ViewSonic XG2431 Discussion Thread [Blur Busters Approved XG2431 - 24" 240Hz IPS with Best Strobing]

[nuninho1980]

Hello.

I request new firmware for 50Hz added.

Photo:

20250902_160341.jpg (4.47 MiB) Viewed 3517 times

Errors log:

Code: Select all

************* Texto de Exceção **************
System.ArgumentOutOfRangeException: InvalidArgument=Value '255' não é um valor válido para 'SelectedIndex'.
Nome do parâmetro: SelectedIndex
   em System.Windows.Forms.ComboBox.set_SelectedIndex(Int32 value)
   em BlurBusters.StrobeUtilityForm.PollMonitorForStrobeState()
   em BlurBusters.StrobeUtilityForm.StrobeUtilityForm_VisibleChanged(Object sender, EventArgs e)
   em System.Windows.Forms.Control.OnVisibleChanged(EventArgs e)
   em System.Windows.Forms.Form.OnVisibleChanged(EventArgs e)
   em System.Windows.Forms.Control.WmShowWindow(Message& m)
   em System.Windows.Forms.Control.WndProc(Message& m)
   em System.Windows.Forms.Form.WmShowWindow(Message& m)
   em System.Windows.Forms.NativeWindow.Callback(IntPtr hWnd, Int32 msg, IntPtr wparam, IntPtr lparam)


************** Assemblies Carregados **************
mscorlib
    Versão do Assembly: 4.0.0.0
    Versão do Win32: 4.8.9310.0 built by: NET481REL1LAST_C
    Base de Código: file:///C:/Windows/Microsoft.NET/Framework64/v4.0.30319/mscorlib.dll
----------------------------------------
ViewSonicStrobeUtility
    Versão do Assembly: 2.1.3.0
    Versão do Win32: 2.1.3
    Base de Código: file:///C:/Program%20Files/Blur%20Busters/ViewSonic%20Strobe%20Utility/ViewSonicStrobeUtility.exe
----------------------------------------
System.Windows.Forms
    Versão do Assembly: 4.0.0.0
    Versão do Win32: 4.8.9251.0 built by: NET481REL1LAST_C
    Base de Código: file:///C:/WINDOWS/Microsoft.Net/assembly/GAC_MSIL/System.Windows.Forms/v4.0_4.0.0.0__b77a5c561934e089/System.Windows.Forms.dll
----------------------------------------
System
    Versão do Assembly: 4.0.0.0
    Versão do Win32: 4.8.9310.0 built by: NET481REL1LAST_C
    Base de Código: file:///C:/WINDOWS/Microsoft.Net/assembly/GAC_MSIL/System/v4.0_4.0.0.0__b77a5c561934e089/System.dll
----------------------------------------
System.Drawing
    Versão do Assembly: 4.0.0.0
    Versão do Win32: 4.8.9037.0 built by: NET481REL1
    Base de Código: file:///C:/WINDOWS/Microsoft.Net/assembly/GAC_MSIL/System.Drawing/v4.0_4.0.0.0__b03f5f7f11d50a3a/System.Drawing.dll
----------------------------------------
System.Configuration
    Versão do Assembly: 4.0.0.0
    Versão do Win32: 4.8.9037.0 built by: NET481REL1
    Base de Código: file:///C:/WINDOWS/Microsoft.Net/assembly/GAC_MSIL/System.Configuration/v4.0_4.0.0.0__b03f5f7f11d50a3a/System.Configuration.dll
----------------------------------------
System.Core
    Versão do Assembly: 4.0.0.0
    Versão do Win32: 4.8.9297.0 built by: NET481REL1LAST_C
    Base de Código: file:///C:/WINDOWS/Microsoft.Net/assembly/GAC_MSIL/System.Core/v4.0_4.0.0.0__b77a5c561934e089/System.Core.dll
----------------------------------------
System.Xml
    Versão do Assembly: 4.0.0.0
    Versão do Win32: 4.8.9037.0 built by: NET481REL1
    Base de Código: file:///C:/WINDOWS/Microsoft.Net/assembly/GAC_MSIL/System.Xml/v4.0_4.0.0.0__b77a5c561934e089/System.Xml.dll
----------------------------------------
System.Windows.Forms.resources
    Versão do Assembly: 4.0.0.0
    Versão do Win32: 4.8.9037.0 built by: NET481REL1
    Base de Código: file:///C:/WINDOWS/Microsoft.Net/assembly/GAC_MSIL/System.Windows.Forms.resources/v4.0_4.0.0.0_pt-BR_b77a5c561934e089/System.Windows.Forms.resources.dll
----------------------------------------
MonoGame.Framework
    Versão do Assembly: 3.8.0.1641
    Versão do Win32: 3.8.0.1641
    Base de Código: file:///C:/Program%20Files/Blur%20Busters/ViewSonic%20Strobe%20Utility/MonoGame.Framework.DLL
----------------------------------------
mscorlib.resources
    Versão do Assembly: 4.0.0.0
    Versão do Win32: 4.8.9037.0 built by: NET481REL1
    Base de Código: file:///C:/WINDOWS/Microsoft.Net/assembly/GAC_MSIL/mscorlib.resources/v4.0_4.0.0.0_pt-BR_b77a5c561934e089/mscorlib.resources.dll
----------------------------------------
SharpDX
    Versão do Assembly: 4.0.1.0
    Versão do Win32: 4.0.1
    Base de Código: file:///C:/Program%20Files/Blur%20Busters/ViewSonic%20Strobe%20Utility/SharpDX.DLL
----------------------------------------

