Potentially low MPRT on many 4K and 8K Samsung QLED TVs (lots of RTINGS BFI Test image comparisons)

[purplemelon1]

I think the RTINGS test is made at 2000pixel/sec, therefore it is really hard for a display to get it perfect,
it would need to be ~0.5ms MPRT.
My estimation is that the brighter QN90D test is a bit over 2ms MPRT (480hz sample & hold OLED test look slightly clearer), but that darker QN90F test is noticeably under 2ms MPRT. I would consider that test picture to be "near perfect", I'd have a hard time eye-tracking beyond that level.

Its certainly 960px/s for all.
You see in the rtings images the boxes below with the numbers? Those numbers represent the amount of pixels horizontally in the box.... I forgot how to explain. See the 16 box? At 60hz at 1920px/s, that box would have white twice it's width. 32 white pixels.
~~...samsung may want to start advertising it officially.~~

Edit: okay nevermind looking closely again. in absolute terms it only reaches about 360hz fully once you ignore the smear. Still refreshing to 720hz ish clarity maximum.

Responding to the later comments. Personally i am pretty sure i should be able to track to 5120px/s. easily. It's something you have to warm up your eyes for but it feels easily doable to the average person. It's around a car passing in front of you in real life. Just maybe not on a phone stuck at 120hz since there isn't enough space or clarity for it.
I would actually go beyond that and hope to teach people. What they can track with their eyes is not the same as what is comfortable to their eyes.
To me i need 2ms of persistence in order to not strain my eyes tracking and perfectly understand what i am seeing. Maybe up to 3ms. 10-12ms persistence is around where i stop understanding what i am tracking. Not understanding leads to straining my eyes. The same way blurry text would to everyone.

[JimProfit]

I think the RTINGS test is made at 2000pixel/sec, therefore it is really hard for a display to get it perfect,
it would need to be ~0.5ms MPRT.
My estimation is that the brighter QN90D test is a bit over 2ms MPRT (480hz sample & hold OLED test look slightly clearer), but that darker QN90F test is noticeably under 2ms MPRT. I would consider that test picture to be "near perfect", I'd have a hard time eye-tracking beyond that level.

Its certainly 960px/s for all.
You see in the rtings images the boxes below with the numbers? Those numbers represent the amount of pixels horizontally in the box.... I forgot how to explain. See the 16 box? At 60hz at 1920px/s, that box would have white twice it's width. 32 white pixels.
~~...samsung may want to start advertising it officially.~~

Edit: okay nevermind looking closely again. in absolute terms it only reaches about 360hz fully once you ignore the smear. Still refreshing to 720hz ish clarity maximum.

Responding to the later comments. Personally i am pretty sure i should be able to track to 5120px/s. easily. It's something you have to warm up your eyes for but it feels easily doable to the average person. It's around a car passing in front of you in real life. Just maybe not on a phone stuck at 120hz since there isn't enough space or clarity for it.
I would actually go beyond that and hope to teach people. What they can track with their eyes is not the same as what is comfortable to their eyes.
To me i need 2ms of persistence in order to not strain my eyes tracking and perfectly understand what i am seeing. Maybe up to 3ms. 10-12ms persistence is around where i stop understanding what i am tracking. Not understanding leads to straining my eyes. The same way blurry text would to everyone.

Good catch!
Hard to put a definitive number on the high brightness QN90D test picture. Definitely I would say the the 480hz OLED looks cleaner, of course this has the advantages inherent to perfect response times.
I have this C1 Monitor 120hz Motion Pro High test picture (that has been confirmed by various sources to be ~315hz equivalent) and the QN90D's old protocol test picture is noticeably clearer as well. So yeah, high 300s or low 400s for sure, damn near the 2.5ms MPRT mark.
Edit: QN90D test picture still slightly better than the 360hz OLED test pictures found on RTINGS and slightly worse than the PG27AQDP at 480hz, so I'm calling it right down the middle.

