Blur Busters Forums

Discorz wrote: ↑

06 Nov 2022, 12:14

He compared different movement speeds! Faster moving speeds will always look blurrier/smearer. So its not really a apples to apples comparison. Just something to keep in mind.

Oh that's unfortunate but good to know, thanks. Can his response time charts be used for a apples to apples comparison?

SvenL wrote: ↑

06 Nov 2022, 13:12

Oh that's unfortunate but good to know, thanks. Can his response time charts be used for a apples to apples comparison?

Pursuits are still usable tho.

From what I see both XL' and PG' are measured with same "10-90% of luminance" method so yes. But keep in mind its not really a 1.5 ms due to choice of this method.

Actually PG's extreme overdrive has the same avg 21,6% overshoot as XL's premium overdrive. So that's perhaps a good panel-vs-panel comparison. Off vs off would be ideal. We can see TN has faster falling transitions while IPS has faster rising transitions. Although IPS GtG doesn't enter the yellow/orange area on this heatmap (notice the max response times). On average they turn out identical.

If TN panel had same factory optimizations as this IPS it would definitely outpace it.

Discorz wrote: ↑

06 Nov 2022, 13:44

Pursuits are still usable tho.

From what I see both XL' and PG' are measured with same "10-90% of luminance" method so yes. But keep in mind its not really a 1.5 ms due to choice of this method.

Actually PG's extreme overdrive has the same avg 21,6% overshoot as XL's premium overdrive. So that's perhaps a good panel-vs-panel comparison. Off vs off would be ideal. We can see TN has faster falling transitions while IPS has faster rising transitions. Although IPS GtG doesn't enter the yellow/orange area on this heatmap (notice the max response times). On average they turn out identical.

If TN panel had same factory optimizations as this IPS it would definitely outpace it.

Very interesting! Thank you for the explanation.

Does that mean that this IPS panel has already caught up massively to the new 360hz Fast-TN panels in terms of motion blur and response times? (Compared to the previous 360hz IPS models)

That would be impressive

SvenL wrote: ↑

06 Nov 2022, 14:51

Discorz wrote: ↑

06 Nov 2022, 13:44

Pursuits are still usable tho.

From what I see both XL' and PG' are measured with same "10-90% of luminance" method so yes. But keep in mind its not really a 1.5 ms due to choice of this method.

Actually PG's extreme overdrive has the same avg 21,6% overshoot as XL's premium overdrive. So that's perhaps a good panel-vs-panel comparison. Off vs off would be ideal. We can see TN has faster falling transitions while IPS has faster rising transitions. Although IPS GtG doesn't enter the yellow/orange area on this heatmap (notice the max response times). On average they turn out identical.

If TN panel had same factory optimizations as this IPS it would definitely outpace it.

Very interesting! Thank you for the explanation.

Does that mean that this IPS panel has already caught up massively to the new 360hz Fast-TN panels in terms of motion blur and response times? (Compared to the previous 360hz IPS models)

That would be impressive

Seems like it, even the YouTuber you posted this from also stated this in his video.

Actually looks like TN is still a hair faster. Zowie doesn't need as much overdrive gain to achieve same avg response, at least at 360Hz (OD 15 vs OD Normal). But god they are close!

Discorz wrote: ↑

06 Nov 2022, 12:14

He compared different movement speeds! Faster moving speeds will always look blurrier/smearer. So its not really a apples to apples comparison. Just something to keep in mind.

Can someone tell him not to do that?
Maybe chief?

I can confirm that 360 Hz "fast" TN (e.g. E-TN) is currently faster than most 360 Hz IPS.

The leapfrogging did happen again, even if the best 240Hz IPS is now faster than some of the early 240Hz TN.

If you're just buying 240 Hz, IPS is already (practically) caught up, but now in 360+ Hz territory, TN had recently gotten the trophy again with the XL2566K.

But IPS has more speed jumps, and we're seeing continued leapfrogging.

Discorz wrote: ↑

06 Nov 2022, 12:14

He compared different movement speeds! Faster moving speeds will always look blurrier/smearer. So its not really a apples to apples comparison. Just something to keep in mind.

differing movement speeds XL2566K PG27AQN PG259QN.jpg

Ugh.
It's definitely a good question.

But the Vicious Cycle Effect kind of applies here where 1440p is motion-blurrier than 1080p at the same refresh rate (higher resolutions amplify refresh rate limitations).

Human eye tracking capability is partially limited by how long an object is onscreen for -- if it moves too fast, you can't notice the motion blur. 1 screenwidth/sec is a pretty comfortable eye tracking speed.

So there's pros/cons of this approach.

Better yet for a reviewer to offer multiple visualizations:

pixel/sec-perspective, set as 960pps
pixel/sec-perspective, set as 1920pps
screenwidth/sec-perspective, set as 0.5 screenwidth/sec
screenwidth/sec-perspective, set as 1 screenwidth/sec

I'd rather standardize on multiple of 960 pixels/sec, or screenwidth/sec.

I need to do some thinking about reviewer education, because I understand why some would use screenwidth/sec. Tough call.

Discorz wrote: ↑

06 Nov 2022, 17:41

Actually looks like TN is still a hair faster. Zowie doesn't need as much overdrive gain to achieve same avg response, at least at 360Hz (OD 15 vs OD Normal). But god they are close!

This is awesome! But since "10%-90% of luminance" was measured when measuring with 0% to 100% GtG instead, could the result differ more? Or will the ratio remain roughly the same?

SvenL wrote: ↑

07 Nov 2022, 03:43

This is awesome! But since "10%-90% of luminance" was measured when measuring with 0% to 100% GtG instead, could the result differ more? Or will the ratio remain roughly the same?

Can't say for 0-100% but for 3-97% + gamma correction is about 60% slower difference, roughly speaking.