************** Depuração JIT **************
Para habilitar a depuração just-in-time (JIT), o arquivo .config deste
aplicativo ou computador (machine.config) deve ter o valor
jitDebugging definido na seção system.windows.forms.
O aplicativo também deve ser compilado com a depuração
habilitada.

Por exemplo:

<configuration>
    <system.windows.forms jitDebugging="true" />
</configuration>

Quando a depuração JIT está habilitada, qualquer exceção sem tratamento
será enviada ao depurador JIT registrado no computador,
em vez de ser tratada nesta caixa de diálogo.

Please...

[Discorz]

It's finally out! Check out the new XG2431 article on Blur Busters website.

https://blurbusters.com/viewsonic-xg243 ... deep-dive/



EDIT: Short URL: blurbusters.com/xg2431-discorz

[purplemelon1]

It's finally out! Check out the new XG2431 article on Blur Busters website.

https://blurbusters.com/viewsonic-xg243 ... deep-dive/

There has only ever been one big error ever made would be that the chief or viewsonic never clearly marketed what that certification actually meant. The chief has often said the display has perfect clarity. Yet i never really understood what that meant. (Maybe it is in this thread. That's not accessible and would never cross someone visiting the amazon page.) He has described the quest 2 as having 0.33ms clarity yet never described it as perfect. If a clear number that was easily sellable like 4000fps clarity at 60fps was given.. ~~at 30 nits~~. We would have had very different conversations. Even rtings with it's updated testing a few years after launch isn't clear about what they are.

Well. It's a bygone now. It was never communicated so that even niche enthusiats would know. It's no suprise the marketers just never understood either. Maybe it's possible for a slight push with a reviewer like linus emphasizing a mini led 1000 nit display could go much farther. In a retrospect review. To make it real one day. But then again the VR displays are just more practical.

Steam frame is about to come out with better/native flatscreen to display intergration. The rumours focus.... Maybe you guys can do a review of that. Maybe a 2560p screen with 0.3ms strobe. With the goal of bringing back focus to strobing.

[mango87]

It's finally out! Check out the new XG2431 article on Blur Busters website.

https://blurbusters.com/viewsonic-xg243 ... deep-dive/

There has only ever been one big error ever made would be that the chief or viewsonic never clearly marketed what that certification actually meant. The chief has often said the display has perfect clarity. Yet i never really understood what that meant. (Maybe it is in this thread. That's not accessible and would never cross someone visiting the amazon page.) He has described the quest 2 as having 0.33ms clarity yet never described it as perfect. If a clear number that was easily sellable like 4000fps clarity at 60fps was given.. ~~at 30 nits~~. We would have had very different conversations. Even rtings with it's updated testing a few years after launch isn't clear about what they are.

