Blur Busters Forums

Who you gonna call? The Blur Busters! For Everything Better Than 60Hz™ Skip to content

XL2546 vs. LG 27GK750F-B vs. xg248q and a few questions !

Everything about displays and monitors. 120Hz, 144Hz, 240Hz, 4K, 1440p, input lag, display shopping, monitor purchase decisions, compare, versus, debate, and more. Questions? Just ask!

Re: XL2546 vs. LG 27GK750F-B vs. xg248q and a few questions

Postby Notty_PT » 12 Jan 2019, 04:07

hkngo007 wrote:
Notty_PT wrote:1080p on 27 inches is bad imo. And as I told you, Asus XG248Q is the only monitor right now with a native 240hz panel. You should not consider a first gen 240hz screen over Asus XG24 unless you really want a bigger size.


Can you explain what you mean when you say the xg248q is the only monitor right now with a "native 240hz panel"?


I was under the impression that all 240hz monitors on the market are "natively 240hz" so when i interpret what you've said, it makes me think you are saying all the other 240hz monitors are inferior and are instead 144hz panels (or anything below 240hz) but overclocked to 240hz (similar to how monitors like pg279q are natively 144hz but overclocked to 165hz).

I am pretty sure you didn't mean this, since recently you also quoted a good monitor/input lag review website, Rtings.com and also the XL2540 monitor (240hz) that they also reviewed (https://www.rtings.com/monitor/reviews/ ... wie-xl2540), where in that review it certainly describes the panel as having a native refresh rate of 240hz (under the "Motion" and "Refresh Rate" headings)

lol So what did you mean by xg248q is the only native 240hz panel\


Those panels are 180hz and were factory overclocked to 240hz. Thats why they have problems. They still deliver less input lag than 144hz of course, mainly due to persistence (4ms)
Notty_PT
 
Posts: 247
Joined: 09 Aug 2017, 02:50

Re: XL2546 vs. LG 27GK750F-B vs. xg248q and a few questions

Postby hkngo007 » 12 Jan 2019, 06:02

Notty_PT wrote:Those panels are 180hz and were factory overclocked to 240hz. Thats why they have problems. They still deliver less input lag than 144hz of course, mainly due to persistence (4ms)


Wow that is strange, if that is true it does make me question why those all those reviewers and manufacturers are advertising/listing as native 240hz, that would be false advertising for sure.

It's the first time i heard those 240hz monitors are native 180hz, where did you get this information. Do you work in the panel industry or something and in the know? :o


Also the persistence thing, i must admit i don't really know much about that lol i thoguht it was to do with motion blur than input lag, i will have to read more into persistence.

I did however comment to one of your posts in another thread about input lag of majority of 240hz monitors being more than that of 144hz panel viewtopic.php?f=2&t=4426 would love your response in that thread, so much to learn.


Chief or RealNC able to comment about all 240hz monitors (except the xg248q that Notty claims as 240hz native) being 180hz oc'd to 240hz? :lol:
hkngo007
 
Posts: 10
Joined: 28 Nov 2017, 01:40

Re: XL2546 vs. LG 27GK750F-B vs. xg248q and a few questions

Postby Mroverst » 16 Jan 2019, 02:48

hkngo007 wrote:
Notty_PT wrote:Those panels are 180hz and were factory overclocked to 240hz. Thats why they have problems. They still deliver less input lag than 144hz of course, mainly due to persistence (4ms)


Wow that is strange, if that is true it does make me question why those all those reviewers and manufacturers are advertising/listing as native 240hz, that would be false advertising for sure.

It's the first time i heard those 240hz monitors are native 180hz, where did you get this information. Do you work in the panel industry or something and in the know? :o


Also the persistence thing, i must admit i don't really know much about that lol i thoguht it was to do with motion blur than input lag, i will have to read more into persistence.

I did however comment to one of your posts in another thread about input lag of majority of 240hz monitors being more than that of 144hz panel viewtopic.php?f=2&t=4426 would love your response in that thread, so much to learn.


