144hz vs 144hz g-sync

[Glide]

i.e. if my fps is at 78 while using the swift, instead of getting the motion blur of 144hz without gsync (and deal with tearing) I would get the motion blur of 78hz. I'm asking because I think I'd rather keel the 7ms motion blur and deal with tearing rather than get more motion blur with the gsync changing refresh rates as I won't be able to push a constant 144.

You don't get a fixed amount of motion blur with a flicker-free (sample & hold) display.
That applies to both G-Sync and fixed-refresh 144Hz displays.

You won't get 7ms of motion blur at 78fps on a 144Hz display.
It gets complicated when you're not dealing with rates that are synchronized to the refresh rate, but it's going to be closer to:

• 12.8ms G-Sync (1000/78 = 12.8ms)
• 13.9ms 144Hz (1000/72 = 13.9ms) since that is the closest factor of the refresh rate.

Well, an impulse display will still have blur artifacts if the framerate is lower than the refresh. (e.g. image doubling if framerate is 30 fps, and refresh is 60 hz).

You'll get really bad judder from repeating frames, but the screen is still only illuminated for ~1ms as the screen refreshes, so I'm not sure that motion blur would be affected. Or if it is, wouldn't it be doubled to ~2ms?

As I said, it gets a lot more complicated when you're not looking at framerates that sync up to the refresh rate. Basically any time that happens you are in a non-ideal state and it's going to be a bad experience unless you're using VRR. (G-Sync or Adaptive/Free-Sync)

But G-Sync is always going to be in a better state than a fixed refresh rate if you're comparing sample & hold displays.

[Falkentyne]

Gsync wont go down to 60hz just because it "can"..
It will just keep the refresh rate matching the framerate! that's all.

if you are CURRENTLY getting 120hz at 120 fps with a non gsync monitor in some sort of Lightboost, Benq blur reduction or other strobed mode, if you switch to a gsync monitor, AS LONG AS THE RESOLUTION IS THE SAME AS THE OLD ONE (hint: you can always use a lower resolution on a 1440p!) you will get the same framerates! Example: if you have a lightboost 1920x1080 monitor and use lightboost mode and switch to a GSYNC monitor and use the same resolution and use 1920x1080, you can use ULMB (you don't have to use gsync) and get the same framerate and the same smoothness you had before.

You said that you have ULMB already which implies you have a gsync monitor. So why would you want to sidegrade to a swift?


Spacedriver and the others were just talking about refresh rate and how gsync works.

[Falkentyne]

i.e. if my fps is at 78 while using the swift, instead of getting the motion blur of 144hz without gsync (and deal with tearing) I would get the motion blur of 78hz. I'm asking because I think I'd rather keel the 7ms motion blur and deal with tearing rather than get more motion blur with the gsync changing refresh rates as I won't be able to push a constant 144.

You don't get a fixed amount of motion blur with a flicker-free (sample & hold) display.
That applies to both G-Sync and fixed-refresh 144Hz displays.

You won't get 7ms of motion blur at 78fps on a 144Hz display.
It gets complicated when you're not dealing with rates that are synchronized to the refresh rate, but it's going to be closer to:

• 12.8ms G-Sync (1000/78 = 12.8ms)
• 13.9ms 144Hz (1000/72 = 13.9ms) since that is the closest factor of the refresh rate.

Well, an impulse display will still have blur artifacts if the framerate is lower than the refresh. (e.g. image doubling if framerate is 30 fps, and refresh is 60 hz).

You'll get really bad judder from repeating frames, but the screen is still only illuminated for ~1ms as the screen refreshes, so I'm not sure that motion blur would be affected. Or if it is, wouldn't it be doubled to ~2ms?

As I said, it gets a lot more complicated when you're not looking at framerates that sync up to the refresh rate. Basically any time that happens you are in a non-ideal state and it's going to be a bad experience unless you're using VRR. (G-Sync or Adaptive/Free-Sync)

But G-Sync is always going to be in a better state than a fixed refresh rate if you're comparing sample & hold displays.

Yep hes right.
When you're not using a method of blur reduction, there is all 100% positive benefit of using a GSYNC (or freesync) monitor vs a non freesync/gsync monitor. The only question then is about blur reduction vs sample and hold.

[kayaknate]

Gsync wont go down to 60hz just because it "can"..
It will just keep the refresh rate matching the framerate! that's all.

It won't go down because it can. It would go down to that because I typically put my game settings to hover between 60-80. Unless I'm playing league, tf2, or other less intensive games, in which I turn on strobelight because I know I can get a solid 100 frames. The other reason I was thinking of the upgrade is because I would like to game at 1440 again. Used to with a 60hz monitor I was borrowing. Now that I've seen 144hz though, I've been trying to find a monitor that will give me clarity of 144 at 1440p. Swift seemed like the solution. It's the closest thing to a solution, but I'd have to turn down my game settings too much to keep the monitor at 144fps/hz. I'd be right back to the blur I had before getting my current asus. That is if I'm understanding all this correctly.

