Blur Busters Forums

Who you gonna call? The Blur Busters! For Everything Better Than 60Hz™ Skip to content

Lightboost vs ULMB vs Benq BlurR. vs DyAc INPUT LAG

Ask about motion blur reduction in gaming monitors. Includes ULMB (Ultra Low Motion Blur), NVIDIA LightBoost, ASUS ELMB, BenQ/Zowie DyAc, Turbo240, ToastyX Strobelight, etc.

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

Postby BlurBoss » 22 Dec 2018, 12:41

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.

Man you are, calling 0.5 ms and 240 Hz gimmicks on BlurBusters forum...
I could clearly see the difference between 4.2 ms Eizo FG2421 and 1.7 ms Asus PG258Q.
Also, 0.5 ms response time should allow better ULMB on 240 Hz that only Benq XL2546 has and no other monitor.
BlurBoss
 
Posts: 9
Joined: 17 Dec 2018, 13:52

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

Postby Chief Blur Buster » 22 Dec 2018, 14:55

BlurBoss wrote:Man you are, calling 0.5 ms and 240 Hz gimmicks on BlurBusters forum...

:D
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.

Hello!
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%

Yes, I agree that for most cases, waiting for 0.5ms instead of 1.0ms is overrated for most people.

However, 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.
Head of Blur Busters - BlurBusters.com | TestUFO.com | Follow @BlurBusters on Twitter

       To support Blur Busters:
       • Official List of Best Gaming Monitors
       • List of G-SYNC Monitors
       • List of FreeSync Monitors
       • List of Ultrawide Monitors
User avatar
Chief Blur Buster
Site Admin
 
Posts: 6058
Joined: 05 Dec 2013, 15:44

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

Postby Chief Blur Buster » 22 Dec 2018, 15:01

PanzerIV wrote:I could only see the difference on the UFO test.

I can import the "TestUFO smoothness" into my games in ULMB when I do the following:
1. Either VSYNC ON or the use of the new Lagless VSYNC modes (NOT VSYNC OFF) to bring perfect GSYNC-smoothness to ULMB
2. Powerful GPU that always maintains framerate=refreshrate at high reliabilities (like VR-capable graphics cards)
3. Ultrasmooth mousepad
4. Highend 6400dpi/12800dpi sensor with mouse vendor software configured to 1600dpi or 3200dpi (pointer will be too fast in Windows, but will turn ULMB into TestUFO-smoothness when used with perfect framerate=refreshrate synchronization modes)
5. Control Panel to middle "Pointer Speed" setting
6. Ultra-low in-game sensitivity
7. Mouseturns as perfectly smooth as keyboard strafe left/right
8. Certain non-FPS games that use tons of scrolling, such as RTS

People cannot get TestUFO smoothness into real-world games because those people cannot understand how to import TestUFO smoothness into their videogames like I can. They just go "VSYNC OFF" or "GSYNC" because it's easier for low lag and low stutter, but those are imperfect solutions for blur-hater people and we have DIFFERENT tweaks needed because we want to import TestUFO-smoothness into our realworld games.

GSYNC is amazing and 1440p is amazing, but some of us have eye pain (eye strain) from motion blur. Not everyone can benefit from only GSYNC. Some are color blind. Some are sensitive to brightness. Some are sensitive to blur. So some of us are desparate to see TestUFO-smooth Nintendo-panning-perfect arcade style motion fluidity into our real-world PC video games, and we are managing to succeed using a completely different set of very different tweaks than the usual eSports/FPS players.
Head of Blur Busters - BlurBusters.com | TestUFO.com | Follow @BlurBusters on Twitter

       To support Blur Busters:
       • Official List of Best Gaming Monitors
       • List of G-SYNC Monitors
       • List of FreeSync Monitors
       • List of Ultrawide Monitors
User avatar
Chief Blur Buster
Site Admin
 
Posts: 6058
Joined: 05 Dec 2013, 15:44

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

Postby h1tbox » 11 Feb 2019, 06:27

Sorry for hijacking but :D
@Chief Blur Buster which monitor do you recommend atm for competitive fps gaming?
Currently using a XL2411z with the vt tweak and at times BlurR on. The inputlag is sometimes noticeable and was wondering if it was worth it to upgrade to something like the XL2546. Would appreciate any input you have, as there are a 100 opinions floating around :D
h1tbox
 
