Asus XG258 Questionable Overdrive

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!
Notty_PT
Posts: 481
Joined: 09 Aug 2017, 02:50

Re: Asus XG258 Questionable Overdrive

Post by Notty_PT » 07 Jun 2019, 17:22

Chief Blur Buster wrote:
MatrixQW wrote:I don't understand Notty. He doesn't accept VG258QR overdrive but accepts XG258Q overdrive.
It's often surprising even to myself -- how sensitive my readers are! I'm perfectly fine with lots of artifacts but picky with others.

But it's understandable, and I am capable of understanding -- that's our famously educational Blur Busters popular science to explain to my readers why.

I know people who are particularly sensitive to overdrive differences between monitors. The image, created with help by Jorim, is one of my favourite images for demonstrating ghosting differences of overdrive settings (now in the Pixel Response FAQ). Captured via pursuiting camera to accurately capture motion blur:

Image

Now take a closer look at "Normal" setting which many people claim is "perfect" for them. Look closer. It's still not perfect.

Image

Most are okay with this slight asymmetry. Heck, I'm even okay (as founder of Blur Busters). It's not blatant. But it's not perfect.

Look at the left and right trailing edges -- they're not perfectly symmetrical! Even "Normal" does not have perfect symmetry between the leading/trailing edges. Look at the slight blue tinge at left and the slight green tinge at right edge of the UFO dome. This is a great example of 1ms-human-visibility; since 1ms translates to 1 pixel per 1000 pixels/second. So those discolored pixels from imperfect 1ms, is still human visible. The newer 0.5ms displays helps reduce this even further if you're *that* picky about ghosting.

Now, the problem is that manufacturer claims often appears fluffed -- but they're not fake claims, but are trunctated via an based on a imperfect measurement standard established as a technological compromise. GtG response time is based on an VESA 10%-to-90% cutoff standard, so the ghosting from below-10% and above-90% is still human-visible -- like the faint ghost to the right of the yellow dome.

Nontheless, 1ms imperfections is human visible in this photo! Green tinge versus blue tinge on left/right edge....

TestUFO motionspeed is intentionally standardized at 960 pixel per second for ease of pixel response analysis -- 960 being the closest motionspeed number to 1000 pixels/second that is divisible by common refresh rates 60, 120, 240. It makes it easy to judge the pixel response of a pursuit camera picture -- even for 1ms "Normal", you can see about maybe 4 or 5 pixelwidths of ghosting to the left of the yellow dome, most of it below the 10% threshold. You see about 1-2 obvious pixelwidths of discolored blurring (ghosting) and 3-to-4 faint pixelwidths of disclored blurring (ghosting). That 1ms GtG to 90% is still like at least 5ms GtG to 100%.

Nontheless, that out of the way, the bottom line is that 0.5ms GtG (not 0.5ms MPRT) claimed monitors will generally have even fainter ghosting than this. Some people are extremely sensitive to this.

Oh, and it gets more complex with variable refresh rate that does not have good overdrive. Sometimes you get bad ghosting only at certain frame rate ranges; it might be like "Extreme" at some frame rates and fading closer to "Normal" when framerates increase. The high priced NVIDIA G-SYNC module is designed exactly to try to avoid ghosting asymmetry during varying frame rates; as part of the price of the G-SYNC premium. That said, some FreeSync monitors are good, and pixel response sufficiently fast enough that it doesn't need overdrive help to remotely reach at least "Normal" quality. Disabling overdrive completely is often not an option, because even "Normal" (light overdrive) for many is so vastly superior to having no overdrive at all. But not everyone like even the slight discolorations at the arrows... ouch.

Also, the curve shapes are not the same. You can have very good 10%-to-90% GtG that completes the last 10% quickly or the last 10% slowly. Basically 1ms(10->90%) with 5ms(100%) or 50ms(100%) -- the shape of the curve matters a lot.

Image

Even what happens below 10% or above 90% (still human visible) might be slower or quicker in different models of exactly the same GtG 10%->90% -- a single number doesn't tell you the shape of the curve. And the curveshapes are sometimes totally different for totally different pixel-color pairs -- VA pixels have very interesting curve shape differences for dark colors than for bright colors. Ouch. No wonder a single number can be blamed as manufacturer fluff when it's merely trying to be an average that misses a lot of nuances.

It's not surprising that many people claim the manufacturer is lying about response time (that's often a bit over the line.... I'd say "I wish the industry would come up with better measuring standards instead"...). Pixel response is sometimes a big unmeasured problem, that is often left to others to measure, and no single site can ever go the comprehensive depth it so deserves -- since it ends up becoming a lot of "TL;DR" stuff of complexity. So the industry likes to use simpler single numbers when marketing.

Your vision is not the same as the next person. You might need eye glasses. You might not. You might see better in the dark than the other person. Or you might be color blind. (Or simply less sensitive to colors). The bottom line is that everyone sees slightly differently than the next individual. This goes for many kinds of display artifacts -- some see them blatantly well, others don't.

