Is the ASUS VG259QM still good when FPS is around 180-200?

[lostyBLUR]

I heard the ASUS VG259QM is not good for 60 Hz and consoles, but I'm wondering are there any problems when FPS hovers around 180-200? My main game is Rocket League and I can run that at a stable 250 FPS which is why I want a 240+ Hz monitor, but I can only run around 180-200 in other games like Modern Warfare. Should I be looking at a different monitor or will I have no problems with this monitor at lower FPS? Thanks.

[Chief Blur Buster]

I heard the ASUS VG259QM is not good for 60 Hz and consoles, but I'm wondering are there any problems when FPS hovers around 180-200? My main game is Rocket League and I can run that at a stable 250 FPS which is why I want a 240+ Hz monitor, but I can only run around 180-200 in other games like Modern Warfare. Should I be looking at a different monitor or will I have no problems with this monitor at lower FPS? Thanks.

Short Answer: There is no problem
Long Answer: As long as you are at max Hz, a lower framerate won't add extra monitor-caused latency.
There is a lot of confusion:
1. BAD: 60fps at 60Hz on most 240Hz+ monitors
2. GOOD: 60fps during 240Hz+

There's no latency problems doing 60fps on a 240Hz monitor, as long as you're doing 60fps during 240Hz+ (whether fixed-hz or the max-Hz of the VRR ranged mode). The problem is consoles are not outputting 240Hz.

The reasons are explained in this thread why some 240Hz monitors do a somewhat laggy job of the 60Hz refresh rate mode -- this is because they have to buffer a slow-delivering 60Hz signal before scan converting to a fast 240Hz-velocity scanout. The buffering process of a lower refresh rate is what causes the latency, which is why some 240Hz monitors have extra latency for 60Hz gaming consoles. But not all of them. Certain models (ASUS XG258) do a really good job of a low lag 60Hz mode.

[gunner7]

I heard the ASUS VG259QM is not good for 60 Hz and consoles, but I'm wondering are there any problems when FPS hovers around 180-200? My main game is Rocket League and I can run that at a stable 250 FPS which is why I want a 240+ Hz monitor, but I can only run around 180-200 in other games like Modern Warfare. Should I be looking at a different monitor or will I have no problems with this monitor at lower FPS? Thanks.

Short Answer: There is no problem
Long Answer: As long as you are at max Hz, a lower framerate won't add extra monitor-caused latency.
There is a lot of confusion:
1. BAD: 60fps at 60Hz on most 240Hz+ monitors
2. GOOD: 60fps during 240Hz+

There's no latency problems doing 60fps on a 240Hz monitor, as long as you're doing 60fps during 240Hz+ (whether fixed-hz or the max-Hz of the VRR ranged mode). The problem is consoles are not outputting 240Hz.

The reasons are explained in this thread why some 240Hz monitors do a somewhat laggy job of the 60Hz refresh rate mode -- this is because they have to buffer a slow-delivering 60Hz signal before scan converting to a fast 240Hz-velocity scanout. The buffering process of a lower refresh rate is what causes the latency, which is why some 240Hz monitors have extra latency for 60Hz gaming consoles. But not all of them. Certain models (ASUS XG258) do a really good job of a low lag 60Hz mode.

Hi Chief,

If you were looking for a monitor for mainly next-gen consoles, would you go with a TN or IPS and 144hz or 240hz? I'm leaning towards a TN monitor..? This is what 95% of pros still use.

I am feeling so stuck on making a decision so any advise would be appreciated...I want to stay between a 24"-25" in size, but will play Warzone competitively on the series X and want a monitor with very low input and response time at 100-120hz and only care about the esports performance and not the picture quality/color. I assume it should also be a Freesync monitor?

[hayche]

I just received this monitor. Set it up with elmb sync on 280 Hz g sync enabled. Playing control around 60 to 80 FPS and amazed at the motion clarity. Reminds me of old CRT. Aim is also better in games and feels faster than my older 240hz. I'm starting to believe that high fps is not what I need anymore if the motion can be that good at those low fps.