Well. It's a bygone now. It was never communicated so that even niche enthusiats would know. It's no suprise the marketers just never understood either. Maybe it's possible for a slight push with a reviewer like linus emphasizing a mini led 1000 nit display could go much farther. In a retrospect review. To make it real one day. But then again the VR displays are just more practical.

Steam frame is about to come out with better/native flatscreen to display intergration. The rumours focus.... Maybe you guys can do a review of that. Maybe a 2560p screen with 0.3ms strobe. With the goal of bringing back focus to strobing.

From various posts and articles, the Chief always emphasized 1px of motion blur at 1000 px per second motion as the gold standard. That's what I'm assuming as his benchmark for perfect clarity.

https://blurbusters.com/making-of-why-a ... er-second/

[purplemelon1]

It's finally out! Check out the new XG2431 article on Blur Busters website.

https://blurbusters.com/viewsonic-xg243 ... deep-dive/ about what they are.

Well. It's a bygone now. It was never communicated so that even niche enthusiats would know. It's no suprise the marketers just never understood either. Maybe it's possible for a slight push with a reviewer like linus emphasizing a mini led 1000 nit display could go much farther. In a retrospect review. To make it real one day. But then again the VR displays are just more practical.

Steam frame is about to come out with better/native flatscreen to display intergration. The rumours focus.... Maybe you guys can do a review of that. Maybe a 2560p screen with 0.3ms strobe. With the goal of bringing back focus to strobing.

From various posts and articles, the Chief always emphasized 1px of motion blur at 1000 px per second motion as the gold standard. That's what I'm assuming as his benchmark for perfect clarity.

https://blurbusters.com/making-of-why-a ... er-second/

Well yes but no. See my thread about 720p 1080hz oled. You want 1 pixel of blur per frame at all speeds.

If you read discorz review. He says the viewsonic has 0.1ms persistence. Which means 10,000 fps. Of course it's probably at 10 nits. Discorz didn't say. But even something slightly below that would have been the sole boon to give success to more blur blusters approved monitors. The time for that has already passed though. It's going to depend on the open source initiative. Maybe you'll see more mini led displays capable of the same. A 10,000fps 8k display at 100 nits. Lol.

[Chief Blur Buster]

From various posts and articles, the Chief always emphasized 1px of motion blur at 1000 px per second motion as the gold standard. That's what I'm assuming as his benchmark for perfect clarity.

It's a scientific formula, not a gold standard.

The gold standard is 0 pixels.

If you have 0.1ms MPRT, you have 1 pixel every 10,000 (Ten Thousand) pixels per second.

So if you read my article again, I did not say "gold standard" or "perfection". It's just a math formula of motion blur equivalence. It was never the final frontier.

Oh, and I gave Discorz' piece a shorturl: www.blurbusters.com/xg2431-discorz
Short enough that forums won't autoshorten the URL into ellipsis (...)

[Chief Blur Buster]

Well yes but no. See my thread about 720p 1080hz oled. You want 1 pixel of blur per frame at all speeds.

Ideally, you don't want any pixel of motion blur. But 1 pixel is the "good enough" standard where you don't really need anymore. It's really literally 0.5 pixels of blur at leading edge and 0.5 pixel of blur at trailing edge. And those are gradients so look like 0.25 effective pixel of edge-based blur on OLEDs. So you don't really notice it anymore once you're down to 1 pixel of motion blur.

But, 1ms is not the gold standard.