Chief or RealNC able to comment about all 240hz monitors (except the xg248q that Notty claims as 240hz native) being 180hz oc'd to 240hz? :lol:



Someone has to chime in. I’ve searched up and down the web and I can’t find any info to support this claim.
Mroverst
 
Posts: 3
Joined: 04 Jan 2019, 09:34

Re: XL2546 vs. LG 27GK750F-B vs. xg248q and a few questions

Postby heckenjoni » 16 Jan 2019, 08:10

no wonder he never answerd, like almost everything he wrote is wrong lol. The panel is NOT from AUO, its a 200hz panel oc'd to 240hz. it uses this innoluc panel https://www.twscreen.com/lcdpanel/20194 ... -LCD-Panel
heckenjoni
 
Posts: 14
Joined: 21 Apr 2018, 16:04

Re: XL2546 vs. LG 27GK750F-B vs. xg248q and a few questions

Postby pox02 » 16 Jan 2019, 18:12

heckenjoni wrote:no wonder he never answerd, like almost everything he wrote is wrong lol. The panel is NOT from AUO, its a 200hz panel oc'd to 240hz. it uses this innoluc panel https://www.twscreen.com/lcdpanel/20194 ... -LCD-Panel


now i understand why its feels slower then aw2518hf

https://www.twscreen.com/lcdpanel/7966/ ... -LCD-Panel
monitors xg248q aw2518hf 27GK750F-B pg248q xg240r lg w2363d-pf xb270hu
pox02
 
Posts: 52
Joined: 28 Sep 2018, 06:04

Re: XL2546 vs. LG 27GK750F-B vs. xg248q and a few questions

Postby Mroverst » 16 Jan 2019, 21:48

pox02 wrote:
heckenjoni wrote:no wonder he never answerd, like almost everything he wrote is wrong lol. The panel is NOT from AUO, its a 200hz panel oc'd to 240hz. it uses this innoluc panel https://www.twscreen.com/lcdpanel/20194 ... -LCD-Panel


now i understand why its feels slower then aw2518hf

https://www.twscreen.com/lcdpanel/7966/ ... -LCD-Panel



I think i might have missed something. But, what......?

Which monitor slower than the aw2518hf? In such a detail oriented thread im seeing the vague responses.
Mroverst
 
Posts: 3
Joined: 04 Jan 2019, 09:34

Re: XL2546 vs. LG 27GK750F-B vs. xg248q and a few questions

Postby Notty_PT » 17 Jan 2019, 05:51

heckenjoni wrote:no wonder he never answerd, like almost everything he wrote is wrong lol. The panel is NOT from AUO, its a 200hz panel oc'd to 240hz. it uses this innoluc panel https://www.twscreen.com/lcdpanel/20194 ... -LCD-Panel


What are you on about dude? I never mentioned XG248q panel as being overclocked from 200hz, I mentioned the first gen 24,5 240hz panels.

The XG248q being the only native 240hz panel right now was firstly assumed by asus on their own website. Look up for xg248q website and read the "first native 240hz panel".

For someone saying that everything I wrote was wrong, you didnt seem to do a good job tbh.

Also, on Blur Busters website: https://www.blurbusters.com/new-240hz-a ... e-monitor/

Ask Chief, because he was the one writing this article (and he is right ofc, but considering you dismiss what I say).

the panel is optimized for 240 Hz operation unlike the 24.5″ panels. The 24.5″ panels were not originally manufactured with 240 Hz in mind and had to be tuned by monitor manufacturers to 240 Hz operation



pox02 wrote:
now i understand why its feels slower then aw2518hf

https://www.twscreen.com/lcdpanel/7966/ ... -LCD-Panel


It doesnt feel slower than AW2518HF at all! I have that Dell model and it is slower than Asus XG248q in every aspect. Input lag, pixel response time, worse overshoot etc. I told you this before, if your Asus is bad on that department just RMA it. Asus overdrive is the best across all 240hz monitors I tried.
Notty_PT
 
Posts: 247
Joined: 09 Aug 2017, 02:50

Re: XL2546 vs. LG 27GK750F-B vs. xg248q and a few questions

Postby heckenjoni » 17 Jan 2019, 19:48

sorry if i sounded harsh ... (english is not my native language) and i did not re-read what you have written, but i did read "It is way faster than the dell so idk why you saying that." do you have something to proof this or does it just feel faster / more reponsive ? and yeah you did say "Is the only native 240hz monitor. Nothing else to add." and again thats simply wrong .. its an overclocked 200hz panel. But i would love to hear if you had the same bad clouding/blb on your xg248q ? (mine was way worse then the 1440p ips panels)
heckenjoni
 
Posts: 14
Joined: 21 Apr 2018, 16:04

Re: XL2546 vs. LG 27GK750F-B vs. xg248q and a few questions

Postby Chief Blur Buster » 17 Jan 2019, 21:25

hkngo007 wrote:It's the first time i heard those 240hz monitors are native 180hz, where did you get this information. Do you work in the panel industry or something and in the know? :o

Well...

