, depending on later confirmation in upcoming comparisons.

Head-to-head / comparisons (color rendering + latency tradeoffs)

m19 vs Q9 vs TD96 (future/mentioned)

  • m19 vs Q9 (color rendering comparison):

    • m19 surpasses Q9 in color rendering
    • He’s unsure how m19 compares to TD96, which he implies may have more saturated colors

  • TD96 (Android version, expected next review):

    • He expects TD96 to surpass the base model (T-26) in color rendering
    • Predicts it will compete with Q9

Known latency concerns

  • Against TD96: he says it does not have fixed latency
    • latency “jumps” about ~24–31 ms
    • he once saw ~18 ms briefly
  • Q9: better for gaming due to good color rendering and stable/low latency
    • about ~25 ms in the center (stated ~18–25 ms; center ~25 ms)

Verdict from this portion:

  • If you prioritize gaming latency stability, Q9 is framed as the safer choice.
  • If you prioritize color rendering, m19 looks stronger, but gaming-lag stability vs TD96/Q9 still needs confirmation.

Notable failures / excluded models

  • F30 and T8 allegedly would not work with the tester device, so he couldn’t properly validate delay.
  • F30: mentions matrix burn-in, implying it’s probably not a common recommendation (even though he owns it).
  • T8: he hints he waited for firmware/updates, meaning early test results may differ later.

Overall pros/cons themes from the video

Pros

  • Measured low input lag options across multiple budgets (often ~20–30 ms in better tiers)
  • Clear separation between fixed vs variable latency
  • Optical HDMI recommended because it doesn’t change lag vs copper (but improves practical reliability)
  • Many models presented as stable at 60 Hz (especially around ~$100)

Cons

  • Some top-lag performers have variable/unstable latency, important for twitch shooters
  • Possible console compatibility/60 Hz switching issues (at least claimed for BlitzWolf)
  • Known long-term issues (example: F30 matrix burn-in)
  • Some models couldn’t be fully tested due to the tester-device limitation

Concise recommendation / verdict

  • Best “safe gaming” direction: prioritize models with stable/fixed latency around ~25–33 ms.
  • Most compelling by his favorites/upcoming leaders:
    • T3 and YOU G600 for strong 720p gaming lag ranges and positive overall claims
    • Q9 for gaming-lag behavior (around ~25 ms center), though it may lose on color rendering to others
  • For console users: be cautious with models he claims can’t properly lock 60 Hz (notably BlitzWolf).

Unique points mentioned (consolidated)

  1. Focus on input lag for gaming, not deep color rendering comparisons
  2. Uses a delay test device and HDMI optical cable
  3. Optical HDMI vs copper HDMI: no meaningful lag difference
  4. Two latency behaviors: fixed vs variable/jumping
  5. Latency may depend on measurement “height/position”
  6. Key 480p model: M4 fixed ~34–35 ms
  7. BT-2: ~28–33 ms, quiet/high-quality; color rendering not great; ~$100–110 mentioned
  8. M7: ~21–30 ms, but unstable
  9. M4 Plus (2633): ~33 ms, stable
  10. BlitzWolf: ~26–33 ms, but possible 60 Hz/console mode issues → not recommended for Xbox One/PS4
  11. ~$100 tier claims: stable at 60 Hz across Xbox 360 / Xbox One / PS4 / PC
  12. Hockey 3: ~24–30 ms (avg ~31 ms)
  13. T8: ~18–26 ms (center/normal ~26 ms), possible communication/firmware concerns
  14. E500: ~18–26 ms, stable avg ~26 ms

  15. $100 tier: UJI 600 average ~20–30 ms, but unstable

  16. T3: ~20–28 ms, “awesome,” good brightness/color; presentation-friendly
  17. YOU G600: ~22–30 ms, durability anecdote (dropped twice, still works)
  18. TD96: expected to beat T-26 in color rendering and compete with Q9
  19. TD96 downside: latency not fixed; jumps roughly 24–31 ms
  20. Q9: good color rendering and gaming latency around ~25 ms center; stable
  21. m19: beats Q9 on color rendering; TD96/Q9 gaming-lag relationship unclear
  22. F30: matrix burn-in issue; also not testable with the tester constraints
  23. F30 and T8: couldn’t be validated properly with the delay tester device
  24. He suggests viewers mention his channel to AliExpress sellers for discounts/support

Speaker notes

  • The video appears to feature one main reviewer delivering measurements, rankings, and opinions.
  • No other speakers are clearly distinguished in the provided subtitles.

Original video