I do think Samsung should heavily promote this feature. Their QD-OLEDs are great and everything, and once they release a model that can low-lag interpolate to 240hz or more, I'd gladly buy one.
But only their LCDs can go (significantly) beyond that by lowering brightness.
I have no idea if there are other panels which would have less ghosting artifacts and how it would affect other properties (contrast, viewing angles), but all in all it is quite impressive for LCDs.
I have had monitors that go sub 1ms at 120hz, but they are hardly perfect in any other aspect.

My older PG27VQ is basically perfect in motion, better than my FW900, with just 5cm/2" of crosstalk at the bottom of the screen, but the matte coating was terrible.
My newer PG27AQN looks great in motion as well, nearly as good as the PG27VQ but with ZERO crosstalk, and also does at 240hz and 360hz ULMB, plus basic HDR compatibility, but unfortunately it cannot be hacked via CRU to support 60hz or anything else.
The big problem with this one is, the KSF phosphor trailing is very annoying at 120hz depending on the color transitions (noticeably less so 240hz and I assume 360hz).
I would love it a lot more if it was possible to do 240hz CRT simulation on top of ULMB in order to single-strobe 60fps content.
Also 240hz + any kind of software BFI + ULMB2 to alleviate KSF phosphor trails in 120fps content...

And In both cases, the contrast levels suck.

Can't have everything I guess, but I think if more people were aware and backlight strobing became more of a selling point, and manufacturers put their heart to it, LCDs would possibly secure their spot as the "do everything well" screen type.

[purplemelon1]

Hard to put a definitive number on the high brightness QN90D test picture. Definitely I would say the the 480hz OLED looks cleaner, of course this has the advantages inherent to perfect response times.
I have this C1 Monitor 120hz Motion Pro High test picture (that has been confirmed by various sources to be ~315hz equivalent

I do think Samsung should heavily promote this feature.

Actually its not that hard. I suggest reading https://www.rtings.com/monitor/learn/re ... suit-photo specifically scroll/find in page "we added an mrpt indicator". At higher levels of clarity you can even count individual pixels to see what is overlapping. You can eyeball the brightness changes in pixels. The higher the overlap the more the pixel changes color. For the mrpt indicator it is all just white.
So using the qn90d example. That also only reaches 360hz truely. It's reaching 480hz or 420hz like you noted but being smeared. All the tvs you noted are probably the same.

If samsung advertizes it. I would expect them beeded to specify 360fps even if it goes higher. I don't think they need to advertize heavily. By the time people are aware en mass 5 years from now. We may already have 4k 480hz tvs. Q nanorod emissive diodes and all that.
I only expect they put the 360fps number high up in the specs and ask reviewers to cover it when doing reviews.

There is also tvs coming with 1080p 240hz modes now. The TCL qm7k apparently supports 1080p 288hz. It's good to know the chinese are also pushing the forefront.

[roginthemachine]

The new rtings test is very clever, allowing you to eyeball the MPRT very easily.

What’s very exciting about these displays’ particular quirk, where brightness and pulse width are interlinked, is that if we are somehow able to squeeze more peak brightness from the display, we can use that extra headroom to lower the brightness setting further and get a shorter pulse width/MPRT. you can effectively cash in brightness for motion clarity.

My quick research online suggests that the extra options to improve max out brightness on Samsung displays involve the service menu - where you can disable ASBL, and increase peak luminance values of specific window sizes

https://youtu.be/VkV-pkc2ehA?feature=shared

[JimProfit]

The new rtings test is very clever, allowing you to eyeball the MPRT very easily.

What’s very exciting about these displays’ particular quirk, where brightness and pulse width are interlinked, is that if we are somehow able to squeeze more peak brightness from the display, we can use that extra headroom to lower the brightness setting further and get a shorter pulse width/MPRT. you can effectively cash in brightness for motion clarity.

