Blur Busters Forums

guys i just bought a vg259qm and i am doing very well but until i buy a zowie i will not be happy. I would like to try Dyac, but what I would like to know is that, since xl2546k costs much more than the old model, taking away the aesthetic differences, is there a substantial difference compared to the old xl2546?

I need your honest opinion guys. Should I buy a slightly used XL2546S which doesn't have any stuck or burnt in pixel for 450 EUR or should I go for new XL2546K for 519 EUR? The XL2546S was purchased at the beginning of this year therefore it's still in warranty period and it has the v003 firmware version which should be okay. I've read earlier that there's a problem with the v001 version. I'm not sure if there's any difference between the two models when it comes to dyac+ and the motion blur.
Many thanks in advance!

Functionally the two monitors should be the same, so I'd go with the cheaper option. Plus you have the peace of mind of knowing there are zero stuck pixels which is always a concern when buying a new monitor and warranty does not always cover stuck pixels depending on the position and amount.

CortexFPS wrote: ↑

28 Oct 2020, 00:48

guys i just bought a vg259qm and i am doing very well but until i buy a zowie i will not be happy. I would like to try Dyac, but what I would like to know is that, since xl2546k costs much more than the old model, taking away the aesthetic differences, is there a substantial difference compared to the old xl2546?

Pretty sure the k and s have DyAc+ which people say is worth it over the regular version seeing how you are interested in using DyAc I would get the k or s version then.

Compare 2 of the best 240hz TN with one of the best tuned 240hz IPS, respectively using the best overdrive for each monitor.



I'd say that the Benq is still the best, it clearly suffers from overshoot compared to the KD25F, so you might prefer the latter if you are sensible to overshoot but it's marginally better in motion blur (look at the green part around the Ufotest eyes and the stick being held by the alien, it's very subtle, but it does look better).

Stevie66 wrote: ↑

28 Oct 2020, 17:58

CortexFPS wrote: ↑

28 Oct 2020, 00:48

guys i just bought a vg259qm and i am doing very well but until i buy a zowie i will not be happy. I would like to try Dyac, but what I would like to know is that, since xl2546k costs much more than the old model, taking away the aesthetic differences, is there a substantial difference compared to the old xl2546?

Pretty sure the k and s have DyAc+ which people say is worth it over the regular version seeing how you are interested in using DyAc I would get the k or s version then.

DyAc+ is exactly the same thing as DyAc, the + only stands for DyAc being introduced in the newer panel which S and K versions use (Fast Liquid Crystal TN).

axaro1 wrote: ↑

29 Oct 2020, 11:21

Compare 2 of the best 240hz TN with one of the best tuned 240hz IPS, respectively using the best overdrive for each monitor.



I'd say that the Benq is still the best, it clearly suffers from overshoot compared to the KD25F, so you might prefer the latter if you are sensible to overshoot but it's marginally better in motion blur (look at the green part around the Ufotest eyes and the stick being held by the alien, it's very subtle, but it does look better).

I dare to disagree From my testing ASUS VG259QM (280 Hz) eats both XL2546 and Omen X 25f alive for breakfast when it comes to motion clarity and overdrive performance. From what I've seen, XL2546K is basically the same monitor, just with some cosmetic changes and a slightly faster panel, without DyAc motion clarity is not so great. These 240 Hz TN panels also suffer from insane pixel inversion artifacts, seems like it's very common. I'm done with TNs. It's safe to say new-gen IPS panels are taking over, if you ask me. There's just no reason to look away from all the advantages IPS provides, especially considering how fast they've become these days. It amazes me how e-sport FPS pro gamers still hold on to their aged Zowie XL monitors (except guys from ENCE who switched to the new 360 Hz IPS ASUS monitors), there are way better options to choose from. Perhaps it's the sponsorship, maybe they don't wanna change gear that won tournaments already and has proven to be good, as Chief Blur Buster once mentioned I believe, maybe it's something else. Pros are not necessarily any more educated about their gear than an average person.

speancer wrote: ↑

29 Oct 2020, 14:42

I dare to disagree From my testing ASUS VG259QM (280 Hz) eats both XL2546 and Omen X 25f for breakfast alive when it comes to motion clarity and overdrive performance. From what I've seen, XL2546K is basically the same monitor, just with some cosmetic changes and a slightly faster panel, without DyAc motion clarity is not so great. These 240 Hz TN panels also suffer from insane pixel inversion artifacts, seems like it's very common. I'm done with TNs. It's safe to say new-gen IPS panels are taking over, if you ask me. There's just no reason to look away from all the advantages IPS provides, especially considering how fast they've become these days. It amazes me how e-sport FPS pro gamers still hold on to their aged Zowie XL monitors (except guys from ENCE who switched to the new 360 Hz IPS ASUS monitors), there are way better options to choose from. Perhaps it's the sponsorship, maybe something else. Pros are not necessarily any more educated about their gear than an average person.

