Experience & Opinion: 240hz displays are blurry

[lexlazootin]

240hz, non-strobed...

Un docced pic: https://i.imgur.com/KA9iai0.jpg
I didn't want to show the whole thing because i knew yehaw jump to conclusions about why the rest of the picture has artifacting and assume that 240hz is shit because he loves to jump to conclusions about stuff he doesn't understand.

but he instead he instantly assumed i was trying to fool him with test speeds even though you can see the after glow of the previous alien in the photo...

Btw the only reason the rest of it is blurred because of the sensor scan speed. Nothing else, this has zero to do with the panel, i can take a photo of the bottom one as well that looks just fine...

https://i.imgur.com/LcZi6Lk.jpg

[yehaw]

but he instead he instantly assumed i was trying to fool him with test speeds even though you can see the after glow of the previous alien in the photo...

Well, the photo looked to good to be true for 240hz, even the admin chief asked if it was strobed! If that's what your 240hz looks like without any slow-mo tricks or anything, I think you have a great monitor. I'm unsure if the top and bottom are issues with the camera, or the monitor though (as they look similar to some issues I've been describing). I also know overdrive can look better/worse on different shades of color, as well as inversion, so it's hard to judge. Hopefully the Acer I get tonight looks that good without the camera flaws you claim.

I also personally think something isn't adding up with the photos you've shared, as we can easily compare the 144hz photo you also uploaded earlier to this new 240hz photo. Somehow your 144hz photo shared has just as clean motion as 240hz? That's not possible.
Unless you have some new tech that bypasses blur persistence! You're doing something to alter the outcome of the photos, or taking the photo wrong. There is blur at 144hz and 240hz, but somehow your photos have none. But the great part about this, we can now see and compare overdrive issues I've detailed earlier in this thread between current gen 240hz and older gen 144hz. It should very easy now to see the overdrive flaws on 240hz:

144hz benq photo shared by lex:


240hz acer photo shared by lex:

[lexlazootin]

"top and bottom are issues with the camera, or the monitor though (as they look similar to some issues I've been describing)."

This is exactly my point, it's very easy to get a bad photo that looks bad. Unless the photo is from one of the BlurBuster guys or TFTcentral and you've read the information regarding the photo i just would not take it as evidence of anything. To many people out there have no idea what they are doing and will incorrectly assume thing based on what they find. Pretty much every youtube review I've seen on a monitor has been garbage and incorrect in so many ways.

"I also know overdrive can look better/worse on different shades of color, as well as inversion"

I heard you talking about pixel inversion and darzo is right, it's not what you think it is. It doesn't do anything for blur. Don't make assumptions.

"so it's hard to tell if it's camera issue or monitor."

It's a camera thing, i said that like 3 times. i could take the photo sideways and that problem would not be there.

"I also think something isn't adding up with the photos you've shared"

Please tell me, i would love to hear.

"144hz benq photo shared by lex:"

That would actually be a horrible title, the photo i shared was from the G-Sync chip. the Benq chip does a horrible job at OD and the blur is awful. you can see my comparison here: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2795

If you want my thoughts on the monitor on the Acer 240hz G-Sync: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3490&hilit=i+just+got+my+acer+240hz

[yehaw]

"
I heard you talking about pixel inversion and darzo is right, it's not what you think it is. It doesn't do anything for blur. Don't make assumptions.

I'm not making assumptions:

Pixel inversion simulates image noise usually generated by light intensity variations, sensor sensitivity and image thresholding.

Pixel inversion introduces noise. Image noise + motion and you have a blurrier image, opposed to an image with zero noise. To me, everything looked blurrier, so that's the term I used. If not, what else would you call it then, so I can refer to it correctly?

And the photos you've shared are very inaccurate, to the point you had us thinking they were strobed. They're way to clear, as you've demonstrated your 144hz photo looks the same as 240hz in terms of blur. There is a limitation with these panels called blur persistance and it's not physically possible that what you've shown is accurate.

The only way to remove blur like your photos show, is to have a CRT, DyAc, Lightboost, ULMB, etc. So either you altered the way you capture the photos to not show the blur, or you took the photos wrong. It's a hard task, so I appreciate your effort.