Posts: 4
Joined: 18 Oct 2014, 05:57

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

Postby A Solid lad » 15 Feb 2019, 05:34

If you want strobing+lowest input lag possible, then there's no competition atm. XL2546 all the way.
Youtube channel: youtube.com/TheSolidlad
Steam profile with PC Specs: steamcommunity.com/id/TheSolidlad
Monitors I've used/use: IBM p275, Benq XL2411Z, Alienware AW2518Hf, Alienware AW2518H, Acer XF270HA, LG 27GK750F-B, Benq XL2740, ACER XB271HU, ACER XG270HUa, Benq XL2720Z, Benq XL2540
User avatar
A Solid lad
 
Posts: 220
Joined: 17 Feb 2018, 08:07
Location: Slovakia

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

Postby PanzerIV » 15 Feb 2019, 18:36

h1tbox wrote:Sorry for hijacking but :D
@Chief Blur Buster which monitor do you recommend atm for competitive fps gaming?
Currently using a XL2411z with the vt tweak and at times BlurR on. The inputlag is sometimes noticeable and was wondering if it was worth it to upgrade to something like the XL2546. Would appreciate any input you have, as there are a 100 opinions floating around :D

To me ur mostly changing 4x25¢ for 1$ if you switch from XL2411Z to XL2546. Both are already 1ms TN 1080p panels with the main difference being the newer one is using a newer version of "BenQ Motion Blur Reduction" called "DyAc" which is like going from v2.0 to v2.5 or AT MOST to v3.0. I mean, it's nothing revolutionary and if you had nothing or could sell ur current monitor for a decent price then sure get the newer one but if you already have the XL2411 it's a waste of money for such a small upgrade.

Some people are gonna say the newer one have 240Hz, so what? Unless you only play Counter-Strike or some other old crappy games where you can keep and maintain 240FPS/Hz, then it's entirely useless. Good luck even with a SLI of GTX2080Ti at only 1080p to stay AT ALL TIME at 240FPS in Battlefield 5 or Hunt Showdown on maximum settings, trust me it's never gonna happen even in ur dreams! People don't buy such cards also to run games at the lowest graphical settings, and games don't scale that much anymore, you really don't double ur frame rate from Ultra to Low.

I'd much rather have a perfectly smooth 100FPS/Hz with ULBM than G-Sync 120-144-165Hz or fluctuating fps without blur reduction. If you have at least a GTX1080 or better, then there's the (Acer XB271HU) which is the best compromise imo if you want the best possible quality while barely scarifying smoothness cause it's 4ms instead of 1ms but still lowest input lag, but at least it's 1440p, IPS and true 8bit if I remember right rather than 6Bit + FRC.
Intel i5 8600K @ 5.0Ghz | EVGA GTX1080 8Gb @ 2100Mhz | MSI Z370 Krait Gaming | Corsair 2x8Gb DDR4-3200
Acer XB271HU + Shimian QH270 "1440P IPS"
User avatar
PanzerIV
 
Posts: 47
Joined: 17 Apr 2014, 12:55
Location: Canada > Quebec

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

Postby Chief Blur Buster » 16 Feb 2019, 02:38

PanzerIV wrote:To me ur mostly changing 4x25¢ for 1$ if you switch from XL2411Z to XL2546. Both are already 1ms TN 1080p panels with the main difference being the newer one is using a newer version of "BenQ Motion Blur Reduction" called "DyAc" which is like going from v2.0 to v2.5 or AT MOST to v3.0. I mean, it's nothing revolutionary and if you had nothing or could sell ur current monitor for a decent price then sure get the newer one but if you already have the XL2411 it's a waste of money for such a small upgrade.

While generally true for most modes...not correct for DyAc.

...Depends on how picky you are about strobe crosstalk same Hz-for-Hz.