[gunner7]

I'm torn between a TN - ViewSonic XG240R and an IPS - AW2521, MSI MAG25, or Acer XB253Q. Do you have any suggestions for lowest input lag without sacrificing response time for competitive play at around 120 fps? Since Warzone is cross play and I will be playing on a series X, I learned on this forum that to best compete with 200+ frame PC players since I will be capped at 120 is to play on a monitor that excels in input lag?

[Chief Blur Buster]

I just received this monitor. Set it up with elmb sync on 280 Hz g sync enabled. Playing control around 60 to 80 FPS and amazed at the motion clarity. Reminds me of old CRT. Aim is also better in games and feels faster than my older 240hz. I'm starting to believe that high fps is not what I need anymore if the motion can be that good at those low fps.

Definitely, strobe-based motion blur reduction can make motion blur reduction independent of framerate, if you can tolerate the flicker of a strobe backlight mode. Like LightBoost was in 2012, today we've got dozens of brands of motion blur reduction modes that flashes a backlight to reduce motion blur. And it's also part of the Blur Busters Approved program too!

That said, strobing is a great humankind bandaid when we cannot reduce motion blur without flicker (we need 1000fps@1000Hz to do a flickerless/strobeless equivalent of a CRT tube -- Blur Busters Law: The Amazing Journey To Future 1000 Hz Monitors combined with cheaper Frame Rate Amplification Technology for future 1000fps-capable GPUs). That's all a very expensive innovation for now until it someday becomes cheap (much like 4K became cheap)

For now, strobe-based motion blur reduction is the best way to eliminate display motion blur, and that's what you're witnessing -- ASUS ELMB using backlight-flashing techniques to eliminate display motion blur.

It does fix motion blur. But it does not fix stroboscopic effect. Don't forget the Stroboscopic Effect of Finite Framerate Displays, so higher framerate is still beneficial in competitive gameplay.





Motion blur is independent of framerate when you strobe.

But if you hate strobing, the usual Blur Busters upgrade recommendation is 2x framerate & refreshrate. The natural upgrade path is 60fps -> 120fps -> 240fps -> 480fps -> 960fps to punch through the diminishing curve of returns.

[Chief Blur Buster]

If you were looking for a monitor for mainly next-gen consoles, would you go with a TN or IPS and 144hz or 240hz? I'm leaning towards a TN monitor..? This is what 95% of pros still use.

I am feeling so stuck on making a decision so any advise would be appreciated...I want to stay between a 24"-25" in size, but will play Warzone competitively on the series X and want a monitor with very low input and response time at 100-120hz and only care about the esports performance and not the picture quality/color. I assume it should also be a Freesync monitor?

I now recommend 240Hz+ IPS panels as my favourite.

Just make sure you have a bit extra refreshrate headroom. 144Hz IPS-vs-TN still gives TN an edge, 240Hz IPS-vs-TN still gives TN an edge (a smidge). But throw in refresh rate headroom, and it's pratically solved. The new 360Hz IPS monitor has less latency and less motion blur than a 240Hz TN panel, if you can run extra frame rates.

However, I totally understand the desire to stay with TN. Some minor nuances of TN is still better (e.g. symmetrical blur at leading/trailing edges of motion) as even though IPS ghosting has MASSIVELY REDUCED for Year 2020+ 240Hz+ panels (3x less ghosting than 2019-era IPS panels), and is superior to worst TN, it's not necessarily better at same framerate-for-framerate to the best TN. However, that extra refresh rate gives you a winning esports margin, with 360Hz IPS having less lag than 240Hz TN.