[open]

To be clear, pixel inversion is describing how monitors flip the electric polarity of each pixel in order to prevent damage that would happen if the polarity was constant over a long period. There will be subtle differences in intensity depending on the voltage and the differences will show up in the inversion pattern used by the pixel inversion method. Usually this is very VERY subtle on most monitors and in my experience I have never been able to see it normally or using pixel inversion pattern test images on any of my monitors in the past 5 years. It would be possible for it to be a component of general blurring however compared to pixel response and sample and hold based bluring it would probably account for less than 5% of the total effect if even that.

No doubt when you say pixel inversion you are talking about the inversion pattern used by 6 bit frc. 6 bit frc allows high refresh monitors to use 6 bit pannels and reproduce 8 bit color by quickly alternating between 6 bit values. The alternation would happen over 4 frames so wost case it would be a 60hz fluctuation in color that would at worst case be about 1/64 of the current contrast in brightness difference. In practice it can be noticeable to the human eye and could be considered as a factor in blur or distortion. However it as well is subtle and noticing it usually depends on specific conditions where the eye and brain can process visual information on the sub 1/60th of a second time scale. To most it will either not be noticed at all or will be so subtle when it is noticed that it doesnt bother them. I personally welcome having 8bit color on my 240hz as my old 144hz was a 6 bit pannel with no frc and the difference in having 4 times as many shades of red green and blue for a total of 64 times as many colors is a nice imporvement.

If you are using gsync and dropping to very low frame rates then the frc inversion pattern may be more noticeable however it is still introducing a relatively small amount of distortion compared to the motion blur we measure.

I think yehaw you are just seeing the difference in sample and hold blur due to faster pixel response times on the 240hz. It is as chief has said that with 24hz content, bluring is actually needed in in the content itself to hide the sample and hold blur from the human mind. With the 240hz you are actually seeing faster pixel response times and so when your framerate drops below 240fps you are able to notice sample and hold blur that you were not able to see before with slower pixel response. It's all part of the tech. Its just like if a 24hz movie used crystal clear images durring fast motion, you would be able to notice the individual frames more easily.

[darzo]

So now 240hz monitors have 1ms response times that are so much faster than the 1ms response times of other monitors that he's getting headaches and his 144hz monitor has dramatically less blur at lower fps than the 240hz one he had? Bad overdrives on all 240hz monitors, pixel inversion on all 240hz monitors, and now faster response times on all 240hz monitors? Seriously? Will he be in danger of developing a brain tumor when the next generation of 240hz monitors with even faster pixel response times are released? Here's an acute observation, this dude is in a tiny minority of people who see dramatically more blur on his 240hz monitor. He's the chosen one who has been afflicted with headaches in addition. No, chances are he's not actually special either. He probably just had a crappy monitor.

If he comes back tomorrow with vomit in his hair and a pounding migraine swearing that he can click through a Power Point presentation better than the Acer he bought displays 120 fps (and are we talking about wild swings in fps?) we can start digging deeper.

By the way, any of you tried playing at lower refresh rates on your monitors, whatever they are? Haven't you noticed that the motion is significantly worse than what you would get on an actually lower refresh rate monitor? Now, I don't think this applies, or at least not nearly as much, when you use g-sync and keep your monitor at its refresh rate, but it is something I've found quite strange. I've seen this on a 144hz monitor at 60hz. No way motion was that terrible on the 60hz monitor I used before.

[yehaw]

To be clear, pixel inversion is describing how monitors flip the electric polarity of each pixel in order to prevent damage that would happen if the polarity was constant over a long period. There will be subtle differences in intensity depending on the voltage and the differences will show up in the inversion pattern used by the pixel inversion method. Usually this is very VERY subtle on most monitors and in my experience I have never been able to see it normally or using pixel inversion pattern test images on any of my monitors in the past 5 years. It would be possible for it to be a component of general blurring however compared to pixel response and sample and hold based bluring it would probably account for less than 5% of the total effect if even that.

No doubt when you say pixel inversion you are talking about the inversion pattern used by 6 bit frc. 6 bit frc allows high refresh monitors to use 6 bit pannels and reproduce 8 bit color by quickly alternating between 6 bit values. The alternation would happen over 4 frames so wost case it would be a 60hz fluctuation in color that would at worst case be about 1/64 of the current contrast in brightness difference. In practice it can be noticeable to the human eye and could be considered as a factor in blur or distortion. However it as well is subtle and noticing it usually depends on specific conditions where the eye and brain can process visual information on the sub 1/60th of a second time scale. To most it will either not be noticed at all or will be so subtle when it is noticed that it doesnt bother them. I personally welcome having 8bit color on my 240hz as my old 144hz was a 6 bit pannel with no frc and the difference in having 4 times as many shades of red green and blue for a total of 64 times as many colors is a nice imporvement.

