Monitor Advice for someone with a neurological issue.

[whitespider]

Right now I am using a ips Catleap 2b panel. I have some neurological issues (called visual snow) that kicked in jan 2013 that affect my contrast and colour perception. This makes the dark scenes in films and games very hard to perceive and colours washed out. I call it sepia vision. And computer monitors tend to make it increase while using them. Almost like my brain is self dimming the picture. I also see yellow blobs of oil form in the white areas of the screen, glares, halo's, and everything is moving a little. I believe these things are inherent symptoms of my condition. There is research happening about the condition, however I still want to try and enjoy games to the best of my ability. I have been using sweetfx on this ips panel to boost the saturation, and tonemapping to boost the brightness of whites. This allows games to look mostly sharp and vibrant again.

Like most people, I am itching to get my hands on a Gsync screen. I won't be playing fast paced competitive fps games, so blurring is not a big issue for me. (I do like a relatively quick input rate however, my u2711 dell monitor felt like I was steering a tank). 4k is interesting to me because it has more pixels, so i figure that the higher pixel density might allow me to see more of games. And perhaps TN monitors allow blacks to be more clear for people with contrast issues?

So I have the choice between the asus 1440p monitor, with a native 8bit display (hopefully comparable to a low quality IPS or PLS) or the ACER XB280HK which uses the U28D590D samsung panel. Which is also very high color.

Now, being someone with a sensitive brain, I notice stutters extremely well. It seems widely reported that the biggest benefit of gsync is the 35-70hz range. And beyond that is a slight improvement. Since the 4k monitor is the majority of this range, and all I will be wanting to do is play stutter free high detail singleplayer games. That the 4k display might be more for me. However downgrading to TN is my major concern. I really don't know if a TN display will be better or worse for my visual disorder than the IPS. I have a TN laptop, however that is a cheap laptop, and probably not a good indication of what a quality TN screen will look like.

So there's my situation. Any input you might have to share about any suggestions would be welcome.

[Chief Blur Buster]

So there's my situation. Any input you might have to share about any suggestions would be welcome.

Very interesting, and unfortunate.
Thanks for explaining your condition. It sounds tricky to resolve with a monitor.

There are a few options I can see at the moment:

1. Try out a TN monitor and see how it works with your vision.
2. Wait for Overlord to release an IPS GSYNC monitor (it was talked about in Overlord Forums), probably a long wait.
3. Wait for another vendor to release an IPS monitor.
4. Tolerate the loss of color quality, and use a TN GSYNC monitor.

[whitespider]

1. So I tried out an old tn screen I had stashed away, it was a benq, the viewing angles where terrible, however that was to be expected. The gamma (black levels) actually seemed more perceptible on the TN screen. I could see in dark spaces a little better. However the overall brightness of the screen looked dull and faded. When I pushed the contrast and brightness to 90, the brightness felt lively however I could not see things like color differences for windows (like when you quote and there is a mild brown background, that became washed out). I believe this is normal when you raise brightness and contrast, regardless of your eyesight/vision.

What i learnt from this, was that I don't mind the colors and gamma of a TN screen for games (for windows use ips is worlds better) however the actual brightness of the TN screen when set to normal calibration levels was far too low. This Catleap 2b I am using is a very bright monitor, which counteracts a bit of my vision dimming. Perhaps another TN screen will have a higher brightness level?

2. Yes, I might have to do that. If i can find TN monitor with a lot of light output without negatively affecting the calibration and bleaching the screen, then i'll go for gsync on a tn screen instead of waiting 1-3 years for nvidia to pass along the production torch to overlord.

3. This is my other consideration, I would love to hear some news about a 60hz gsync IPS.

4. I booted up watchdogs on the TN screen (1920x1200 @ 60hz) and I found it quite good looking. I lost some of the finer details due to less colors, however the overall experience was great with the exception of the light output being too low for me not to feel like I was watching something very faded. Then again, it was raining in the game. So that probably did not help matters.