The ghosting may apparently be 10x more visible to the next person than the other. Even how it looks in a pursuit camera photograph -- may stand out more to another person than others. I've politely pointed arrows at the asymmetry -- it's subtle to some eyes but more visible to other eyes.

This relates to other kinds of sensitivities (temporal, spatial, colorspace, etc). Just like some are sensitive to tearing. Or sensitive to stutters. Or sensitive to bad viewing angles. Or sensitive to motion blur. Or sensitive to lag. Different people have different priorities in a monitor.

TL;DR: Pixel response, ghosting, coronas, GtG, MPRT, etc -- creates a huge Pandora Box of display topics that invites plenty of vigorous online debate, sometimes as vigorous as the historical "Human can't see 30fps vs 60fps" debates of yesteryear.

This is just masterclass. Thank you so much for this again Chief. Your knowledge is something astonishing and Im so happy you created this website and teach us everyday. Simply amazing!

karavanasam
Posts: 185
Joined: 16 Mar 2019, 14:41

Re: Asus XG258 Questionable Overdrive

Post by karavanasam » 08 Jun 2019, 02:25

Chief is always the best.:)

ogchampion
Posts: 18
Joined: 17 Mar 2019, 18:23

Re: Asus XG258 Questionable Overdrive

Post by ogchampion » 09 Jun 2019, 03:23

I'm torn about the XG258Q. It does offer objectively better performance metrics for me in Aim Lab over my 144hz monitors.

Wish I could find an acceptable trade off for the overdrive settings.

Observed in Test UFO with my sample;

OD level 3 gives very obvious colourful shadowy overshoot which I find quite distracting.

OD level 2 solves the overshoot problem but is too weak & introduces heavy 'powdery' trailing.

If only there was an OD 2.5 setting!

MatrixQW
Posts: 168
Joined: 07 Jan 2019, 10:01

Re: Asus XG258 Questionable Overdrive

Post by MatrixQW » 09 Jun 2019, 05:43

Chief knows how things works, we just see how things look.

My monitor looks better than when I first tried it.
I don't know what made the difference, maybe driver version, but this is what I did:

1. Unppluged network cable.
2. Installed a clean Windows 10 1709 VL Fall Creators. (You can now download 1903 from Microsoft).
3. Disabled automatic driver updates (advanced system settings / hardware tab).
4. Installed Nvidia 425.31 without GeForce Experience (custom installation: only controller and PhysX).

Ogchampion, it's a long shot but try to uninstall Nvidia driver completely at least, install latest and set brigthness 50, contrast 60, FreeSync 'on' with normal overdrive (don't know what value that is).

Notty_PT
Posts: 481
Joined: 09 Aug 2017, 02:50

Re: Asus XG258 Questionable Overdrive

Post by Notty_PT » 09 Jun 2019, 18:08

ogchampion wrote:I'm torn about the XG258Q. It does offer objectively better performance metrics for me in Aim Lab over my 144hz monitors.

Wish I could find an acceptable trade off for the overdrive settings.

Observed in Test UFO with my sample;

OD level 3 gives very obvious colourful shadowy overshoot which I find quite distracting.

OD level 2 solves the overshoot problem but is too weak & introduces heavy 'powdery' trailing.

If only there was an OD 2.5 setting!
My current config on the Asus XG258Q:

Cinema mode
Brightness 60 (depends on your room etc)
Contrast 50
Saturation 45
OD Level 3
No FreeSync/Gsync
No ELMB
Colour: Normal

Try this, I could hide a lot of overshoot with this config.

Imo the astonishing low input lag on this model makes it a must have for fast paced shooters players. All my records beaten dayvafter day and currently rocking 54% LG averagenon my stats amd recently had a 67% game.

Best competitive gaming monitor I used to date.

User avatar
Chief Blur Buster
Site Admin
Posts: 6471
Joined: 05 Dec 2013, 15:44

Re: Asus XG258 Questionable Overdrive

Post by Chief Blur Buster » 09 Jun 2019, 18:30

Notty_PT wrote:This is just masterclass. Thank you so much for this again Chief. Your knowledge is something astonishing and Im so happy you created this website and teach us everyday. Simply amazing!
karavanasam wrote:Chief is always the best.:)
MatrixQW wrote:Chief knows how things works, we just see how things look.
Thank you!
ogchampion wrote:If only there was an OD 2.5 setting!
We often wish we had a OD slider continuum -- like ability to adjust an overdrive slider. Sometimes it's available as an "Overdrive Gain" slider at the factory adjustment level (0x00 through 0xFF with 256 different levels of overdrive via hex-editing the firmware). But is not available as a DDC Command. If one wants to download Entech Taiwan SoftMCCS and attempt to hunt down the OD Gain setting to accomplish in-between overdrive settings.

Alternatives to hacking in-between overdrive setting is sometimes pulled off if you don't mind distortions to your color gamut (e.g. slight static color tint, full screen static loss of contrast, full screen static loss of color saturation, etc). Like those Notty_PT ajdustment settings.

