Why am I finding it easier to aim on 144Hz instead of 240Hz? (BenQ XL2546)
Re: Why am I finding it easier to aim on 144Hz instead of 240Hz? (BenQ XL2546)
I normally do not wirte that but: That is very interesting! I will have to try that out
Re: Why am I finding it easier to aim on 144Hz instead of 240Hz? (BenQ XL2546)
I definitely agree about seeing clearly means you can react faster. That's why I often played with FastSync on for example (no FreeSync on this model). It added noticeable lag, but the clarity was great.
Also, I noticed a clear improvement in lag by going to AMA Premium from High and on my machine I honestly didn't notice much, if any, worsening of the image while strobed.
That being said, my particular unit does look very very good at 240Hz strobed in the UFO Test. Even in-game. But there's just literal extra "input lag" (feels floaty). Going down to 144Hz (or 182Hz, though I did not compare it to 144Hz yet) does improve clarity while strobed but honestly not by much at all. The main thing is the improvement in the laggy feel.
I'm stumped as to why. I have an i9-9900K with an RTX 3080 and a 1000Hz USB mouse. It might just be Overwatch since I am running the game on Ultra settings and numerous YouTubers have commented that some of these graphical settings introduce lag, even if the fps hit isn't severe. So maybe going to a higher refresh does something to draw that out more. I don't know, I'm just guessing. It should be a linear improvement in feel but it's not, so who knows. I can clone my screen (for streaming) and I don't notice, so I don't see why just having a higher refresh rate would stress the GPU/system in any way as to introduce more lag.
Guess I'll have to go down from Ultra settings at some point. Part of what makes the game enjoyable for me after playing for so many years was getting to enjoy the graphics while still "tryharding".
I wish I had that latency analyzer on this machine. I'm still strongly considering moving to the Alienware 360Hz monitor. No strobing, but I can run G-Sync at 360fps/360Hz (OW's in-game cap is 400fps) with minimal lag which might offset some of that.
A question for you, Chief Blur Buster: Are there any custom resolution settings I can use (like Vertical Totals) to improve 240Hz itself or maybe something like 200-220Hz?
Also, I noticed a clear improvement in lag by going to AMA Premium from High and on my machine I honestly didn't notice much, if any, worsening of the image while strobed.
That being said, my particular unit does look very very good at 240Hz strobed in the UFO Test. Even in-game. But there's just literal extra "input lag" (feels floaty). Going down to 144Hz (or 182Hz, though I did not compare it to 144Hz yet) does improve clarity while strobed but honestly not by much at all. The main thing is the improvement in the laggy feel.
I'm stumped as to why. I have an i9-9900K with an RTX 3080 and a 1000Hz USB mouse. It might just be Overwatch since I am running the game on Ultra settings and numerous YouTubers have commented that some of these graphical settings introduce lag, even if the fps hit isn't severe. So maybe going to a higher refresh does something to draw that out more. I don't know, I'm just guessing. It should be a linear improvement in feel but it's not, so who knows. I can clone my screen (for streaming) and I don't notice, so I don't see why just having a higher refresh rate would stress the GPU/system in any way as to introduce more lag.
Guess I'll have to go down from Ultra settings at some point. Part of what makes the game enjoyable for me after playing for so many years was getting to enjoy the graphics while still "tryharding".
I wish I had that latency analyzer on this machine. I'm still strongly considering moving to the Alienware 360Hz monitor. No strobing, but I can run G-Sync at 360fps/360Hz (OW's in-game cap is 400fps) with minimal lag which might offset some of that.
A question for you, Chief Blur Buster: Are there any custom resolution settings I can use (like Vertical Totals) to improve 240Hz itself or maybe something like 200-220Hz?
- Chief Blur Buster
- Site Admin
- Posts: 11714
- Joined: 05 Dec 2013, 15:44
- Location: Toronto / Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
- Contact:
Re: Why am I finding it easier to aim on 144Hz instead of 240Hz? (BenQ XL2546)
That's an interesting observation. That said, it's useful to know if the latency gradient has changed, based on strobe phase.drmcninja wrote: ↑17 Feb 2021, 12:30That being said, my particular unit does look very very good at 240Hz strobed in the UFO Test. Even in-game. But there's just literal extra "input lag" (feels floaty). Going down to 144Hz (or 182Hz, though I did not compare it to 144Hz yet) does improve clarity while strobed but honestly not by much at all. The main thing is the improvement in the laggy feel.
What does www.testufo.com/crosstalk look like at 240Hz and what does it look like at 144Hz? Are crosstalk near the screen edges, or do they shift towards the middle of the screen? If so, that may explain part of the lag-lowering of 144Hz DyAc.
The latency gradient changes based on the position of the strobe phase (lag is lowest in the area immediately above the horizontal band of maximum strobe crosstalk).
See ANIMATIONS: Adjusting Strobe Phase & Crosstalk for more information.
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: Why am I finding it easier to aim on 144Hz instead of 240Hz? (BenQ XL2546)
I would suggest to stick this topic to the top or make some kind of manual. This is very useful information!!!