That also answers your other question. I don't have ulmb. Misspoke. I have the 27 inch asus that strobelight works with.

[spacediver]

Well, an impulse display will still have blur artifacts if the framerate is lower than the refresh. (e.g. image doubling if framerate is 30 fps, and refresh is 60 hz).

You'll get really bad judder from repeating frames, but the screen is still only illuminated for ~1ms as the screen refreshes, so I'm not sure that motion blur would be affected. Or if it is, wouldn't it be doubled to ~2ms?

Consider a moving object whose position is being updated 30 times a second, but whose existence is being updated 60 times a second. Even with infinitesimal persistence, the object is still being flashed at each location twice.

Now consider what happens when your eyes are tracking this object. If we assume that the eyes move in a perfectly continuous manner, then for each of these pairs of flashes, which take place at the same location on the display, there is an accompanying pair of images at different retinal locations, which will cause an artifact similar to eye tracking based motion blur.

The blur won't consist of an extended trail, but will rather be characterized by a spike at the end of where this trail would be in the case that it was a sample and hold display. In other words, it'll look like a full energy ghost that is lagging behind.

[Glide]

The blur won't consist of an extended trail, but will rather be characterized by a spike at the end of where this trail would be in the case that it was a sample and hold display. In other words, it'll look like a full energy ghost that is lagging behind.

I'd call that double-image judder rather than motion blur. Either way, I agree that it's awful.
You really need the framerate to match the refresh rate with an impulse-type display.

[spacediver]

I'd call that double-image judder rather than motion blur. Either way, I agree that it's awful.

Ah ok, makes sense.

You really need the framerate to match the refresh rate with an impulse-type display.

Would you say that it's less of a problem when the framerate is higher than refresh rate, compared to when it's lower than the refresh rate?

[kayaknate]

OK. So does all this mean that 144hz is pointless in regards to motion blur when only pushing out 60 frames? Maybe it was just a placebo effect, but even at 60fps, when I got my 144 it looked clearer with less blur.

[Glide]

Would you say that it's less of a problem when the framerate is higher than refresh rate, compared to when it's lower than the refresh rate?

Well you'll either have crystal-clear partial frames (screen tearing) if V-Sync is disabled in Full-Screen Exclusive mode, or if you're using Windowed Mode (which is triple-buffered via the desktop compositor) you will just have 144 perfectly clear frames selected from however many are being rendered.
The frame presentation will not be synchronized to the refresh rate in either case though, so they will judder - but it shouldn't be displaying double-images. It would be far smoother to enable V-Sync.

OK. So does all this mean that 144hz is pointless in regards to motion blur when only pushing out 60 frames? Maybe it was just a placebo effect, but even at 60fps, when I got my 144 it looked clearer with less blur.

Basically yes. There are reasons why you might get slightly different results (60 is not a divisor of 144 for example) but simply running the display at a higher refresh rate should not improve motion blur. If anything it would be better to run at 60Hz if you are outputting 60 FPS.

[Falkentyne]

OK. So does all this mean that 144hz is pointless in regards to motion blur when only pushing out 60 frames? Maybe it was just a placebo effect, but even at 60fps, when I got my 144 it looked clearer with less blur.

No not true.
What controls the level of "persistence blurring" on 144 hz@ 60 fps panels vs 60 fps @ 60hz is usually the overdrive mechanism. A 144 hz panel will usually have a faster or more aggressive overdrive circuit than a 60 hz panel. This can vary panel to panel but in most cases, the amount or type of motion blur you will see at 60hz depends on the overdrive circuit.

The Asus VG248QE is known for having one of the best TN overdrive circuits of a 1080p 144hz gaming panel. And it really makes a difference playing on this panel at 144hz with Tracefree=60, than another panel like a Benq 144hz panel at the same refresh rate and fps.

So when you're pushing out 60 fps on a 144hz gaming monitor at 144 hz, vs 60 fps on a 60hz gaming monitor, you are usually getting an improvement in the pixel overdrive circuit. There are some other things as well but I think we need chief blur buster to come in and explain this, because this gets really complicated.

Ghosts point about 144 hz not being in sync with 60 fps also has a point. There's even more as well

And that's the mouse polling rate.
If the polling rate is an even divider of the refresh rate or frame rate, you will have smoother gameplay than not. That's why a 125hz refresh rate is ALWAYS Better to game at (if you can keep 125 fps with vsync *ON*) than a 120hz refresh rate.

Why?

What are the mouse polling USB rates?
125hz. 250hz, 500hz and 1000hz.
125hz divides evenly into all four values.
120hz does not divide evenly into any of them although its close to 500 (480->500) and 1000 (960>1000).
So on my Benq monitor I don't use 120hz. I use a custom refresh rate of 125hz, otherwise I just run 100hz.