Welcome to the Hoop-Jumping Olympics to goad a difficult-to-coax monitor to do exactly what we want to do. Manufacturers want to keep it easy, keep it to fewer settings, which is great, but sometimes creates maddening conundrums like these. We got Brightness 100% sliders today instead of a 5-step Brightness, but for my famously supremely picky readers -- that ain't gonna do.

At least, let's have an optinal "Airplane Cockpit Mode" for our mouse-controlled monitor OSDs and just let us adjust even more stuff -- like having an Overdrive 0%->100% continuum slider. (Hello Aorus and MSI, yoo hoo!)
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

Paft
Posts: 17
Joined: 03 Jun 2019, 14:03

Re: Asus XG258 Questionable Overdrive

Post by Paft » 10 Jun 2019, 12:46

Chief Blur Buster wrote:
Notty_PT wrote:This is just masterclass. Thank you so much for this again Chief. Your knowledge is something astonishing and Im so happy you created this website and teach us everyday. Simply amazing!
karavanasam wrote:Chief is always the best.:)
MatrixQW wrote:Chief knows how things works, we just see how things look.
Thank you!
ogchampion wrote:If only there was an OD 2.5 setting!
We often wish we had a OD slider continuum -- like ability to adjust an overdrive slider. Sometimes it's available as an "Overdrive Gain" slider at the factory adjustment level (0x00 through 0xFF with 256 different levels of overdrive via hex-editing the firmware). But is not available as a DDC Command. If one wants to download Entech Taiwan SoftMCCS and attempt to hunt down the OD Gain setting to accomplish in-between overdrive settings.

Alternatives to hacking in-between overdrive setting is sometimes pulled off if you don't mind distortions to your color gamut (e.g. slight static color tint, full screen static loss of contrast, full screen static loss of color saturation, etc). Like those Notty_PT ajdustment settings.

Welcome to the Hoop-Jumping Olympics to goad a difficult-to-coax monitor to do exactly what we want to do. Manufacturers want to keep it easy, keep it to fewer settings, which is great, but sometimes creates maddening conundrums like these. We got Brightness 100% sliders today instead of a 5-step Brightness, but for my famously supremely picky readers -- that ain't gonna do.

At least, let's have an optinal "Airplane Cockpit Mode" for our mouse-controlled monitor OSDs and just let us adjust even more stuff -- like having an Overdrive 0%->100% continuum slider. (Hello Aorus and MSI, yoo hoo!)
Gave those settings a test. Doesn't seem to make any difference, I wasn't really expecting it to ether. Do you not get any overshooting/ghosting at all on OD 3? I mean it's I can live with it on 3 but it's still very noticeable.

inx9r
Posts: 3
Joined: 10 Jun 2019, 06:54

Re: Asus XG258 Questionable Overdrive

Post by inx9r » 11 Jun 2019, 10:35

Hey Guys,

currently i'm using the Benq XL2546 for my daily game sessions but i would like to test out the XG258Q as well. After some research i also found the XG248Q on the asus page but couldn't find any differences on the both monitors, beside the size.

I can't really imagine that asus just built a 23,5" and a 24,5" monitor with the same feature, because the size difference is so small.

Does anyone have an idea which is better or if they're really the same?

oof_oof
Posts: 53
Joined: 12 May 2019, 03:22

Re: Asus XG258 Questionable Overdrive

Post by oof_oof » 11 Jun 2019, 12:16

Notty_PT answered that question already.

the 23.5" uses an innolux display and allows strobing up to 240hz and the 24.5 only allows strobbing up to 144hz.

apparently the 24 has better colors.

ogchampion
Posts: 18
Joined: 17 Mar 2019, 18:23

Re: Asus XG258 Questionable Overdrive

Post by ogchampion » 12 Jun 2019, 04:04

MatrixQW wrote:Chief knows how things works, we just see how things look.

My monitor looks better than when I first tried it.
I don't know what made the difference, maybe driver version, but this is what I did:

1. Unppluged network cable.
2. Installed a clean Windows 10 1709 VL Fall Creators. (You can now download 1903 from Microsoft).
3. Disabled automatic driver updates (advanced system settings / hardware tab).
4. Installed Nvidia 425.31 without GeForce Experience (custom installation: only controller and PhysX).

Ogchampion, it's a long shot but try to uninstall Nvidia driver completely at least, install latest and set brigthness 50, contrast 60, FreeSync 'on' with normal overdrive (don't know what value that is).
Thanks MatrixQW, I tried everything you suggested (except a clean install of windows) but unfortunately didn't seem to do anything for me.
Notty_PT wrote: My current config on the Asus XG258Q:

Cinema mode
Brightness 60 (depends on your room etc)
Contrast 50
Saturation 45
OD Level 3
No FreeSync/Gsync
No ELMB
Colour: Normal

Try this, I could hide a lot of overshoot with this config.

Imo the astonishing low input lag on this model makes it a must have for fast paced shooters players. All my records beaten dayvafter day and currently rocking 54% LG averagenon my stats amd recently had a 67% game.

Best competitive gaming monitor I used to date.
Thanks Notty_PT, these settings are an improvement and definitely hide the shadowy overdrive enough in Apex Legends (pretty much all I play right now).

Post Reply