My quick research online suggests that the extra options to improve max out brightness on Samsung displays involve the service menu - where you can disable ASBL, and increase peak luminance values of specific window sizes

https://youtu.be/VkV-pkc2ehA?feature=shared

I sure hope there's a way to improve the real scene brightness in HDR Game Mode.
The fact that you can improve motion further by sacrificing whichever amount of brightness you can spare is a big deal, especially if you start from 120/144hz (haven't tested the latter due to splitter incompatibility). So yes in a sense the higher the potential brightness, the better the potential motion clarity.
So hopefully someday soon I will feel confident in safely boosting the brightness on mine (knowing that it is already one of the brightest out of the box with Game Mode HDR being an slight outlier).

I mean like I said many times now, I would gladly buy an OLED that has low-lag interpolation to 240hz, to take my G1's spot in my Office/Home Theater room, I can forget about rolling-scan BFI, I can live with higher MPRT if the benefits outweigh the downsides compared to the ageing G1 (much higher brightness, and no BFI => No brightness loss).
I'm not however willing to go back to a small 1080p monitor to get higher refresh rates I'll never reach by "natural" means.
I don't even think there are 500hz+ 1080p OLEDs on the market anyway, all I could find on RTINGS were 540hz LCDs for my comparison earlier (for the record, when there were several monitors with the same specs, I picked the shot which looked the clearest/less smeary).

But then by the time most OLED TVs reach 240hz, these Samsung LCDs will be able to reach the same refresh rate AND, barring some unfortunate nerf, still push things further by lowering backlight pulse width.

Realistically at this moment, RTINGS test is the best tool we have to "hierarchize" motion clarity, and in the current reality, in TVs, of 4K 120>165hz we live in, Samsung LCDs stand head and shoulder above the rest.

I'm sorta interested in the PG27AQDP (1440p 480hz) OLED monitor, but again the brightness is lackluster compared to TVs.
I love Lossless Scaling, and am looking forward to an universal, straightforward implementation of CRT Simulation, but at this moment I do not feel like the former is a viable solution for ultra-high refresh (performance issues on too high multipliers), the latter is super nice in concept and will get more and more interesting as refresh rates increase, but in terms of raw performance, 120hz backlight strobing on an LCD can theoretically go much beyond the maximum 540hz clarity we have in lowly 1080p monitors.

Therefore LCD backlight strobing is not obsolete at this point, therefore having access to the gold standard in both TVs and monitors remains desirable, even as companion pieces to OLEDs that have other strengths, QED.

In the future there are many things to wish for on top of an increase in resolution and refresh rates.
-A return of rolling-scan BFI in OLED, preferably one stronger than seen before to competes with LCD backlight strobing
-An increase in OLED fullscreen brightness to help with the above.
-Improved Low-Lag interpolation with less artifacts, adopted by other brands than Samsung.
-Improved LCD backlight strobing by other brands than Samsung.
-An increase in Mini-LED zone count (star fields do tend to look a lot better on OLED)
-RGB Mini-LED backliighing.
Both technologies have room for improvement and some ways to bridge the gap between one another.

As far as Micro-LED is concerned, from what I understand it is simply a better OLED but I believe it behaves mostly the same when it comes to motion (i.e. sample and hold, not particularly easier to strobe).
I also have no idea what motion clarity is like on the various projector technologies, from what I gather it is nothing special.

[purplemelon1]

I mean like I said many times now, I would gladly buy an OLED that has low-lag interpolation to 240hz, to take my G1's spot in my Office/Home Theater room, I can forget about rolling-scan BFI, I can live with higher MPRT if the benefits outweigh the downsides compared to the ageing G1 (much higher brightness, and no BFI => No brightness loss).
I'm not however willing to go back to a small 1080p monitor to get higher refresh rates I'll never reach by "natural" means.

I'm sorta interested in the PG27AQDP (1440p 480hz) OLED monitor, but again the brightness is lackluster compared to TVs.

