Page 2 of 7

Re: Lightboost vs ULMB vs Benq BlurR. vs DyAc INPUT LAG

Posted: 25 Feb 2018, 20:17
by Chief Blur Buster
A Solid lad wrote:Nobody has bothered to even compare classic benq blur reduction to DyAc... I don't want to believe, that maximum brightness is the only difference.
Honestly, I'd like to. One big problem is it costs anybody more than a typical house's mortgage to buy up every single "Better Than 60 Hz" monitor available. I am however, going to ramp up monitor tests -- the ramp-up is taking months longer than expected -- but it is going to indeed ramp up. Keep tuned.

Re: Lightboost vs ULMB vs Benq BlurR. vs DyAc INPUT LAG

Posted: 26 Feb 2018, 03:20
by Techno Viking
This site is awesome, and when i'm reading your answers i can see a LOT of time is invested in all of this.
I've been reading and lurking here since uhm... battlefield 3 ?

THIS website (and that guy 'toasty' of course) may be the reason that we are finally getting to see manufacturers implement ulmb.

So I don't he meant that you should go and buy two of those monitors to compare them.

What i personally want is that Benq weren't such ****'s and just give a little more info about their "DyAc" . If it's really something awesome they should have it patended so why not brag about it ?

If it's a marketing scam which only includes a little more brightness, just the way LG is doing with this monitor (i hear it's really bright!), then customers can make an informed decision.

If it's somewhere in between (just a very well implemented 'hardcoded' ulmb) , then they should just say so.

TLDR : WTF is "DyAc" ? :P

I want info more than actual testing.

Re: Lightboost vs ULMB vs Benq BlurR. vs DyAc INPUT LAG

Posted: 26 Feb 2018, 06:38
by A Solid lad
Chief Blur Buster wrote:
A Solid lad wrote:Nobody has bothered to even compare classic benq blur reduction to DyAc... I don't want to believe, that maximum brightness is the only difference.
Honestly, I'd like to. One big problem is it costs anybody more than a typical house's mortgage to buy up every single "Better Than 60 Hz" monitor available. I am however, going to ramp up monitor tests -- the ramp-up is taking months longer than expected -- but it is going to indeed ramp up. Keep tuned.
I understand.
Though, maybe you could do the same, as I did (many times now):
Order from an online retailer, to which you can return your product in a given amount of time. (in my country, there's a law that allows you to return any goods bought online in 2 weeks time, without providing any reason)

That way, even if you don't want to keep a certain monitor, you can get yourself a long-enough time window to test most things on it.

Re: Lightboost vs ULMB vs Benq BlurR. vs DyAc INPUT LAG

Posted: 26 Feb 2018, 09:36
by Techno Viking
I don't think that law is meant for this kind of endeavor.

You're better of just being honest and asking a manufacturer for a loaner to review.

Re: Lightboost vs ULMB vs Benq BlurR. vs DyAc INPUT LAG

Posted: 26 Feb 2018, 10:34
by mello
Techno Viking wrote:I don't think that law is meant for this kind of endeavor.
It is not, and obviouslty people abuse it. And because of that almost every retailer has some used stock that is advertised and sold as 'new'. Basically what happens is, you are using something for 10 days, returning it within 14 day window (no questions asked) and someone else is receiving their 'new' monitor for example, that you have been already using/testing. Obviously, retailer can refuse your return if there are obvious sings of usage and/or damage.

Re: Lightboost vs ULMB vs Benq BlurR. vs DyAc INPUT LAG

Posted: 26 Feb 2018, 11:57
by Chief Blur Buster
I have two fully ethical solutions in getting access to dozens of monitors later this year - keep tuned.

Priorities and prerequisites first, keep tuned.

Re: Lightboost vs ULMB vs Benq BlurR. vs DyAc INPUT LAG

Posted: 26 Feb 2018, 12:15
by A Solid lad
You guys just made me look like a despicable human being, that deserves to be publicly shamed. 16th century style at that.

Re: Lightboost vs ULMB vs Benq BlurR. vs DyAc INPUT LAG

Posted: 26 Feb 2018, 19:07
by PanzerIV
A Solid lad wrote:hmm!
This seems really interesting for me, as my ideal monitor would be a 27 inch 1080p 240hz one, which does strobing even at 240hz, with minimal amout of crosstalk...

...Or maybe I'll have to wait for BenQ to release a DyAc enabled version of the XL2740, and pay a ton of money for it...since BenQ tax is now a thing.
Just to know I don't mistaken, to SEE 240Hz you have to ALSO have 240FPS cause otherwise if I understand correctly if I set my current XL2730Z to 144Hz but only reach 100FPS while playing, then it's like if I was at 100Hz??? If so then it's totally meaningless to get a 240Hz monitor imo!

Ur right about the "BenQ Tax", their monitor suddently got way overpriced out of nowhere since they joined Zowie. Stupid eSport Tax, like I can hardly believe that simply by going from 1080P to 1440P the pannel would cost 2x the price. You can get 4K tv for even cheaper these days than their monitors which makes no sense. I could understand 700$CAD if it was OLED or at least... IPS but for a very basic TN panel it's unacceptable.

Re: Lightboost vs ULMB vs Benq BlurR. vs DyAc INPUT LAG

Posted: 26 Feb 2018, 21:43
by Chief Blur Buster
A Solid lad wrote:You guys just made me look like a despicable human being, that deserves to be publicly shamed. 16th century style at that.
I think 21st century with a minion army is better. Just feed them enough bananas.

Re: Lightboost vs ULMB vs Benq BlurR. vs DyAc INPUT LAG

Posted: 27 Feb 2018, 07:40
by Doom Slayer
PanzerIV wrote:
A Solid lad wrote:hmm!
This seems really interesting for me, as my ideal monitor would be a 27 inch 1080p 240hz one, which does strobing even at 240hz, with minimal amout of crosstalk...

...Or maybe I'll have to wait for BenQ to release a DyAc enabled version of the XL2740, and pay a ton of money for it...since BenQ tax is now a thing.
Just to know I don't mistaken, to SEE 240Hz you have to ALSO have 240FPS cause otherwise if I understand correctly if I set my current XL2730Z to 144Hz but only reach 100FPS while playing, then it's like if I was at 100Hz??? If so then it's totally meaningless to get a 240Hz monitor imo!

Ur right about the "BenQ Tax", their monitor suddently got way overpriced out of nowhere since they joined Zowie. Stupid eSport Tax, like I can hardly believe that simply by going from 1080P to 1440P the pannel would cost 2x the price. You can get 4K tv for even cheaper these days than their monitors which makes no sense. I could understand 700$CAD if it was OLED or at least... IPS but for a very basic TN panel it's unacceptable.
No... it is not like you are playing on 100hz if you have 100 fps. As chief explaines it dozen of times... you will have lower input lag on 240hz wtih 100fps then on 120hz with 100fps.
Yes in order to see 240hz you need to have 240 fps obviously but still you'll have less input lag on 240hz even if you can't reach 240 fps