The XL2546 is using a different panel compared to the KD25F and the XL2546K.
I disagree with you, my VG259QM suffers from smearing at both 240 and 280hz, I actually find myself performing better in everything except tracking with my XG2402 (maybe because it's 2.6ms G2G in a 7.2ms refresh window?) which I'm still using as my main.
Especially flicking is unbelievably better with my 144hz TN compared to my 280hz IPS, I'm 100% more comfortable with a panel with perfect transitions inside the window than using one with 2x the refresh rate but that ends up smearing a lot.

That being said when I compare a 240hz TN like the XL2546k with a 240hz IPS like the MSI the first thing I notice is that not only G2G on the best overdrive is slower(1.14ms vs 2.56ms) but WBW and GBG are respectively 2.5x and 3.1x slower.
Even though ELMB-Sync is great I still don't think it's better than Dyac+ from the images that I see on the XL2546s and the XL2546k.
Total response times for 240hz IPS are similar to 240hz TNs but G2Gs are not fast enough for competitive 240hz gaming.

The slow WBW in this generation of IPS panels perfectly reflects in tests such as this https://www.testufo.com/blurtrail where you can see multiple lines behind the main one, I'd argue that these panels are not fast enough for 240hz and neither for 240hz strobing, these panels should have been rated for 200/220hz.
Don't get me wrong, these panels are fast, but not as fast as TNs. Looking at the pictures of the PG259QN at 240hz which has response times more in line with TNs at this refresh rate I'm starting to think that the industry is trying to push these panels way too far in terms of refresh rate even if it means that the panel struggles to stay inside the refresh window.

I think 90% gtg transitions inside the window should be an industry standard for high refresh rate monitors, using % inside the window +1ms for benchmarks is almost as deceiving as claiming panels to be 1ms rated.

I'd genuinely like to see how these 240hz IPS monitors claimed to be 1ms response time look like with a normalized gamma response curve.
255 to 0 would probably look like white to dimgray even in a 4.17ms window.

Something that I respect about 240hz IPS is the improvement in input lag compared to some 240hz TNs(probably caused by faster signal processing with new hardware?)

axaro1 wrote: ↑

29 Oct 2020, 15:14

Well, I think it's also safe to say it's subjective, and would explain why our experiences in that matter vary Even though I admit that I saw less smearing on 240 Hz TN in UFO Test, the image itself was still sharper and clearer on 280 Hz IPS regardless of added smearing, and what's the most important, enemies in-game also looked sharper and clearer to me on 280 Hz IPS. That's why I tend to encourage people to just buy monitors they're interested in and try them out themselves, because your experience might be different to someone else's, and basing your choice on opinion of others is not the greatest way to decide, if you ask me.

I know S/K versions of Zowie XL2546 use a different panel, it doesn't matter, UFO Test with no strobing looks just as bad as on XL2546 from what I've seen (less smearing than 280 Hz IPS but more unclear UFO, quite severe overshoot visible):



Just like DyAc (and strobing in general) is also very subjective. It tends to be useless in games that make you keep your eyes on the crosshair and hold angles (that's why it's a little bit odd to me it's marketed as something helpful for CS:GO, but again, subjectivity I guess). Strobing helps with eye-tracking, when you scan your surroundings with your eyes. In games like CS:GO however, you're supposed to keep your eyes on the crosshair (with proper crosshair placement all the time) to be able to react instantaneously to an enemy appearing. For me personally - strobing, including DyAc - is completely redundant, because I mainly focus on my crosshair, and I only look at the mini-map or other vital information on the screen when needed.

speancer wrote: ↑

29 Oct 2020, 15:59

Personally I love strobing, it does a great job not only in the way it helps understanding every piece of information during teamfights in games like Overwatch but it helps even in games like R6S for recoil control (it mitigates the blur created from recoil shaking).

Monitors are a very subjective topic, the degree of visual perception vary for each person. Some people are more sensible to blur than to overshoot and vice versa. Some people get headaches from strobing and some don't get it at all.

I want to get my hands on a XL2546K to see if it can be a meaningful upgrade, so far my experience has been good but underwhelming on the motion clarity aspect, let's see if I will change my mind with the BenQ.

Worst case scenario I wait for the next generation of 240hz monitors.