The way ApertureGrille changed the GTG benchmark methodology is unprecedented, I genuinely hope that other reviewers will follow his path.
You are right about Playwares, I tried to compare the korean reviews with some western sites.
I just compared the RTings review of the XL2540 with the playwares review of the same monitor and the difference in G2G is 2ms less on the korean review (4.1ms VS 2.1ms)
When comparing the Hardware Unboxed review of the MAG251RX with the Playwares review the difference is -0.45ms with Faster.
4.7ms vs 2.77ms when comparing TFTcentral vs Playwares review of the VG279QM.
The PG259QN review from Hardware Unboxed is -1ms compared to TFTCentral with the same overdrive.
Judging by what a5hun proved with his video I'll definitely take TFTCentral more into consideration compared to other reviewers like HA and Playwares, it seems like the guys from TFT are focused on more
realistic G2G calculations.
Normally I'd argue that since the korean reviewer is using the same testing methodology and his measurement on the S model reflect into the K model being 1ms (basically 2x) faster then it should make sense
but at this point I'm not willing to put my trust in a reviewer who is consistently on the lower end of the G2G calculation spectrum.
From what I can see Aperture Grille > TFTCentral > Rtings > Hardware Unboxed > Playwares.
Damn, we need a standardized way to test for G2G, Benq Zowie's marketing team is in fact making statements like this:
A: The response time test result will be different because of the test method. Also, there’s a lack of standard of industry measurement. That is why we don’t claim response time as avoid any misunderstanding from now on.
and they are absolutely correct
EDIT: I guess we are gonna have to wait for RTings review of the K model, they bought it last week.