It's nothing short of amazing how far IPS has come to really start overlapping MOST of the TN-vs-IPS venn diagram -- the overlap is huge now. The determinant factor is "240Hz+" and "Year 2020+ manufacture", and IPS becomes esports winnable (finally)

[hayche]

I just received this monitor. Set it up with elmb sync on 280 Hz g sync enabled. Playing control around 60 to 80 FPS and amazed at the motion clarity. Reminds me of old CRT. Aim is also better in games and feels faster than my older 240hz. I'm starting to believe that high fps is not what I need anymore if the motion can be that good at those low fps.

Definitely, strobe-based motion blur reduction can make motion blur reduction independent of framerate, if you can tolerate the flicker of a strobe backlight mode. Like LightBoost was in 2012, today we've got dozens of brands of motion blur reduction modes that flashes a backlight to reduce motion blur. And it's also part of the Blur Busters Approved program too!

That said, strobing is a great humankind bandaid when we cannot reduce motion blur without flicker (we need 1000fps@1000Hz to do a flickerless/strobeless equivalent of a CRT tube -- Blur Busters Law: The Amazing Journey To Future 1000 Hz Monitors combined with cheaper Frame Rate Amplification Technology for future 1000fps-capable GPUs). That's all a very expensive innovation for now until it someday becomes cheap (much like 4K became cheap)

For now, strobe-based motion blur reduction is the best way to eliminate display motion blur, and that's what you're witnessing -- ASUS ELMB using backlight-flashing techniques to eliminate display motion blur.

It does fix motion blur. But it does not fix stroboscopic effect. Don't forget the Stroboscopic Effect of Finite Framerate Displays, so higher framerate is still beneficial in competitive gameplay.





Motion blur is independent of framerate when you strobe.

But if you hate strobing, the usual Blur Busters upgrade recommendation is 2x framerate & refreshrate. The natural upgrade path is 60fps -> 120fps -> 240fps -> 480fps -> 960fps to punch through the diminishing curve of returns.

Thank you for the lengthy informative post. I will be buying the 25" viewsonic when it becomes available. Very nearly bought the 27" but like most others I feel a little robbed of ppi at 27" 1080p

[gunner7]

I now recommend 240Hz+ IPS panels as my favourite.

Just make sure you have a bit extra refreshrate headroom. 144Hz IPS-vs-TN still gives TN an edge, 240Hz IPS-vs-TN still gives TN an edge (a smidge). But throw in refresh rate headroom, and it's pratically solved. The new 360Hz IPS monitor has less latency and less motion blur than a 240Hz TN panel, if you can run extra frame rates.

However, I totally understand the desire to stay with TN. Some minor nuances of TN is still better (e.g. symmetrical blur at leading/trailing edges of motion) as even though IPS ghosting has MASSIVELY REDUCED for Year 2020+ 240Hz+ panels (3x less ghosting than 2019-era IPS panels), and is superior to worst TN, it's not necessarily better at same framerate-for-framerate to the best TN. However, that extra refresh rate gives you a winning esports margin, with 360Hz IPS having less lag than 240Hz TN.

It's nothing short of amazing how far IPS has come to really start overlapping MOST of the TN-vs-IPS venn diagram -- the overlap is huge now. The determinant factor is "240Hz+" and "Year 2020+ manufacture", and IPS becomes esports winnable (finally)

Thanks a lot for your response, Chief! I have learned so much from the forum. I think I will order the XG240R since I will be using it for competitive FPS on the series X. I did have a question regarding HDMI 1.4 and 2.0, as RLCScontender has said previously that "The viewsoinc as HDMI 1.4 which SUCKS for console gaming". I've also read on other site (don't remember the name) you will need 2.0 for 1080p at 120hz, but that's surely incorrect? I just want the fastest and lowest input TN and run COD 1080p at 120fps, with the monitor having VRR-HDMI support for the series x Freesync. Does this monitor tick all the boxes?

[lostyBLUR]

Thank you for the lengthy informative post. I will be buying the 25" viewsonic when it becomes available. Very nearly bought the 27" but like most others I feel a little robbed of ppi at 27" 1080p

Did they announce a 25" version? Or is there any idea when it will be available?