BlurBoss wrote:Man you are, calling 0.5 ms and 240 Hz gimmicks on BlurBusters forum...
I understand why people call it a gimmick, and it can be in cases
- but milliseconds ain't no gimmick.
But let's still be nice and educate when milliseconds are gimmicks and when milliseconds are not.
Personally, I even see a difference between 0.5ms MPRT and 1.0ms MPRT in certain test patterns.
PanzerIV wrote:Honestly paying 400$USD for a monitor just cause it's 0.5ms instead of 1ms is purely ridiculous. Nobody is even gonna notice that, as even 1ms ot 4ms as my (Acer XB271HU) is nearly impossible to notice, at least not in real game and yes I play twitch games like Quake Champion a lot, else Hunt Showdown or used to play BF1. I could only see the difference on the UFO test.
Spend ur money on 1440p, IPS or G-Sync instead of 0.5ms gimmick or even 240Hz gimmick.
I understand the skepticism....BUT
Firstly, I remind you of the Blur Busters "open mind about milliseconds" policy.
Also, we have found the best 240Hz monitors are half as motion-blurry as the worst 240Hz. 240Hz response may be a gimmick in part because of inaccurately slow response in claimed "1ms GtG" (e.g. bad overdrive) and extremely high MPRT numbers. "Honest" 0.5ms -- for every two-color combination -- will help with that.
Did you know that GtG begins bottlenecking motion clarity when GtG is half a refresh cycle long or more? So if manufacturers advertise 1ms GtG but it's really 2ms real-world for many GtG combinations -- then it starts making the worst 240Hz much more blurry than the world's best 240Hz. Also, the best high-Hz implementations (e.g. 480Hz) can look like ULMB without needing to strobe. This is where honest 0.5ms
becomes important. Really, 240Hz can be crap on the worst monitors -- 240Hz is a 4ms refresh cycle and when 2ms GtG starts happening, that can add up to 50% more blurring to a 4ms refresh cycle -- depending on how the GtG curve behaves on that particular monitor. So GtG must stay a tiny fraction of a refresh cycle.
We know it's contentious and manufacturers may not always advertise specs fully accurately. Even the GtG benchmark has big differences for GtG90% (industry standard) versus GtG100%. The numbers manufacturers release are the speeds from GtG10% thru GtG90%
, I agree that for most cases, waiting for 0.5ms instead of 1.0ms is overrated for most people.
, there is a situation where I see a human-visible difference of 0.5ms behaviours. 1ms vs 4ms doesn't matter at 144Hz, but 1ms vs 4ms matters a huge cliff of a deal at 240hz or 480Hz. To do accurate strobeless ULMB (eliminating motion blur without strobing) absolutely requires honestly fast GtG. "Hiding GtG in VBI" to completely make strobe crosstalk disappear (double images) while raising the Hz of blur reduction -- requires extremely fast GtG, and this is where 0.5ms makes a huge difference in decreased strobe crosstalk at higher-Hz blur reduction. Strobe crosstalk also contributes to the harshness of amplified microstuttering, and we need every bit of smoothing for improving the pleasantness of ULMB. Most people can't make games TestUFO-smooth to show ULMB benefits in games as strongly as in TestUFO. Our experiments show that 0.5ms GtG is hugely beneficial to ULMB-style strobing, since it can hide the pixel responses in the black cycle better, between the end-of-scanout of the previous refresh cycle and start-of-scanout of the next refresh cycle. So for ULMB fans, we need 0.5ms and 0.25ms GtG.
Hey Panzer, want to see the human-visible difference between MPRT 0.5ms versus MPRT 1.0ms? Load TestUFO Panning Map Test
at 3000 pixels/sec. Turn on ULMB. Notice you still cannot read the street name labels? Go into your monitor menus and adjust ULMB Pulse Width
down to slightly under 50%. Oscilloscope tells me that this is a 0.5ms MPRT pulse. So this TestUFO is proof that default ULMB (1.0ms-1.5ms MPRT) is too blurry in this test while it's fully readable at 0.5ms MPRT.
Also, we know 1ms GtG is not the same thing as 1ms MPRT (two completely independent millisecond numbers), but both GtG response and MPRT response are quite important for different technical reasons.
Also, keep an open mind to different human vision sensitivities. Some people are color blind. Some people are flicker sensitive. Likewise, some people are VERY blur sensitive. Eye strain from motion blur. This is where your preference may be different from another person's preference.
Bottom line, milliseconds matters a greater deal -- and sometimes for different reasons than you think.