Blur Busters Forums

isn't it using the exact same panel as the 2546S?

Just curious, anyone know the difference between DyAc and DyAc+?

The Zowie rep told me that Dyac+ is the same thing as Dyac, it's just tuned for the newer panel. I don't know why they felt they needed to give it a different name, but it is the same thing as Dyac on the XL2546, just tuned for the panel in the XL2546S/K.

Can anyone who owns the XL2546K check if you have these issues ?

https://streamable.com/nw34iu

https://streamable.com/pe3rko

Taken from https://old.reddit.com/r/BenQ/comments/ ... play_port/

ye that's BenQ alright

I found this(https://youtu.be/LikiFdmRIBM?t=428) response time chart of the XL2546K in a japanese PG259QN review, apparently it goes as low as 1.29ms with what I guess is AMA Premium.

But this is not the end.
For the sake of using the exact same reviewer measuring G2G with the same method (since we all know sites like Rtings/Tftcentral/.. measure G2G differently) compare these two reviews, XL2546k vs XL2546s from a notorious korean reviewer:

XL2546K: http://playwares.com/dpreview/57942615#

XL2546S: http://playwares.com/index.php?_filter= ... l=57798881#

AMA High on the XL2546S is 2.125ms vs 1.165ms from the -K version.
AMA Premium on the XL2546S is 1.545ms vs 1.145ms from the -K version.

As you can see there isn't basically any difference between High or Premium on the -K version in terms of G2G:

In addition, there is no ghosting (reverse afterimage) phenomenon that can be issued to fast-moving images in the entire AMA setting, so it will be effective for configuring the optimal gaming environment in the environment where Premium is the highest level

but Zowie said that both monitors are using the exact same panel, can a reduction of respectively 1ms on High and 0.4ms on Premium be justified just by panel tuning? Are the -K panels the same panels but with better bins?

The improvements in G2G are a quantifiable difference, which at first was making me think that the new Zowie was actually using a newer panel, which was the opposite of what Zowie Support said however WBW and GBG stayed the exact same in the two models so I'm more prone to believe that Zowie only came up with a more refined Overdrive tuning.

We need some western reviewers with response time and input lag measurements. If I hear Linus say how he can't feel any lag one more time I'm gonna scream.

axaro1 wrote: ↑

21 Oct 2020, 16:41

I found this(https://youtu.be/LikiFdmRIBM?t=428) response time chart of the XL2546K in a japanese PG259QN review, apparently it goes as low as 1.29ms with what I guess is AMA Premium.

But this is not the end.
For the sake of using the exact same reviewer measuring G2G with the same method (since we all know sites like Rtings/Tftcentral/.. measure G2G differently) compare these two reviews, XL2546k vs XL2546s from a notorious korean reviewer:

XL2546K: http://playwares.com/dpreview/57942615#

XL2546S: http://playwares.com/index.php?_filter= ... l=57798881#

AMA High on the XL2546S is 2.125ms vs 1.165ms from the -K version.
AMA Premium on the XL2546S is 1.545ms vs 1.145ms from the -K version.

As you can see there isn't basically any difference between High or Premium on the -K version in terms of G2G:

In addition, there is no ghosting (reverse afterimage) phenomenon that can be issued to fast-moving images in the entire AMA setting, so it will be effective for configuring the optimal gaming environment in the environment where Premium is the highest level

but Zowie said that both monitors are using the exact same panel, can a reduction of respectively 1ms on High and 0.4ms on Premium be justified just by panel tuning? Are the -K panels the same panels but with better bins?

The improvements in G2G are a quantifiable difference, which at first was making me think that the new Zowie was actually using a newer panel, which was the opposite of what Zowie Support said however WBW and GBG stayed the exact same in the two models so I'm more prone to believe that Zowie only came up with a more refined Overdrive tuning.

Thank you for this. I still cant believe we cant get exact numbers....horrifying

axaro1 wrote: ↑

21 Oct 2020, 16:41

can a reduction of respectively 1ms on High and 0.4ms on Premium be justified just by panel tuning? Are the -K panels the same panels but with better bins?

It's possible. I've seen GtG improve by >50% on the same panel with simple tuning stuff before. It depends on how bad it was before, and how much headroom to improve there is. Improved TCON/scalers might also be used even if the panel is identical; and the TCON might have cleaner LCD-driving voltages that work GtG slightly better. Overdrive lookup tables may be re-tuned for better GtG with less overshoot.

Conan wrote: ↑

22 Oct 2020, 15:23

Thank you for this. I still cant believe we cant get exact numbers....horrifying

It's not obvious to others, but it's obvious to me and easily explainable. See The Complexity of Testing GtG. Even a 1-degree temperature difference can cause major GtG differences.

Even a 72-hour break-in can speed up GtG slightly after a monitor was shipped. Etc. Etc. GtG tends to stabilize at their fullest speeds once fully warmed up and all pressure spots are gone (e.g. like pressing a finger on the LCD; bad shipping boxes & too-tight bezels or too-tight VESA mounts can create pressure spots). Pressure spots have vastly different GtG...

Remember forgetting a cellphone or wristwatch LCD in a frozen car (below 0F or -20C) in the middle of a winter (if you live in a cold country)? The pixel response GtG become about 1 second (1000ms GtG) on nearly all LCDs when frozen. But even at near-room-temperatures, a 1-degree temperature difference can change GtG of some colors by hundreds of microseconds.

Those numbers after the decimal points might as well sometimes be random numbers sometimes; but as panels start getting faster and testing procedures become better (a mandatory burn-in period for all incoming monitor shipments like running 24h for a few days, then make sure 30min+ warmup before testing GtG in an exactly-20C temp room), the GtG heatmapping work becomes more and more accurate, more consistent, and more easy to compare across tests.

Panel lottery unfortunately produces major GtG differences after the decimal point (hundred-microsecond timescales).

Read The Complexity of Testing GtG and weep. 'Nuff said.

Manual +rep to Chief again.