[Edmond]

Well, im no expert, but i would recomend the best quality gsync monitor you can get.

Gsync = flicker/stutter/lag/tearing/whatever permaGONE! And as you know - as long as you stay above 30fps, gsync is active.

If it is 120hz monitor, good - less blur.
This might not be a popular opinion but i, myself would never use ULMB or any other blur reduction method that introduces flicker and disables gsync. IMO the real way to get close to CRT blur is with flicker free native 240hz displays... which we wont see for a while.

1. Right now, the best one looks like to be the native 8bit TN asus rog Swift. However, they think 800$ is appropriate. I dont.
2. The next best thing would be one of the BENQ 24" or 27" 1080p gsync monitors. Should be around 600$.
Benq cares about eye health, they use better than most TN panels and have low blue light features and such. That feature alone might be worth it over the ROG Swift.

I cant think of any other healty gsync monitors. I dont trust acer, viewsonic and aoc... im sure they will use the worst tn panels they can get their greedy little hands on.
Also - Ive found that 21:9 ips`s are very comfortable to look at, but they are very difficult to smoothly enjoy games on, especially if you have seen gsync in action. I havent heard of any legit ips gsync monitors. Overlord computers are supposedly working on one, i wouldnt count on experimental monitors myself. Also, doesnt current ips @ 120hz turn into an intoreable blurfest?

Right now tho, i would suggest that 144hz 27" 1080p gsync from Benq as the healtiest and most comfortable one that we know of. Unfortunatelly it seems to have been pushed to September. (im still hoping thats bullshit)

[whitespider]

Thanks for your opinion edmond, much appreciated! I had someone else tell me benQ has some really good quality and eye friendly panels. And while it's not exactly my eyes are are at fault here, i do think that what comes into them plays very directly into my condition. I am using a 2560x1440, ips panel at 132hz at the moment, however it's also pretty bad for my eyes. (Catleap 2b)

I guess the big question is, can benq also deliver on picture quality as well. Because that asus gsync moddable monitor seems to have terrible picture quality

[Blural]

IMO the real way to get close to CRT blur is with flicker free native 240hz displays... which we wont see for a while.

I was thinking this myself. Even though 240hz is far from blur free, it may be as close as a compromise as we will see anytime soon and it may not be as far off as you think. To my understanding, DisplayPort 1.2 has enough bandwidth for a 240hz 8bit display and 1.3 should push that even further. I imagine a 4k 240hz adaptive-sync monitor could give strobing a run for its money. Then again, I haven't actually seen 240hz in action so it may prove to still be too blurry to compete. I understand the mathematical latency of 240hz but sometimes things look better in real life than on paper. I already find 120hz to be teetering on clear enough to be usable but ultimately too blurry.

[Q83Ia7ta]

IMO the real way to get close to CRT blur is with flicker free native 240hz displays... which we wont see for a while.

I was thinking this myself. Even though 240hz is far from blur free, it may be as close as a compromise as we will see anytime soon and it may not be as far off as you think. To my understanding, DisplayPort 1.2 has enough bandwidth for a 240hz 8bit display and 1.3 should push that even further. I imagine a 4k 240hz adaptive-sync monitor could give strobing a run for its money. Then again, I haven't actually seen 240hz in action so it may prove to still be too blurry to compete. I understand the mathematical latency of 240hz but sometimes things look better in real life than on paper. I already find 120hz to be teetering on clear enough to be usable but ultimately too blurry.

240Hz is possible even over DVI with removed pixelclock limit in drivers.
http://forums.blurbusters.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=48
I guess that "interface board" made with Catleap 2B PCB or with components from it.

[Chief Blur Buster]

If it is 120hz monitor, good - less blur. This might not be a popular opinion but i, myself would never use ULMB or any other blur reduction method that introduces flicker and disables gsync. IMO the real way to get close to CRT blur is with flicker free native 240hz displays... which we wont see for a while.