The truth is somewhere in between.

LCD pixels don't have a native refresh rate. Zis commandeered a 4K60 panel to be able to do 480Hz, an impressive 8:1 ratio above original specifications.

The limiting factor is the TCON, how much power you can put into the panel in such a short time period.

The electronics in the TCON (Timing CONtroller, the last circuit board thingy attached to the LCD panel via ribbon cable) may be rated for 150Hz, 180Hz, 200Hz, 240Hz, or whatever, but a monitor manufacturer sometimes replaces the TCON with a higher-Hz capable one.

The amount of power that can be injected into the LCD panel very quickly with the drivers on the edge of the LCD board, can often be the limiting factor for the LCD -- the briefer you refresh a pixel, the less reliably the LCD pixel behaves (ghosts more, transitions slower). So you may have fast pixel response at native Hz but very slow pixel response at overclocked Hz (more ghosting/smearing). Overdrive algorithms have to be amplified a little more during higher Hz or overclocking.

We don't always know which manufacturers replaces the TCON. But many do! NVIDIA often does for GSYNC (aka that "GSYNC module" is a custom-made TCON). Though that is becoming less necessary nowadays. So even if the panel originally had a 200Hz TCON, it's probably gone already, it's replaced by a native-240Hz GSYNC TCON. The LCD pixels themselves have no refresh rate built into them. Other times, there are modifications to the original TCON, or yes, even the original TCON is actually overclocked. (e.g. the 165Hz or 180Hz overclockables)

It's a continuum of degradation the faster you try to push LCD pixels, but I've seen 200Hz->240Hz panel modifications much higher quality than 60Hz LCD pixels. Often the endeavour of replacing a TCON isn't called (By manufacturers) an "overclocking" process. It gets nebulous/more complicated when you try to define what is overclocking, and what is not overclocking, in the era of panel-binning or chip-binning.

Even Intel does it, e.g. a 3Ghz-targetted chip may bin into 2.8Ghz, 3.0Ghz, 3.2Ghz, 3.4Ghz, and not even be called "overclocking" especially if the best-binned 3.4Ghz (metaphorically, it does it perfectly/stable as if it was not an overclock) does it more reliably than the worst-binned 2.8Ghz (metaphorically, unstably/problematically, as if it was overclocked at 2.8Ghz). So there's really a wide spectrum of overlap of how to define "overclocking" -- whether the manufacturers say it is or not -- and whether users say it is or not.

Panels are sometimes (not always) binned similarly, and sometimes panels are just manufactured as fast-GtG. That's why you have 1ms TN 60Hz panels....Many of them can do 144Hz with a custom replacement TCON without any overclock artifacts, but TCON modification is often more expensive than buying a new 144Hz monitor from scratch. Or to add new features like VRR -- Occasionally, TCON modification has happened like for the ASUS VG248QE GSYNC Upgrade Kit (now discontinued) that was available in 2013. But it's not for the faint of heart.

So reading the specs on Alibaba/Aliexpress-style supplier websites, isn't always a reliable indicator of what workarounds a manufacturer is doing. They often include a basic TCON that is sometimes/not always used when these panels are installed in gaming monitors.

And even the same panels can have different TCONs (e.g. TN 1080p 1ms 60Hz and TN 1080p 1ms 144Hz panels are often exactly the same LCD glass but with different TCON circuit). And there might be a 60Hz, 144Hz, 200Hz, 240Hz versions of the TCON attached to the same 1ms-capable TN panel. (Assuming the panel has enough headroom to be driven by any of them)

There exists a continuum of degradation. LCD color quality and black levels does degrade in general at higher refresh rates, so there's a continuum of degradations. The name of the game is to try to use panels that have almost unnoticeable degradation when increasing refresh rate up to a certain point, and to make good TCONs to make sure that does properly happen. But there's only so much electric current you can push into those grid microwires quickly enough in brief pulses at high-Hz. The briefer you try to refresh LCD pixels, the less accurate they become. You start hitting the edges of panel engineering limitations such as pixel transistor specifications and microwire resistance. The pixels of the active matrix switch less accurately at higher Hz, and other inconsistencies appear (such as differences in resistances of all the different microwires) creating artifacts such as poor contrast, ghosting artifacts, or splotchy blacks. And deciding what thresholds to call "overclocking" or not, can be nebulous.