120Hz DyAc has less strobe crosstalk on 240Hz BenQs than 144Hz BenQs

The quality of 120Hz DyAc looks better on the 240Hz BenQs than the 144Hz BenQs, because extra hertzroom reduces strobe crosstalk. The lower below max Hz you decide to use a motion blur reduction -- the less strobe crosstalk there is, as a general rule of thumb (given the exact same panel).

If you are familiar with the high speed videos of http://www.blurbusters.com/scanout

High speed video of the TestUFO Scanout (that rapidly rotates between 4 frames)

phpBB [video]


As you can see, an LCD refreshes from top to bottom, then repeats at the top. But often the pixels at the bottom edge are still transitioning while the top edge is beginning to refresh. Often, 3 refresh cycles are thus visible simultaneously because of that GtG lag effect overlapping multiple refresh cycles. Not good for eliminating strobe crosstalk with a strobe backlight!

The common solution is vendors will do an accelerated scanout (e.g. NVIDIA LightBoost/ULMB will scanout in roughly ~1/180sec) but sometimes you can do the accelerated scanout via the GPU side. Several BenQ monitors do not have accelerated scanout by default, and requires GPU-side custom resolution tweaking (Large Vertical Totals) to make this possible. A monitor can do it internally (buffer and then fast-scanout) or the user can do it externally (Custom Resolution Utility to create a Large Vertical Total, to deliver individual refresh cycles faster over the cable -- for monitors that synchronizes panel scanout velocity to cable scanout velocity). For the 144Hz BenQ's it can be done externally, and for the 144Hz NVIDIA ULMB/LightBoost it is done internally. For the 240Hz BenQ's it's already buffering and fast-scanning out (in 1/240sec).

The use of Large Vertical Totals can produce a wider blur reduction zone for 120Hz DyAc on a 240Hz monitor than 120Hz DyAc on a 144Hz monitor.

The Quick Frame Transport effect (QFT) of transmitting a refresh cycle faster via the use of a Large Vertical Total can produce more time between refresh cycles, to let the LCD pixels settle before beginning the new refresh cycle.

only add more marginally 120Hz blur reduced mode (VT1502/1080p) for 120Hz strobed = ~38% faster scanout for DyAc 120Hz on a 144Hz BenQ.

But on some 240Hz displays, one can do VT2250/1080p for 120Hz strobed = ~100% faster scanout for DyAc 120Hz on a 240Hz BenQ, creating an ultralong blanking interval pause of about ~4.16ms for an 8.3ms refresh cycle rapid-scanned-out in 4.16ms.

That said, it is already known that many early 240Hz monitors often have a fixed scanout velocity -- and the BenQs are no exception. The 240Hz BenQs appear to be already doing it by default due to it using a 240Hz panel that always scans out at its max velocity, so a Large Vertical Total on the PC side is not always needed for the BenQs except to reduce frame delivery latency (this is why it is always recommended to use Large Vertical Totals anyway even for monitors that already has internally-accelerated scanout velocity -- this prevents the monitor from buffering which delays the refresh cycle. Buffering happens only when the cable scanout is slower than panel scanout. You can stop the buffering behaviour of 240Hz monitors for lower refresh rates via the use of the Large Vertical Total tricks.

144Hz refresh cycles transmitted over the cable in 1/240sec (Quick Frame Transport effect of a Large Vertical Total) means about ~3ms less input lag for the bottom edge of a strobed screen. VERY important for reducing strobe lag of low Hz, if you're a strobe-lag hater.

Since one needs the LCD to be completely refreshed before flashing the backlight, bigger VBIs are hugely beneficial in reducing strobe crosstalk, and if one is super-picky about strobe crosstalk, it's an important consideration.

Image

TL;DR: Extra hertzroom is hugely beneficial for permitting quicker scanout at lower refresh rates, that creates large pauses between refresh cycles, necessary to allow pixel transitions to more fully complete (in total darkness) before flashing the motion blur reduction strobe backlight on a more-fully-refreshed panel. Which means 120Hz DyAc looks better on 240Hz BenQ monitors than 120Hz DyAc on 144Hz BenQ monitors.

TL;DR2: The higher Hz a monitor supports, the larger the vertical totals you generally can get (for a given lower Hz). The bigger the Vertical Total, the better for (A) Quick Frame Transport effect to reduce strobe lag; and (B) It also reduces strobe crosstalk

References:
- High Speed Video Of Strobe Backlight
- High Speed Video Of LCD Screens Scanning-Out
- Motion Blur Reduction FAQ
- Advanced Crosstalk FAQ
- Animations Of Effects During Strobe-Tuning a BenQ Monitor
- Quick Frame Transport FAQ
Head of Blur Busters - BlurBusters.com | TestUFO.com | Follow @BlurBusters on Twitter

       To support Blur Busters:
       • Official List of Best Gaming Monitors
       • List of G-SYNC Monitors
       • List of FreeSync Monitors
       • List of Ultrawide Monitors
User avatar
Chief Blur Buster
Site Admin
 
Posts: 6058
Joined: 05 Dec 2013, 15:44

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

Postby A Solid lad » 17 Feb 2019, 19:54

PanzerIV wrote:
h1tbox wrote:Sorry for hijacking but :D
@Chief Blur Buster which monitor do you recommend atm for competitive fps gaming?
Currently using a XL2411z with the vt tweak and at times BlurR on. The inputlag is sometimes noticeable and was wondering if it was worth it to upgrade to something like the XL2546. Would appreciate any input you have, as there are a 100 opinions floating around :D

To me ur mostly changing 4x25¢ for 1$ if you switch from XL2411Z to XL2546...

Have to disagree.
I myself, switched from the xl2411z, to the xl2540 (with a lot of in-betweens) and everything is better about this monitor... in some areas, by a lot.
Colors, contrast, viewing angles...these two monitors are leagues apart.
The OSD is also better, and the stand is a lot better too.
And even in regards to what counts when gaming competetively: Overdrive tuning is also leagues better on the newer screen (there was so much overshoot on the xl2411z compared to this one...it's not even funny) and also, blur reduction was almost unusable for me on the xl2411z, because of the super-low brightness. That issue is non-existent even on my xl2540, which doesn't have DyAc.
(Not sure how much the difference between DyAc and the "service page-blur reduction" on my xl2540 is though...if there's any.)
Youtube channel: youtube.com/TheSolidlad
Steam profile with PC Specs: steamcommunity.com/id/TheSolidlad
Monitors I've used/use: IBM p275, Benq XL2411Z, Alienware AW2518Hf, Alienware AW2518H, Acer XF270HA, LG 27GK750F-B, Benq XL2740, ACER XB271HU, ACER XG270HUa, Benq XL2720Z, Benq XL2540
User avatar
A Solid lad
 
Posts: 220
Joined: 17 Feb 2018, 08:07
Location: Slovakia

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

Postby Chief Blur Buster » 18 Feb 2019, 02:08

I have recently now obtained the XL2546 here for a project I am doing --

New Observation 1: XL2546 has better color quality than XL2411Z
I can concur that the color quality was one thing I immediately noticed about the XL2540 over the XL2411Z.

New Observation 2: XL2546 has brighter blur reduction mode (it doesn't dim nearly as much)
And the XL2546 has much brighter strobing too (it uses voltage-boosted strobing, which the XL2411Z does not seem to have). Yet another reason to get the XL2546 for 120Hz strobing even if you never use 240Hz, if you're a Blur Reduction-lover of Blur Busters fame.

New Observation 3: Strobe Utility is less useful since further improvements are much more marginal
Indeed, Strobe Utility is less useful on the XL2546 than XL2411Z because the improvements on the XL2546 can only be marginally further improved by Strobe Utility, while there was a lot more improvement headroom on the XL2411Z (even if not all the way to XL2546 120Hz strobe quality).
Head of Blur Busters - BlurBusters.com | TestUFO.com | Follow @BlurBusters on Twitter

       To support Blur Busters:
       • Official List of Best Gaming Monitors
       • List of G-SYNC Monitors
       • List of FreeSync Monitors
       • List of Ultrawide Monitors
User avatar
Chief Blur Buster
Site Admin
 
Posts: 6058
Joined: 05 Dec 2013, 15:44

Previous

Return to Eliminating Motion Blur — LightBoost / ULMB / ELMB / DyAc

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests