Viewsonic XG270 with 'PureXP" MBR [pre-tuned by Blur Busters!]

[ELK]

I created a custom 110hz resolution using the default 60hz timings and then the 144hz timings. The ghosting test was so similar I wasn't confident to say which was better, but then I looked at the moving photo test. The 60hz timings looks WAY better than the 144hz timings. Why is this? Is it because it's 45 vs 18 pixels in the vertical blank?

edit: It's even awful when scrolling... Wonder if 144hz could work with the 60hz timings....

edit2: I made a 145hz resolution with the 60hz timings. I looked at many tests and while I could make out differences I'm not sure which one looked better because they were so similar.

[ELK]

I'm a little confused.. CRU has a line that says
48-241 Hz, 255-255 kHz, 600MHz.
the 240hz mode is 279.285 kHz, and I just tested a resolution 1920x1080@108hz with a 2520 vertical blank. It glitched and told me it was ~254kHz but was actually ~270kHz. I wonder what it's true limitations are...

edit: nevermind I'm just a dummy. Pixel clock is tied to the kHz thingy and 600MHz is the limit. Would a large vertical total even effect this monitor?
viewtopic.php?t=3343
"NOTE #1. Skip this if you're using "easy" Blur Reduction modes such as ULMB
NOTE #2. This only affects monitors that can do instant mode (unmodified dotclock) straight to the LCD panel. The most popular monitors supporting this FAQ are currently BenQ/Zowie gaming monitors.
"

[ELK]

I tested the vertical blank by using SSYNC. With a vertical total of 2000 I should have been able to set it to, for example, 1500 and not have a tear line but I did so obviously changing the vertical total wasn't doing anything at all and it was actually 1125 reguardless of what I set. I used CRU to edit the detailed 60hz resolution's vertical total which worked, but new custom resolutions still defaulted to 1125 vertical total so I removed every resolution except the detailed 60hz one and edited it to 2000 vertical total. Now custom resolutions default to 2000 vertical total and I tested with SSYNC and it is working. With a vertical total of 2000 I cannot exceed 136hz without exceeding the pixel clock limit (black screen). I could push it up to 2270 and make 120hz the highest refresh rate without exceeding the limit. 1080/2270 would give about a 1/252th of a second scan out instead of the 1/222th of a second scan out I'm at with 2000 vertical total.

I'm not sure if this pushes to monitor too hard so I will include this info (this applies to 120hz only)
2160 which would give a 1/240th scan out with a pixel clock of 570.2400
The pixel clock of the default 240hz is lower than this at 566.95
2140 would give a 1/237th scan out but have a pixel clock of 564.96

[ELK]

I'm using a VT of 2570@100hz but it looks way worse than VT1125... I guess this is because I cannot adjust strobe timing and strobe phase settings as mentioned in your article?

[Chief Blur Buster]

Advanced VT Hacks Are Mostly Unnecessary With XG270

PureXP is designed to be easy & user friendly (like ULMB), while being more flexible (multisync at any custom Hz above 75Hz).

Like most 240Hz panels (so this is already public information), the XG270 uses fixed max-Hz scanrate at the panel level. On these panels, all scanouts are 1/240sec regardless of GPU Hz if you do high speed video on such panels. That means some panels like these have internal automated large-VT logic (scanrate conversion to create large VBIs) for any refresh rates lower than 240Hz. Thus, it is generally not necessary to use large VTs on the XG270 to lower strobe crosstalk. However, large vertical totals might slightly reduce input latency via the Quick Frame Transport effect (another benefit of large VTs when used in conjunction with strobing and/or VSYNC ON).

<Slightly OffTopic>
Optional, may have no benefit except reduce latency: If you do advanced hacking to try large VTs, get the 240Hz VT, multiply Hz x VT. Then divide by new Hz. That's the VT to test. For example 1125x240 = 270,000 horizontal scan rate. Now divide the target Hz (e.g. 100Hz), 270,000 divided by 100. That's VT2700 at 100Hz to match the horizontal scan rate of VT1125 at 240Hz. Also, simultaneously, try to maintain exact same horizontal total as original 240Hz. Vertical Total posts are considered offtopic in this thread and will now be moved to a separate thread, please post VT questions in a different thread since VT topics are complicated to new users. I want to keep this thread purely to user-friendly PureXP.
</Slightly OffTopic>

[ELK]

Advanced VT Hacks Are Mostly Unnecessary With XG270

PureXP is designed to be easy & user friendly (like ULMB), while being more flexible (multisync at any custom Hz above 75Hz).

Like most 240Hz panels (so this is already public information), the XG270 uses fixed max-Hz scanrate at the panel level. On these panels, all scanouts are 1/240sec regardless of GPU Hz if you do high speed video on such panels. That means some panels like these have internal automated large-VT logic (scanrate conversion to create large VBIs) for any refresh rates lower than 240Hz. Thus, it is generally not necessary to use large VTs on the XG270 to lower strobe crosstalk. However, large vertical totals might slightly reduce input latency via the Quick Frame Transport effect (another benefit of large VTs when used in conjunction with strobing and/or VSYNC ON).