LCD (Liquid Crystal Display) being analog molecules that block light, and these molecules have a momentum that fights against being faster pixel response. So there is just a slowly-degrading tradeoff effect the higher Hz you go. Molecules don't have the refresh rate. It's not like "You go above "###" Hz and the panel suddenly stops working" (that's the TCON or driver electronics that's suddenly failing, you can always upgrade those). There's always degradation at higher Hz. It may be a 1%->2%->3%->5%->10%->20%->50% degradation curve the more you step up Hz in steps. There's often also electronics circuits built into the panel glass edge (e.g. row-driving electronics that go between TCON and the pixels), which can provide another sudden-failure avenue. Sometimes some unexpected headroom occurs -- like the 60Hz laptop that overclocked to 180Hz. It varies from panel glass to panel glass. And the curves changes depending on the panel you attach the TCON too. Sometimes it's so tiny it's not noticeable (e.g. some panels might have a tiny 1% degradation for doubling Hz from 60Hz to 120Hz). Even binning is a big problem. Does one consider a 10% degradation as an overclock behavior, or a 25% degradation as an overclock behavior, etc. And things like "What does 10% degradation" mean? (contrast ratio loss? uniformity loss? How do you define a cutoff threshold for degradation, via a measuring device, etc). In many cases, the complexity of binning LCD panels simply is not done, and you just have a single panel that meets specs, then attach increasingly expensive TCON's (cheaper 60Hz TCON or more expensive 144Hz TCON) to the same panelglass, to save the costs of binning labour.

So it is useless to do the polarized Yes/No "Overclocked/Not" nitpicking, it's not that simple.

So, again... The Truth is somewhere in between.
LCD pixels have no native "refresh rate" in them....
Head of Blur Busters - BlurBusters.com | TestUFO.com | Follow @BlurBusters on Twitter

       To support Blur Busters:
       • Official List of Best Gaming Monitors
       • List of G-SYNC Monitors
       • List of FreeSync Monitors
       • List of Ultrawide Monitors
User avatar
Chief Blur Buster
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5740
Joined: 05 Dec 2013, 15:44

Re: XL2546 vs. LG 27GK750F-B vs. xg248q and a few questions

Postby Notty_PT » 18 Jan 2019, 09:05

heckenjoni wrote:sorry if i sounded harsh ... (english is not my native language) and i did not re-read what you have written, but i did read "It is way faster than the dell so idk why you saying that." do you have something to proof this or does it just feel faster / more reponsive ? and yeah you did say "Is the only native 240hz monitor. Nothing else to add." and again thats simply wrong .. its an overclocked 200hz panel. But i would love to hear if you had the same bad clouding/blb on your xg248q ? (mine was way worse then the 1440p ips panels)


I talked about that with other members on the Asus XG248Q thread. This is my panel:

Image

This is other users panels:

Image Image

As I said on that thread, if you get bad panels just return it. My panel doesn´t have more clouding than any other TN I had and have around here. Asus Quality Control is one of the worst in the industry, but not every panel will be bad and we can´t judge a monitor model because of one bad unit. With asus, the chances of having a bad unit are big on any model. Asus PG278Q for 800€ also has bad and good units.

Also, as I had several others 240hz monitors I can comment on the response time and input lag. I don´t have way to measure it. But I´m no asus fanboy or any brand fanboy. My Asus XG248Q is faster than any 240hz monitor I ever used, including AW2518HF and PG258Q. It doesn´t show overshoot on bright colours like those first gen 240hz monitors; the input lag is way lower at any refresh rate (from 60hz, 144hz, 240hz) and the overdrive is superior in every way. The only worse aspect is the image quality, specifically contrast and colours. They are rubbish like I mentioned on the XG248Q thread. Is a pure gaming monitor, the fastest I ever used in my life and the closest thing to CRT I ever had.
Notty_PT
 
Posts: 247
Joined: 09 Aug 2017, 02:50

PreviousNext

Return to General — Displays, Graphics & More

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests