Asus 240hz native new screen

[leonman45]

Hello guys , Asus is going to release really soon the PG258Q 240hz native screen with gsync but still a tn panel with 1080p so we are talking about a bit old tech...

Asus link: https://rog.asus.com/articles/gaming-mo ... ft-pg258q/

Linus quick glimpse: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3uDsTZ ... mifcneae04

I am currently on a 1080p lps S24D590L monitor oced to 75hz with a 980ti oced equal to a stock reference 1080 gtx. I love high refrest rate , used in the past a 144hz monitor and it was night and day difference for me (tn panel was really bad though , colours in the bottom was washed out and in the top really dark , i though that it was defective , not sure for that but got a refund).

Is this monitor going to worth it from a 144hz one over time? or should i choose a 1440p 144hz? (but then i will not have enough power to push the fps)

[Q83Ia7ta]

There are already 240Hz monitors with exactly same panel on the market:
BenQ XL2540 with FreeSync
AOC AGON AG251FZ with FreeSync review
This ASUS PG258Q comes with G-Sync.
Some other 240Hz models with same panel are coming soon.
I'm currently on BenQ XL2540. I'm using that monitor for competitive gaming. I used Dell S2417DG (1440p 144/165Hz), Asus PG248Q (1080p 144/180Hz). BenQ XL2540 color quality is similar to Dell S2417DG and they are both a bit better than Asus PG248Q especially at 180Hz (OC mode). I guess you had defective 144Hz.
240Hz is for competitive gaming.

[RealNC]

Personally, 240Hz leaves me with a "meh" feeling. It's difficult to get over 120FPS in games, unless you drop the resolution to 900p. And even then you might be CPU-limited and still can't over 120FPS.

I believe 120Hz/144Hz non-TN and with blur reduction is what to look forward to. (Well, OLED is what to look forward to, but that's longer term...)

If you need a Counter-Strike monitor, then OK, 240Hz makes sense. But would you get a monitor for just a single game?

[leonman45]

Yeah , i clearly avoided the pg248q for bunch of reasons , seems really bad panel at 160-180hz cause its a 120hz native.

I play a lot of games , any types but mostly first person shooters , in the newer heavy ones like Bf1 my card can pull up mostly 120fps and in not such heavy or new games it can do 160-300+ fps , so i will enjoy 50%-100% of my sceen but thats for now , i plan to keep this screen for 1-2 more gpu upgrades (at least 4 years) until it can push 200fps without drops and fenefit from the 100% of the performance of the monitor. If i choose the 1440p for now i will be playing the new ones at 60fps (bliah ) so it wont be that enjoyable for now... But is the difference equal from 60 to 144? i mean our brains/eyes are not the same so everyone feels the difference , well... different but i could feel easily the different from 120 to 144 so i guess i can go higher.

As for freesync , i wont go back to amd they really let me down so gsync only....

No cpu limits my friend , i have a 5820k overclocked to 4.5ghz , it doesnt even stress with the games right now

[lexlazootin]

I think 240 or even 144hz+ is a bigger deal then you guys think.

You get much less noticeable screen tearing EVEN at lower fps since by the time the frame is drawn the next refresh shows up to clear it away. I noticed this specially when emulating game like Melee. On a 240hz without V-Sync it's much more difficult to notice screen tears compared to 120.

With a 1080 you can pull a 147fps avg in very modern games like BF1 on ultra settings. With G-Sync that would be a pretty ideal scenario.

[leonman45]

I always play with vsync , for me there is not less noticable tearing , just a non vsync cant be as smooth as vsync(even if it produce more input lag i cant stand with non vsync) thats why a gsync will benefit me like nothing else! Yeah 140-150 fps in bf1 with an oced 1080 its not an upgrade yet... but 1080ti actually can be a nice upgrade in some months!

I will go for this monitor when it launches in Europe , linus said that price will be around 500$ when i was expecting about 700 so i thing that is worth it!

[RPGWiZaRD]

The probably biggest news, at least for me, is that the monitor supports all the way to 240Hz in ULMB!! What does this put it in terms of motion smoothness capabilities vs a CRT (better than a 120Hz CRT)? I mean twice as fast ULMB speed as previously has been possible must mean some ultra smooth motion right there.

phpBB [video]

The colors seem to be quite fine for a TN panel (well should be true 8bit) and the BLB in this video looks very reasonable, the brightness looks to be set relatively high as the colors pop quite a lot in the video and still the screen looks fairly even when it goes black in between, perhaps not the deepest possible black but at least it looks very even.

[Falkentyne]

First of all, what matters in strobing is the persistence, but comparing a LCD to a CRT is very tricky, because the strobing isn't done exactly the same way.

A CRT at 120hz is 8.3ms of persistence. However there is no crosstalk (overdrive artifacts don't exist on CRT's) and the response time of phosphors are in the NANOSECONDS. I would estimate that a 120hz CRT would strobe at somewhere around 0.5ms to 1.0ms of true persistence, if you related this to LCD strobing.

The issue with LCD strobing is, the STROBE persistence isn't based on the refresh rate, as opposed to pixel persistence (sample and hold) but a higher refresh rate does have an impact on how fast objects can move on the screen (via sample and hold AND Via strobing) before they appear to be "skipping frames" (not the same as sample and hold). But with LCD strobing, the persistence is how long the backlight is flashed ON during a single frame, in respect to how long the backlight is flashed off. So you could say in a twisted way, that a "strobed" LCD with 8.3ms of persistence isn't strobing at all, as the backlight is on during the entire frame (thus, sample and hold).

At 240hz ULMB, what matters is the persistence. 1.0ms persistence at 240hz will look better than 1.0ms of persistence at 120hz at FAST MOTION. At slow motion, it will look the same. The bigger benefit is you won't notice any flickering.

Crosstalk on the other hand...that remains to be seen. Traditional strobing at 240hz would have strobe crosstalk from the previous / next frame covering half the screen, so something else has to be done to deal with this. One way is larger blanking intervals. Another way is the Samsung method, of strobing the backlight in several positions on the screen (quadrants, or whatever they do in their new VA panels) instead of having it done from one entire screen flash.

[flood]

First of all, what matters in strobing is the persistence, but comparing a LCD to a CRT is very tricky, because the strobing isn't done exactly the same way.

A CRT at 120hz is 8.3ms of persistence.

might as well call it infinity
for example if you're in a dark room you can see cursor trails on a dark background for quite a while

However there is no crosstalk (overdrive artifacts don't exist on CRT's) and the response time of phosphors are in the NANOSECONDS. I would estimate that a 120hz CRT would strobe at somewhere around 0.5ms to 1.0ms of true persistence, if you related this to LCD strobing.

actually the intensity drops to half of its peak value in ~15us or so (see my images in the input lag thread, pg32)
but it's not a pure exponential decay so you can't really characterize the persistence with a single number.

on testufo.com, on my crt, dark text on a light background looks completely sharp up to ~2000 px/second. beyond that it's nearly impossibe to track with my eyes

btw @chief: if you read this: you should change the speed selection on testufo to multiples of the refresh rate, so that there's no jitter from rounding

[RealNC]

A CRT at 120hz is 8.3ms of persistence.

might as well call it infinity
for example if you're in a dark room you can see cursor trails on a dark background for quite a while

As opposed to an LCD where in a dark room you cannot see a dark background to begin with. Just dark gray and the backlight shining through unevenly, especially at the edges