<Slightly OffTopic>
Optional, may have no benefit except reduce latency: If you do advanced hacking to try large VTs, get the 240Hz VT, multiply Hz x VT. Then divide by new Hz. That's the VT to test. For example 1125x240 = 270,000 horizontal scan rate. Now divide the target Hz (e.g. 100Hz), 270,000 divided by 100. That's VT2700 at 100Hz to match the horizontal scan rate of VT1125 at 240Hz. Also, simultaneously, try to maintain exact same horizontal total as original 240Hz. Vertical Total posts are considered offtopic in this thread and will now be moved to a separate thread, please post VT questions in a different thread since VT topics are complicated to new users. I want to keep this thread purely to user-friendly PureXP.
</Slightly OffTopic>

Thanks. I was going to ask you to move my recent posts. XD.

I already knew this thing was tuned perfectly, because you tuned it. I was wondering why you didn't use large vertical totals but the monitor is scanning out as fast as possible using some VT trick. How does this work? I suppose I could slightly increase my VT if I ever have issues with a games performance while using SSYNC.

Today I tested a bunch of refresh rates.
74hz PureXP enabled(glitch?) but looked horrible
75hz wow. The motion clarity. I am going to play some games using 75hz. The majority of the screen is perfect. It was beautiful and hard to switch off except for for the fact that it looked like a fast slide show lol.
My aim was really poor like 60hz.
80hz My aim was poor like 60hz, faster slide show effect.
85hz Aim drastically improved although smoothness wasn't all there
90hz Aim remained good and felt smooth
100hz Aim remained good and felt smooth(I have tested 240hz vs 100hz strobed and my aim is superior at 100hz strobed)
110hz Again pretty much the same as 90
120hz not even at the center of the screen is the quality I would like it to be (CRT), but the clarity is MASSIVELY better than 240hz, my aim drastically improved in some cases, but was worse in others. It looks much more visibly smoother than 85~110hz. The only cases my aim was worse is when there were effects like smoke, fire, explosions, or some other effect(s) surrounding my target.

I noticed smoothness around 85~90 hertz, which is also when my aim massively improved. 80hz felt like 60hz. Why?
I noticed a big change in smoothness from 110 to 120, but not from 90 to 110. Why?

I wouldn't want to recommend it without a warning because 100hz is around the limit where strobed lights stop giving headaches so depending on the person they might get a headache, but in some games the near perfect clarity in the center of the screen of 100hz may outweigh the huge amount of smoothness you lose from 120hz.

I had a dell p1130 (CRT) back in the day rocking 1600x1200@100hz. I had an advantage during CRT days then a much bigger advantage during LCD days before gaming monitors. Around the time gaming monitors came out my CRT was having issues so I grabbed an early 144hz gsync screen and had an advantage again. Now with this monitor I have a much bigger advantage again. My aim is so much better with this monitor it is really nice to beat players that I know are better than me. Just like the good old days. hahahaha

About the 119hz vs 120hz. On the ghosting test on testufo. I hate when there is a decently visible blue ghost. When you're aiming and some weird colored thing pops up it's distracting. 120hz has a blue ghost but 119hz has a yellow ghost. I can see differences between 118hz and 119hz. It's a bit mind blowing actually. I haven't tested it in-game but the difference between what you see in the tests and in-game are very different. It always looks much better in-game.

edit: even scrolling through texts looks much better at 119hz vs 120hz. Maybe you could give it a look on yours?

[ELK]

This is a little off topic, but I have been wanting to ask you this for a long time. Aperture grille looked amazing. The odyssey+ has technology that lets light shine in between all pixels in all directions. This looks better than aperture grille. People even use very expensive projectors for this effect. One of the things I do not like about this monitor is the screen door effect. The screen door wasn't as thick on my TN.

It's nice that strobing is bringing back some CRT quality, but will screen get samsung's anti-sde tech? I think it's patented. Is it patented? Are there any plans for this technology to be put in gaming monitors? Does samsung ever plan to use this tech in any of their monitors or TVs?

[heckenjoni]

ignore the pictre, in person i can only see blb where the red circles are .. do you have the same issue, looks like the frame is pressing against the panel, even with PureXP on i can still notice a bit of blb other then that very happy with the panel .. is this a common issue ?

[ELK]

ignore the pictre, in person i can only see blb where the red circles are .. do you have the same issue, looks like the frame is pressing against the panel, even with PureXP on i can still notice a bit of blb other then that very happy with the panel .. is this a common issue ?

That's backlight bleeding which is especially bad on IPS panels and even get's it's on name IPS glow because it's so much worse on IPS panels.

This is from google search of IPS glow.
IPS glow
The IPS Glow is a "glow" effect which is present on the corners of an IPS panel whereas Backlight Bleeding usually appears along the edges of a monitor. It is most visible when viewing dark images in a darker environment. ... The IPS Glow is technology-related and can never be completely prevented or eliminated.

edit: To answer your question directly. Yes I have the same issue. The issue is not the frame pressing against the panel. All IPS panels have this issue especially bad, but is seen on TN panels too. The back light glow was pretty bad on my 144hz TN but not as bad as this monitor although close, but it is an IPS so I expected this. Personally it doesn't bother me but it drives some people crazy. Your monitor is fine. IPS have way better color production than TN panels. There are people who refuse to use a TN because the colors are so much better on an IPS. It's a trade off I find well worth it.

edit: I guess I will include this. Some people prefer TN because of the better response time. IPS used to be a large gap slower than TN panels but the panel in your monitor is as quick as TN was a couple years ago.

[ELK]

Maybe I doesn't bother me as much because I always have a lamp on behind my monitor for ambient light. It reduces eye strain and isn't blinding when you try to look around the room.