CRTs always flickers (impulse-driving), and the flicker of CRT is what gave it low persistence.

Also, 240Hz is not enough for CRT clarity, since 1/240sec = 4.1ms persistence. CRT had persistence of 1ms or less. We'd need 1000fps@1000Hz to get CRT quality without the impulse-driving.

Persistence of flicker-free display = (1/Hz)th second persistence
Persistence of impulse-driven display = length of impulse (whether it be CRT, or strobe backlight, etc)

[Edmond]

If it is 120hz monitor, good - less blur. This might not be a popular opinion but i, myself would never use ULMB or any other blur reduction method that introduces flicker and disables gsync. IMO the real way to get close to CRT blur is with flicker free native 240hz displays... which we wont see for a while.

CRTs always flickers (impulse-driving), and the flicker of CRT is what gave it low persistence.

Also, 240Hz is not enough for CRT clarity, since 1/240sec = 4.1ms persistence. CRT had persistence of 1ms or less. We'd need 1000fps@1000Hz to get CRT quality without the impulse-driving.

Persistence of flicker-free display = (1/Hz)th second persistence
Persistence of impulse-driven display = length of impulse (whether it be CRT, or strobe backlight, etc)

I know, i know. But i seriously doubt some light or quantum processors will suddenly take off to run everything @ 500 or 1000 fps to get that low CRT blur in real games. However 240fps output in games is realisticly doable now, even in most modern games if you have a few strong gpu`s and you play on low settings.
Not to mention the blur difference from 240 to 480 isnt that big to pay another 240fps`s for. While the difference between 120 and 240 is quite substantial.
Obviously im talking about flicker free variable refresh rate displays, otherwise there is no point (noone is gona get 240min or 1000min fps in any game, and flicker free is a must regardless, imo). But im sure opinions differ on this.

Now.
Not to get entirely offtopic...

Whitespider. I myself dont have any neurological issues, but i am incredibly senstitive to stutter/any form of lag/tearing/blur/you name it.
And i am incredibly frustrated that there arent any proper, non eye-damaging, non migrane-inducing monitors out there right now.

AMDs recent reveal of a working freesync 1440p IPS display @ computex is good news. A variable refresh rate IPS would be the most comfortable and healtiest monitor i cant think off. I personally would take a 60hz one like that over 120hz TN... its variable refresh rate - it will feel smoother and be cleaner than everything non VRR anyway.
Although IPS can do 72hz without introducing more artifacts or whatever, i wish more companies do that when variable refresh rate ips monitors start appearing.
Unfortunatelly, we have to wait till the end of the year - if we are VERY lucky.

I personally think im going to quit gaming entirely untill there is a 21:9 ips variable refresh rate monitor out there.
However, i doubt you want to take a break for an unknown period of time till the right monitor comes out, then i can only suggest taking a break till september, cuz we know that a gsynced Tn 27" from Benq is comming then.

But once you get used to 144hz gsync you wont be able to switch to one of those Variable Refresh Rate IPS`s later. Your only option afterwards then would be to wait for VRR OLED`s @ high HZ (which might take a while). If you plan to get one of these upcoming gsync TN`s and then want to upgrade to an VRR IPS, i suggest you cap your FPS/HZ @ 60 when using that gsyncTN. It should still feel smoother and cleaner than anything you have experienced before.

Anyway, thats just my suggestion.

[RealNC]

I know, i know. But i seriously doubt some light or quantum processors will suddenly take off to run everything @ 500 or 1000 fps to get that low CRT blur in real games.

CRTs have the exact same issues as strobed LCDs. If you don't get high enough FPS, motion blur increases and you get multiple-image effects. CRTs didn't make "magically" everything blur-free. 30FPS on a 120Hz CRT is going to look pretty much the same as 30FPS on 120Hz strobed LCD. Well, minus the colors, blacks and viewing angles, which are better in a CRT.