For modern LCDs that has a GtG of ~1ms (to >90% completion) my experience is visually perceived motion blur (persistence) is reliably a function of refresh rate -- so you'll have 1/240sec persistence. 240fps@240Hz will have half the motion blur of 120fps@120Hz. Basically, 4.1ms of motion blur. That's only twice as much motion blur as LightBoost default (~2ms) -- but with zero strobing!
The GtG speed (1ms) is still far faster than the refresh rate, so size of motion blur of optimal framerate situations (1/240sec blur trail, ~4.1ms) should still linearly scale with the refresh period (1/240sec refresh, ~4.1ms).
I predict that for any 240Hz LCDs (modern 1ms TN with well-tuned response time acceleration) viewing http://www.testufo.com/#test=photo&phot ... 0&height=0 -- you should begin to easily read street name labels on the Moving Map at 480 pixels/second (non-strobed). On regular 120Hz displays, that's at 240 pixels/second (non-strobed).
Presenting the ZOWIE XL2540 240Hz
- Chief Blur Buster
- Site Admin
- Posts: 11725
- Joined: 05 Dec 2013, 15:44
- Location: Toronto / Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
- Contact:
Re: Presenting the ZOWIE XL2540 240Hz
Head of Blur Busters - BlurBusters.com | TestUFO.com | Follow @BlurBusters on Twitter
Forum Rules wrote: 1. Rule #1: Be Nice. This is published forum rule #1. Even To Newbies & People You Disagree With!
2. Please report rule violations If you see a post that violates forum rules, then report the post.
3. ALWAYS respect indie testers here. See how indies are bootstrapping Blur Busters research!
Re: Presenting the ZOWIE XL2540 240Hz
I've tested Dell S2417DG S2417DG (165Hz) and got results: 3.9ms or 4.2ms. I've changed only Pixels Per Frame value. What's wrong with my results? Overdrive influence? Also http://forums.blurbusters.com/viewtopic ... prt#p22768Chief Blur Buster wrote:For modern LCDs that has a GtG of ~1ms (to >90% completion) my experience is visually perceived motion blur (persistence) is reliably a function of refresh rate -- so you'll have 1/240sec persistence. 240fps@240Hz will have half the motion blur of 120fps@120Hz. Basically, 4.1ms of motion blur. That's only twice as much motion blur as LightBoost default (~2ms) -- but with zero strobing!
The GtG speed (1ms) is still far faster than the refresh rate, so size of motion blur of optimal framerate situations (1/240sec blur trail, ~4.1ms) should still linearly scale with the refresh period (1/240sec refresh, ~4.1ms).
I predict that for any 240Hz LCDs (modern 1ms TN with well-tuned response time acceleration) viewing http://www.testufo.com/#test=photo&phot ... 0&height=0 -- you should begin to easily read street name labels on the Moving Map at 480 pixels/second (non-strobed). On regular 120Hz displays, that's at 240 pixels/second (non-strobed).
Re: Presenting the ZOWIE XL2540 240Hz
Q83Ia7ta wrote:Please try test by the description at top http://testufo.com/#test=mprt and tell us persistence.
Mate.... 4.1ms is measurably spot on.Chief Blur Buster wrote:240fps@240Hz will have half the motion blur of 120fps@120Hz. Basically, 4.1ms of motion blur. That's only twice as much motion blur as LightBoost default (~2ms) -- but with zero strobing!
Testing results:
240hz white background - 9 ppf - 5.1ms - 196 mmcr
240hz black background - 15 ppf - 3.1ms - 327 mmcr
average - 4.1ms - 261.5 mmcr
It started to hurt my eyes because it was moving so damn fast...
If its interesting to anybody the results stepping it down to 144hz and 120hz:
144hz white background - 10 ppf - 7.6ms - 131 mmcr
144hz black background - 14 ppf - 5.5ms - 183 mmcr
average - 6.55ms - 157 mmcr
120hz white background - 10 ppf - 9.2ms - 109 mmcr
120hz black background - 13 ppf - 7.1ms - 142 mmcr
average - 8.15ms - 125.5 mmcr
-
- Posts: 10
- Joined: 21 Nov 2016, 04:32
Re: Presenting the ZOWIE XL2540 240Hz
Any chance of you doing a review of this and the new XL2735? By the way, I use the strobelight app to achieve strobing on a ASUS VG278HE 27". How much input lag and latency am I getting? I use it with 10% brightness.Chief Blur Buster wrote:For modern LCDs that has a GtG of ~1ms (to >90% completion) my experience is visually perceived motion blur (persistence) is reliably a function of refresh rate -- so you'll have 1/240sec persistence. 240fps@240Hz will have half the motion blur of 120fps@120Hz. Basically, 4.1ms of motion blur. That's only twice as much motion blur as LightBoost default (~2ms) -- but with zero strobing!
The GtG speed (1ms) is still far faster than the refresh rate, so size of motion blur of optimal framerate situations (1/240sec blur trail, ~4.1ms) should still linearly scale with the refresh period (1/240sec refresh, ~4.1ms).
I predict that for any 240Hz LCDs (modern 1ms TN with well-tuned response time acceleration) viewing http://www.testufo.com/#test=photo&phot ... 0&height=0 -- you should begin to easily read street name labels on the Moving Map at 480 pixels/second (non-strobed). On regular 120Hz displays, that's at 240 pixels/second (non-strobed).
Thanks in advance.
- lexlazootin
- Posts: 1251
- Joined: 16 Dec 2014, 02:57
Re: Presenting the ZOWIE XL2540 240Hz
My god, i just tried to do the same test on my screen and you're right, it sucks. I think someone needs to figure out a new way of doing it because i'm flinging my head with the alien just to keep track
240hz white background - 9 ppf - 5.1ms - 196 mmcr
240hz black background - 15 ppf - 3.1ms - 327 mmcr
average - 4.1ms - 261.5 mmcr
Mangemongen it should be 1 frame like every other monitor.
240hz white background - 9 ppf - 5.1ms - 196 mmcr
240hz black background - 15 ppf - 3.1ms - 327 mmcr
average - 4.1ms - 261.5 mmcr
Mangemongen it should be 1 frame like every other monitor.
-
- Posts: 10
- Joined: 21 Nov 2016, 04:32
Re: Presenting the ZOWIE XL2540 240Hz
But I recall people saying there being added input lag when using this method. No?lexlazootin wrote: Mangemongen it should be 1 frame like every other monitor.
Any idea when this will happen?Denonic wrote: Full review to come with a comparison to the XL2420G and XL2735 (Dynamic Accuracy) model.
Re: Presenting the ZOWIE XL2540 240Hz
"like every other [lightboost] monitor" he meant i guess.Mangemongen wrote:But I recall people saying there being added input lag when using this method. No?lexlazootin wrote: Mangemongen it should be 1 frame like every other monitor.
Re: Presenting the ZOWIE XL2540 240Hz
Finished doing the tests i wanted. Zowie takes the monitors back tomorrow. Write up will be live by the end of the week, hopefully sooner if time permits.
-
- Posts: 10
- Joined: 21 Nov 2016, 04:32
Re: Presenting the ZOWIE XL2540 240Hz
Great, thanksDenonic wrote:Finished doing the tests i wanted. Zowie takes the monitors back tomorrow. Write up will be live by the end of the week, hopefully sooner if time permits.
Re: Presenting the ZOWIE XL2540 240Hz
What is your subjective feeling on the 240Hz thing? Is the difference hugely noticable vs 120/144Hz? Is there any "wow" factor like when jumping from 60Hz to 120/144Hz?