Jim. I feel that you may be spending too much time on this. If i may suggest this thread viewtopic.php?t=7602&start=30 a quest 3 will have 0.3ms mrpt. 3300fps. The downsides are no hdr, weight on your face, only you can see the screen (which you can just mirror to the tv i suppose if really needed).
You are going to be waiting decades to have this on tv. So if you decide to to use a dual setup of qn90d + quest 3. Let us know how it actually goes. Can you actually track 7680px/s on the testfufo.

This way you get to keep your oleds for movies. Although the quest 3 should be able to show the space of a 75 inch tv.

[JimProfit]

Haven't looked into VR headset yet.
Sounds cool though. But probably not at TV level when it comes to contrast, resolution, HDR, and so forth. I often watch stuff with my girlfriend or buddies so yeah, I will require big TVs regardless.
It would be great if I could run 3D Vision software on it for sure.
As for the motion clarity, is it some sort of asynchronous reprojection thingy? It's important to not only have good motion clarity, but to also not have crazy double image artifacts in 60fps-and-under content. Hence me not putting too much emphasis on ultra high refresh monitors.

But yeah with VR headsets especially, I was always more in the mindset of waiting for the technology to mature, perhaps getting the "best one at the moment" upon upgrading my GPU.
And regarding spending, I haven't spent an unreasonable amount on any display since my Kuro during the great recession, I got good deals on everything else

[purplemelon1]

But probably not at TV level when it comes to contrast, resolution, HDR, and so forth. I often watch stuff with my girlfriend or buddies so yeah, I will require big TVs regardless.
It would be great if I could run 3D Vision software on it for sure.
As for the motion clarity, is it some sort of asynchronous reprojection thingy?

But yeah with VR headsets especially, I was always more in the mindset of waiting for the technology to mature, perhaps getting the "best one at the moment" upon upgrading my GPU.

? Its backlight strobing. Better than crts. Even your fw900.
I am going to link the thread again so you can read it. Its by chief blurbluster himself. viewtopic.php?t=7602&start=30 the only thing missing is hdr. But thats what your tvs will be kept for.

Regarding maturity. It's probably the best it will be. It's going to take years before generational upgrades happen.

[JimProfit]

OK so apparently the Quest 3 does use asynchronous reprojection which is good news.
I can't quite wrap my head around (pun intended) how it works, but it does play a big part in making everything look clearer and smoother.

Like ULMB monitors, it is (even more so) limited to individual consumption and probably not too focused on picture quality (contrast, color accuracy, HDR compatibility etc...). So I'm definitely interested in getting one upon upgrading GPU, but it's not exactly something that makes my new Samsung irrelevant, not in the slightest.
Perhaps down the I could switch to a high-refresh OLED monitor as my daily driver work/gaming hybrid (again, whenever CRT Sim is 100% useable), and use a VR headset when motion clarity takes priority over everything else.
Also curious to know how it handle low-fps content. Double image artifacts is always a concern at high refresh.

I have to say that I keep being impressed by the contrast/black levels on the Samsung. I bet I could trick some OLED elitists into thinking it is one, and that it would really take me bringing my mouse pointer into a black screen for them to notice it.
It ain't perfect, they could make a better version of it for sure, I'm just not sure it will happen any time soon.
So it's a compromise, perhaps the best compromise on the market, but a compromise nonetheless.

[roginthemachine]

Ive just found out my local TV dealer has a few QN90Ds still in stock, and might be making a purchase soon.
They’ve said they’re happy to let me test it out with the YouTube app, which should let me see how the BFI looks at 60Hz at least.

I had just two major remaining questions:

1) the Andrew Robinson review of the 98” model shows some pretty wierd picture processing over solid colours. Have you noticed this? I have a suspicion it only applies to the larger models. Watch at 10:10 >>>https://youtu.be/7TJ_KSRHnys?feature=shared
2) I’d still love to know whether the LED Clear Motion flickers at 50hz when applied over 50hz content - this would be easily apparent as the flicker would be brutal if it did, and perceptibly more unpleasant than the 60hz flicker.

Thank you!