If you are using gsync and dropping to very low frame rates then the frc inversion pattern may be more noticeable however it is still introducing a relatively small amount of distortion compared to the motion blur we measure.

I think yehaw you are just seeing the difference in sample and hold blur due to faster pixel response times on the 240hz. It is as chief has said that with 24hz content, bluring is actually needed in in the content itself to hide the sample and hold blur from the human mind. With the 240hz you are actually seeing faster pixel response times and so when your framerate drops below 240fps you are able to notice sample and hold blur that you were not able to see before with slower pixel response. It's all part of the tech. Its just like if a 24hz movie used crystal clear images durring fast motion, you would be able to notice the individual frames more easily.

Thanks for the detailed explanation and making it easy to comprehend. Best post in the thread.

I ended up going to buy the Acer last night and asked the guy at the counter if I could test it before buying, but he said I had to buy it first, as they can't open new boxes. So I asked if I bought it, could I hook it up to a gaming computer and test it. He said sure and that he would help me. So I bought it and hooked it up to an Alienware gaming PC they had on display (it had a 1070 and yes I switched to 240hz). All it took was a few videos on YouTube of some fast moving sports highlights and I saw that same weird blurring. Anytime a fast camera pan happens, I can feel my eyes straining. Everything just looks blurrier to my eyes and I can spot it right away. Looks identical to what I saw on the Alienware.

Whatever the issue is exactly, I know there is something there introducing more blur than what I've grown accustom to using on my 144hz/165hz. After I saw the same weird blur on the Acer, I just asked the guy if I could get a refund and he obliged. Kind of dumb to make me buy it to test it on the floor, but whatever, it saves me a trip of having to return it (only a few stores had it, and they were all far away).

I'm going to stick with current-gen monitors for now and maybe try 240hz again in another year or two. It's just not worth the eye pain I experience for 2-3 games, when 99% of my PC use is at lower frame rates, including things like youtube videos, etc.

Also, doesn't 144/165hz have sample and hold too? If so, why doesn't it bother me like 240hz? I'm wondering if this is this something my eyes could adjust to over time, or would they always be sensitive to this sample and hold blur? I also read here, that higher refresh rate helps hide the sample and hold, yet I'm seeing it more with a higher refresh? Or maybe I see it more because the additional refresh rate makes it easier to see?

The only way to reduce motion blur caused by sample-and-hold, is to shorten the amount of time a frame is displayed for. This is accomplished by using extra refreshes (higher Hz) or via black periods between refreshes (flicker).

[lexlazootin]

Delusional.

Haven't you noticed that the motion is significantly worse than what you would get on an actually lower refresh rate monitor? Now, I don't think this applies, or at least not nearly as much, when you use g-sync and keep your monitor at its refresh rate, but it is something I've found quite strange. I've seen this on a 144hz monitor at 60hz. No way motion was that terrible on the 60hz monitor I used before.

Yea of course. If you're running at a higher refreshrate your screen will update with a new image a lot more causing the tear lines to go away soon after the screen is drawn. So with a 60hz you will find that when you get a screen tear it would stay on screen in the same place for 1/60 of a second, but on 1000hz for example, it will be there for a 1/1000 of a second and then get redrawn without the tear making it look a lot smoother.

A similar effect happens with fps above the maximum refreshrate.

[darzo]

Does panning a camera in a youtube video count?

What I was referring to in that quote is 60hz on a 144hz monitor vs 60hz on a 60hz monitor at the same fps. Same thing applies to a 240hz monitor going to 144hz.

[lexlazootin]

Does panning a camera in a youtube video count?

No, it's beyond ridiculous what he's trying to say.

"What I was referring to in that quote is 60hz on a 144hz monitor vs 60hz on a 60hz monitor at the same fps. Same thing applies to a 240hz monitor going to 144hz."

OD does tend to get faster if you use higher HZ, idk if it's because OD was configured with the highest HZ in mind or what, but i don't think it get worse then a 144hz. My 240 looks pretty identical to my 144hz at 144hz.