Blur Busters Law formula is pretty simple to extrapolate:

1ms MPRT
= 1 pixel of motion blur per 1000 pixels/sec
= 2 pixel of motion blur per 2000 pixels/sec
= 3 pixel of motion blur per 3000 pixels/sec
= 4 pixel of motion blur per 4000 pixels/sec
= 5 pixel of motion blur per 5000 pixels/sec
= 6 pixel of motion blur per 6000 pixels/sec
= 7 pixel of motion blur per 7000 pixels/sec
= 8 pixel of motion blur per 8000 pixels/sec
= 9 pixel of motion blur per 9000 pixels/sec
= 10 pixel of motion blur per 10000 pixels/sec

As you can clearly see, that definitely isn't final frontier.

0.1ms MPRT
= 0.1 pixel of motion blur per 1000 pixels/sec
= 0.2 pixel of motion blur per 2000 pixels/sec
= 0.3 pixel of motion blur per 3000 pixels/sec
= 0.4 pixel of motion blur per 4000 pixels/sec
= 0.1 pixel of motion blur per 5000 pixels/sec
= 0.2 pixel of motion blur per 6000 pixels/sec
= 0.3 pixel of motion blur per 7000 pixels/sec
= 0.4 pixel of motion blur per 8000 pixels/sec
= 0.9 pixel of motion blur per 9000 pixels/sec
= 1 pixel of motion blur per 10,000 pixels/sec

Remember, a mouse flick in a FPS game can be faster than 1000 pixels/sec. And your eyes can eye-track a panning map at 3000 pixels/sec at www.testufo.com/map#pps=3000 -- you're still getting 3 pixels of motion blur at 1ms. So you definitely want to go less than 1ms.

Now we're talking! But to do so requires a strobe backlight of 0.1ms flashes (which is often too dim). Or a frame rate of 10,000fps at 10,000Hz.

That's why I wrote that retina refresh rate is about 20,000fps 20,000Hz in several of my places. It is based on a human eye's maximum smooth eye tracking speed at retina resolution, which is approximately 10,000 picture elements per second when you max out resolution to retina. Then you oversample it a bit (2x).

*Caveat: As you go past 60Hz, you need good geometrics to easily tell apart refresh rates, while having motion speeds at least ~4x the refresh rate. For example, 120Hz versus 480Hz.

[Discorz]

There has only ever been one big error ever made would be that the chief or viewsonic never clearly marketed what that certification actually meant. The chief has often said the display has perfect clarity. Yet i never really understood what that meant. (Maybe it is in this thread. That's not accessible and would never cross someone visiting the amazon page.) He has described the quest 2 as having 0.33ms clarity yet never described it as perfect. If a clear number that was easily sellable like 4000fps clarity at 60fps was given.. ~~at 30 nits~~. We would have had very different conversations. Even rtings with it's updated testing a few years after launch isn't clear about what they are.

It's possible to get an idea of how it performs if you know the theory. And manufacturers are not keen on explaining the theory. Although the necessary information would be very helpful. To be fair Chief did write a HOW-TO article (https://www.blurbusters.com/xg2431) and this thread exists since 2021. So it's a better situation compared to other monitors.

Perfect motion clarity would mean blurless eye tracking without artifacts. I thought that was clear. For LCDs like these, artifacts would be full-screen strobe crosstalk (pre/after ghost images). XG2431 has the ability to work around those - at the cost of refresh rate it can reduce top-bottom crosstalk, while at the cost of brightness it can reduce blur (although pulse widths also impacts crosstalk a bit). So yes, XG2431 can achieve perfect motion clarity. This monitor is actually a perfect tool for seeing theory in action.


Pulse Width animation by Discorz


Vertical Total animation by Blur Busters

If you read discorz review. He says the viewsonic has 0.1ms persistence. Which means 10,000 fps. Of course it's probably at 10 nits. Discorz didn't say. But even something slightly below that would have been the sole boon to give success to more blur blusters approved monitors. The time for that has already passed though. It's going to depend on the open source initiative. Maybe you'll see more mini led displays capable of the same. A 10,000fps 8k display at 100 nits. Lol.

There are charts provided in the review, but also formulas, so you can calculate/convert anything in between. From nits to miliseconds to pixels. If anything was missing, it's probably now included in new article.

