ULMB 2 Released

[hart]

wonder if this will be affordable anytime soon

right now the only display available in europe is the Asus PG27AQN and costs around 1500€

[daviddave1]

wonder if this will be affordable anytime soon

right now the only display available in europe is the Asus PG27AQN and costs around 1500€

In the Netherlands the price just went down to 1223 euro. I think others euro countrys will follow soon.

https://tweakers.net/pricewatch/1818844 ... zwart.html

[hart]

In the Netherlands the price just went down to 1223 euro. I think others euro countrys will follow soon.

https://tweakers.net/pricewatch/1818844 ... zwart.html

still pretty expensive, I mean, the LG oled can be bought for 750.

Asking 500€ more is still on the super high price side, 850? I could swallow the pride, but I wouldn't go much far than that. ulmb2 is amazing, but at the end of the day, is still a super mediocre ips pannel.

[jorimt]

but at the end of the day, is still a super mediocre ips pannel.

It's the only 1440p IPS panel currently in existence that allows 360Hz operation with acceptable GtG performance, that's why it's expensive (it also contains a G-SYNC module, which increases price as well). All first-gen tech is more expensive than not.

It's also part of the reason why it's a "super mediocre ips panel;" compromises have to be made to reach the performance it's aiming for; if there were a 360Hz 27" OLED with no VRR flicker, LCD-level text rendering, ULMB 2, and virtually zero risk of permanent burn-in for continual productivity use at a similar price, I'd certainly consider that instead, but there isn't...yet.

That said, 1200 - 1500€ is definitely less reasonable than what it is currently available for here in the USA at ~$1049.00 (sans shipping costs and taxes, which varies by state).

[JediBrysen]

I’ll definitely look into just buying some cheap single slot nvidia card with dp1.4 support and has support for the latest drivers

If you do the 2-GPU method, make sure you configure your AMD GPU as primary rendering GPU, and NVIDIA output as the primary video output (monitor #1). Not all games will work properly this way, but this is the most reliable cross-GPU method.

Windows 11 -> Settings -> System -> Display -> Graphics -> find your game app -> GPU Preference

Select your AMD GPU, even when your NVIDIA GPU is the video output for Monitor #1 (primary monitor).

Not all software will properly work with this, but this is how you do cross-GPU operations. The rendered framebuffer is essentially composited to the other GPU (by Windows over the PCIe bus). You can do weird things like having a 3D graphics window rendered by one GPU, can overlap two GPUs outputs (e.g. part of window is on an AMD GPU, and part of window is on NVIDIA GPU), when dragging windows on a multimonitor system.

Now that being said, some games will work fine doing cross-GPU with full screen exclusive mode, but cross-GPU operations seem more reliable with windowed or borderless windowed, since Windows is doing the compositing (displaying render results through the Windows compositor). That being said, different-Hz multi-monitor has some known stutter issues (Windows compositor isn't multi-Hz), so you may want to make sure you're not displaying anything (no windows, no animations, etc) on the secondary monitor while you're playing.

its just a hassle to have to have nvidia just for it to work properly… but yeah setting dual gpu shouldnt be an issue. just annoying to have two cards especially when i barley have room in my case
half my z790 apex slots are taken up by fans lol

[frunction]

I see in the monitors unboxed video the higher overdrive settings can be used now, but I didn't quite get why they are using PWM 50 instead of brighter.

[bumbeen]

I see in the monitors unboxed video the higher overdrive settings can be used now, but I didn't quite get why they are using PWM 50 instead of brighter.

lower pulse width improves motion clarity because it gives more time for the pixels to change while the backlight is turned off

[CYCLOPSAG]

I see in the monitors unboxed video the higher overdrive settings can be used now, but I didn't quite get why they are using PWM 50 instead of brighter.

lower pulse width improves motion clarity because it gives more time for the pixels to change while the backlight is turned off

pulse width.png (4.74 MiB) Viewed 4810 times

difference between pulse 0-100 is not really that noticeable.

Pulse 10 might look the best if u zoom in closely, but the brightness is not usable

[jorimt]

I see in the monitors unboxed video the higher overdrive settings can be used now, but I didn't quite get why they are using PWM 50 instead of brighter.

lower pulse width improves motion clarity because it gives more time for the pixels to change while the backlight is turned off

pulse width.png

difference between pulse 0-100 is not really that noticeable.

Pulse 10 might look the best if u zoom in closely, but the brightness is not usable

Did they provide the pps (pixels per second) they used for those captures? Because PW differences will typically only be apparent at much higher panning speeds.

[bumbeen]

I see in the monitors unboxed video the higher overdrive settings can be used now, but I didn't quite get why they are using PWM 50 instead of brighter.

lower pulse width improves motion clarity because it gives more time for the pixels to change while the backlight is turned off

pulse width.png

difference between pulse 0-100 is not really that noticeable.

Pulse 10 might look the best if u zoom in closely, but the brightness is not usable

The image you posted is accurate from what I can see looking at it with my eyes. Lowering the pulse width on pg27aqn makes literally zero difference at 360hz and at 240hz. Edit: I am incorrect about 240hz. At 240hz, there is a leading edge ghost at the top of the screen that vanishes when lowering the pulse width to 70%. It does nothing to help the trailing ghost of course, but that seems to show that the pulse width is only shortening it from the end and does not move the start point at all One would expect that they would cut the length of pulse width off the front end, delaying the flash until later in the frame display, but it appears the start of the flash remains fixed with the length decreasing as the setting is changed.

When the crosstalk becomes visible at 360hz is about 1/3rd of the way down the screen. The top of the screen looks practically perfect at any pulse width, and I would think lowering pulse width would at least move the point where crosstalk becomes visible at least one row of UFOs down the screen, but it doesn't, it makes zero difference if using 10% or 100%.

At the very bottom of the screen, it looks like the ufo is an entire frame behind the top of the screen. And about 75%-80% of the way to the bottom is where I get two UFOs of equal intensity. The positions of these artifacts do not change at all by altering pulse width. I wonder if this is intentional? I would be curious to see if there's any difference on the other ULMB 2 displays?

At 240hz, the UFO is at least the same UFO all the way down, there's just more and more of the prior UFO frame showing up the further down you go. At least there is the tiny improvement at the top of the screen by lowering it to 70%.

I think I will only be using the monitor at 240hz at this point unless they update the strobe timing in a later firmware update. Starting to think my XG27AQM was a better monitor after all even with the horrible OSD issues it has.

I will be hammering Asus and Nvidia support about this on the daily until they get it sorted. They should *at least* be able to get some of this mess sorted out.

edit: multiple edits