Almost all ≥240hz LCD monitors are not compliant. Why?

[kyube]

The first 240hz monitor that hit the market is the FG2421, which came out in 2013.
Since then, there's a enormous lack of "real" 240hz monitors.
From the top of my mind, the only ones which I've come across (from watching a magnitude of reviews) are:
1080p: X 25 ( 1 ), XL2566K(1, 2), PG248QP (1, 2)
1440p: PG27AQN(1, 2), 27G1S (1)
4K: Odyssey Neo G8 (4k 240hz) (1)
As you can see, there are only 1 IPS monitor in this list, the others are either TN or VA.
And no, the XG2431 and it's derivatives (24G2ZU/XG249CM) are not properly compliant either.
With the arrival of OLED, this has changed of course thankfully.
But, why has LCD been stagnating for so long?
This is why I think most people claim the difference between 144hz to 240hz is not big and not perceptible to them, because almost all LCD monitors are not fast enough.

[r0ach]

I'd rather have slow panels that don't destroy your eyes than fast panels you can't even look at. It probably all started off with Apple and Android MOBILE cell phone displays pushing the industry from tried and true a-SI to LTPS to lower power consumption. It seems LTPS use thinner films as part of their lower power consumption so now it's like you're staring directly at the sun instead of any type of panel even being there at all.

The thinner film supposedly helps with better response times as well, but it's obviously not a requirement because there were fast panels before all this nonsense. The Brussels New World Order has put forth all these regulatory rules about power consumption on computing devices so that's another problem if it forces companies to use the equivalent of low power, thin film, cell phone displays on 27" panels. That regulation would of course be a joke if they don't outright ban 500 watt 4090 RTX GPUs though since 27" displays are probably only saving something like 10 watts with so-called more efficient films that you can't even look at without dying, and OLED are also power hogs.

So I believe we have a combination of higher gamut backlighting being more abrasive to the eye + the panel films being too thin as well and your only choice of buying options now is going to be looking for older panels, possibly TN panels built on some older manufacturing process, or this current 240hz BOE panel that mysteriously doesn't have eye strain for some unknown reason while everything else does.

[Chief Blur Buster]

The first 240hz monitor that hit the market is the FG2421, which came out in 2013.

It was not true 240Hz -- it was 120Hz with a simulation of 240hz via strobing.

[Chief Blur Buster]

I'd rather have slow panels that don't destroy your eyes than fast panels you can't even look at.

I just wanted to inform you that some of our forum members have contacted me to complain about this behavior of your derailing forum threads on Blur Busters Forums with excessive mentions of eyestrain topics (happened several times)

Indeed, while eyestrain topics are now a bigger concern than they used to be, these screen tech differences do not affect even a majority of our population (though I do acknowledge that there's evidently a boom, like 0.1%->1% or 0.5%->5% etc).

However, would like to ask that r0ach only bring up (new post/reply post) eyestrain topic only in the Display Comfort forum. Other forum members can mention it as a passing (e.g. as one of their many bullets for display-versus requirements etc) but pre-emptively replying with eyestrain topics (in this type of manner) outside the Display Comfort forum, is considered a thread-derailment which is a rule violation.

[r0ach]

I just wanted to inform you that some of our forum members have contacted me to complain about this behavior of your derailing forum threads on Blur Busters Forums with excessive mentions of eyestrain topics (happened several times)

Indeed, while eyestrain topics are now a bigger concern than they used to be, these screen tech differences do not affect even a majority of our population (though I do acknowledge that there's evidently a boom, like 0.1%->1% or 0.5%->5%

Say what? I haven’t even made that many comments on the subject while there are people on the forum with 20x as many posts about the subject as me. Who exactly is complaining? LG monitor reps? The cat is already out of the bag on things like nano IPS so going after me for damage control isn’t going to do anything.

Unless they’re afraid that I started putting 2+2 together that thinner film LTPS type panels are probably a part of the problem and they don’t want to spend a billion dollars retooling their manufacturing plant back to earlier a-SI designs. Trying to get rid of me might help stall that problem for a day or two (not that I wouldn’t put that information out all over other places anyway) but the avalanche of Amazon returns alone will eventually force them to concede.

Then we have the fact that even with so many people disliking things like nano IPS they’ve managed to somehow rig their amazon scores up to 4.5/5 stars while OLED scores for both LG’s own screen and Corsair’s unit (which might be slightly better) are only 4/5 stars. They have likely already lost the battle on both the nano IPS field AND the OLED field. No, I do not believe Samsung’s OLED really changes this dynamic much if at all. OLED will likely be a niche or temporary market and not some kind of full replacement of traditional LCD’s, leaving both Samsung and LG with lots of malinvestment.

Instead of trying to censor what I’m saying (such as DSC being a negative and not a positive which will get out anyway), perhaps you and THEY should be listening to me instead since it’s inevitable where this tide is going. Yes, I already remember you said DSC slug cursor negatives are monitor implementation specific. I just don’t believe it’s actually true since the behavior is 4 out of 4 identical on each DSC monitor I’ve used. If it is monitor specific, it doesn’t matter a whole lot if everyone gets it wrong.

It’s just not possible for you or LG or Samsung and their giant malinvestments to force people to use products like OLED or 360hz DSC that they see as being worse or unusable than previous ones. Everyone already knew if they liked OLEDs or not before these 27” screens were created, so it was never possible these things were going to take over as the norm in the first place. While some of you consider this heresy, the stuff I’m typing in this post will be the norm and standard popular opinion several years from now when the dust settles. There’s no valid path forward in these cell phone LTPS ultra-thin films or in OLED besides some people’s niche use.