The “X Hz sample-and-hold equivalent MPRT” marketing can work, but again, it's not telling the whole story and can be misleading to those who are not familiar with theory. 1ms of impulsed MPRT is not completely identical to 1ms of sample-and-hold MPRT. Because, as mentioned in the article, flickering mainly benefits eye tracking scenarios (motion clarity), but other scenarios remain unaffected or negatively affected (motion blurrity). Flickering intermitts the naturaly continuos retinal persistence which has its pros and cons.

[mango87]

From various posts and articles, the Chief always emphasized 1px of motion blur at 1000 px per second motion as the gold standard. That's what I'm assuming as his benchmark for perfect clarity.

It's a scientific formula, not a gold standard.

The gold standard is 0 pixels.

If you have 0.1ms MPRT, you have 1 pixel every 10,000 (Ten Thousand) pixels per second.

So if you read my article again, I did not say "gold standard" or "perfection". It's just a math formula of motion blur equivalence. It was never the final frontier.

Oh, and I gave Discorz' piece a shorturl: www.blurbusters.com/xg2431-discorz
Short enough that forums won't autoshorten the URL into ellipsis (...)

Thank you for the clarification.

[purplemelon1]

isn't clear about what they are.

It's possible to get an idea of how it performs if you know the theory. And manufacturers are not keen on explaining the theory. Although the necessary information would be very helpful. To be fair Chief did write a HOW-TO article (https://www.blurbusters.com/xg2431) and this thread exists since 2021. So it's a better situation compared to other monitors.

Perfect motion clarity would mean blurless eye tracking without artifacts. I thought that was clear. For LCDs like these, artifacts would be full-screen strobe crosstalk (pre/after ghost images).

Sole boon to give success to more blur blusters approved monitors. The time for that has already passed though. It's going to depend on the open source initiative. Maybe you'll see more mini led displays capable of the same. A 10,000fps 8k display at 100 nits. Lol.

There are charts provided in the review, but also formulas, so you can calculate/convert anything in between. From nits to miliseconds to pixels. If anything was missing, it's probably now included in new article.

The “X Hz sample-and-hold equivalent MPRT” marketing can work, but again, it's not telling the whole story and can be misleading to those who are not familiar with theory. 1ms of impulsed MPRT is not completely identical to 1ms of sample-and-hold MPRT. Because, as mentioned in the article, flickering mainly benefits eye tracking scenarios (motion clarity), but other scenarios remain unaffected or negatively affected (motion blurrity). Flickering intermitts the naturaly continuos retinal persistence which has its pros and cons.

Oh thanks for all of this. To start uhh, i didn't realize there were more pages to your review. On mobile its broken. There is no previous and next button at 100-120% scale. Neither the tab works on either mobile/desktop. Once a user reads or skims all the pages. They will understand what perfect is.

Regarding the article the cheif wrote. The title of the article reads to me like a manual. And I don't read manuals without owning the product. I never realized it had the 0.1ms number and would have never gone through it had you not linked it. It is pretty fair. Still hidden.

Also the first 5 maybe 10 pages of this thread are just people excited for the product. So unless a user is willing to sit through a hundred pages. I dont think it's reasonable for anything here to become common knowledge.

From the perspective of a casual who hasn't read your review. Even knowing all the theory. The word perfect is pretty unimaginable. In 2020 when the monitor would have launched, most people didn't even have proper 144hz. It's a big leap to imagine going from 100fps to 10000fps clarity. Especially when going beyond 1080hz would just be for stroboscopic effects. Even when i heard about this display around 2022. While having a bit of understanding. I assumed the resolution bottlenecked the fps. Which is true. I place more importance...

I have my feelings on this matter. The only relevant topic is my fear that the open source display initiative will go the same route as the certification program. Being known only to a few professionals. Atleast one it's potential outcomes already exists. The samsung qn990f is 8k 120hz with strobe to 900hz (from 60hz). Costs $4300. Out of my price range. Atleast it exists.