Blur Busters Forums

Notty_PT wrote: ↑

12 Jan 2022, 10:38

This is an easy one:

Ozone DSP24 240hz TN

or

Itek GGF 288hz TN

After CRTs or Oled, these are the fastest tryhard monitors money can buy currently. Forget about Zowie or other more popular brands. I tried dozens of monitors, more than what you can imagine. No LCD monitor comes close to these two, response time wise. I know they are "underground brands", but they work. And are cheap aswell.

Have fun!

Notty_PT wrote: ↑

12 Jan 2022, 10:38

This is an easy one:

Ozone DSP24 240hz TN

or

Itek GGF 288hz TN

After CRTs or Oled, these are the fastest tryhard monitors money can buy currently. Forget about Zowie or other more popular brands. I tried dozens of monitors, more than what you can imagine. No LCD monitor comes close to these two, response time wise. I know they are "underground brands", but they work. And are cheap aswell.

Have fun!

Notty_PT wrote: ↑

12 Jan 2022, 10:38

This is an easy one:

Ozone DSP24 240hz TN

or

Itek GGF 288hz TN

After CRTs or Oled, these are the fastest tryhard monitors money can buy currently. Forget about Zowie or other more popular brands. I tried dozens of monitors, more than what you can imagine. No LCD monitor comes close to these two, response time wise. I know they are "underground brands", but they work. And are cheap aswell.

Have fun!

antiblur wrote: ↑

10 Jan 2022, 11:41

Nm_kng wrote: ↑

09 Jan 2022, 13:38

KD25F, XF252Q and the Omen X25 (non F)

I got my omen x 25. And in my opinion it is slower than the 2540k or 2546k panel (same). Sometimes it seems to me that I can see blur on the omen, with overdrive 3 (while the artifacts of the corona are noticeable), although it may be due to the terrible pixel inversion that my copy suffers from (the worst pixel inversion that I have seen), the picture loses clarity at such moments due to pixel shift. I could be wrong, and there may be blur too. On a premium ama, I almost did not see artifacts corona, on omen overdrive 3 ghosting is much more noticeable, with overdrive level 4 it is unrealistic to play, they are not only at level 2, but there the picture seems more often blurry. I saw no benefit in g-sync and I think that perhaps the "f" version is no worse, since rings tested it. Having tried Omen and 2540k-2546k I recommend exclusively the Benq. The panel is faster and the monitor is objectively better in most aspects. The Omen liked the viewing angles and the relatively good initial color setting, but the Benq easily adjusts better. Also, my copy of Omena has 2 broken pixels (one consists of dark subpixels, the other is frozen red) and maybe I had no luck with the panel. However, in tests ufo and in games, I find an advantage benq. This is the most versatile monitor for all shooters, I think that the hype bank is justified in this case.

Axaion wrote: ↑

13 Jan 2022, 17:31

please provide proof that yours was that bad, because ive yet to see any of them have overshoot unless you use the wrong overdrive
references;

antiblur wrote: ↑

14 Jan 2022, 07:46

Axaion wrote: ↑

13 Jan 2022, 17:31

please provide proof that yours was that bad, because ive yet to see any of them have overshoot unless you use the wrong overdrive
references;

Man, this has overshoot on overdrive 3 and 4 - any omen owner can tell you that. That's why slide and techless used omen on overdrive 2. In the UFO test, it looks sharp on overdrive 2 and has no overshoot. However, in games I noticed blurring, and in kovak too, so I set overdrive 3. With it, blue-white halos were very noticeable both in the UFO test and in games. Overdrive 4 is unplayable. In principle, you can play on overdrive 3, but it looks terrible compared to ama premium, so the best recommendation is overdrive 2. But let me remind you that 1ms of response is only achieved with overdrive 3. And I sometimes notice blurring on overdrive 2 in games, sometimes on 3, but on 2 it's more comfortable to play, you get used to it and if you don't peer into the pixels, it seems that the picture is not blurred. In a meticulous comparison, my 2540k and 2546k specimens had less blur in games on ama premium, I saw halos only in the UFO test, they could be seen in games, but I had to try very, very hard, with 3 omen overdrive I see them easily. You're asking for proof, but that requires special equipment that I don't have. If I shoot a UFO test for you on my phone, it will look sharp, but in reality it looks worse, and the UFO test does not convey the blurring that I sometimes notice in games. The UFO test is not informative in this case, because it is extremely difficult to see the difference between 2540k, 2546k and Omen in terms of blurring, but in games it was more felt.

antiblur wrote: ↑

14 Jan 2022, 07:46

the UFO test does not convey the blurring that I sometimes notice in games.

jorimt wrote: ↑

14 Jan 2022, 09:41

antiblur wrote: ↑

14 Jan 2022, 07:46

the UFO test does not convey the blurring that I sometimes notice in games.

The UFO test defaults to a relatively slow panning speed that isn't fully indicative of fast panning done in some games. If you increase the test's "Speed" metric (Pixels Per Sec), you should be able to match that better.

I think one of the reasons for the test's default panning speeds is to isolate the GtG/overdrive blur from the MPRT blur that overdrive can't do anything for. As such, you may be conflating overdrive performance (GtG) with MPRT (image persistence) in some cases.

For instance, OLED doesn't need overdrive, but it will still blur during fast pans because of sample-and-hold image persistence, but without smearing or ghosting on top of that blur due to its virtual 0ms GtG.

--------

As for the "fastest" 240Hz LCD panel, all of them are going to have identical MPRT, so the "fastest" will be whatever panel-type has the lowest display processing paired with the lowest native GtG and most neutral overdrive tuning.