Blur Busters Forums

I don't think they'll arrive into consoles as a native feature.

My view is that they will arrive in "Box in Middle" products like Retrotink 4K's and cheaper 2030s descendants thereof. Basically you put a box between your console and your future 240Hz+ TV.

For more information, and how to help make it inexpensive eventually, see www.blurbusters.com/open-source-display

That's why I started the Blur Busters Open Source Display Initiative.

It will be "Bring Your Own Algorithm" (BYOA) -- See Why?
____

Thankfully, more Hz lets us BYOA.

The TV industry plans to bring more native 240Hz signal input to the premium television market in the coming years, though very niche in late 2020s but more common in 2030s. By end of the decade, it is likely that Mac's (Pro) will also be 240Hz in the 2030s, so that decade will be the slow-mainstreaming of 240Hz much like 2020s is the slow-mainstreaming of 120Hz.

See "Target Audience" in the Version 1.02 Specification section.

Chief Blur Buster wrote: ↑

26 Feb 2025, 15:24

I don't think they'll arrive into consoles as a native feature.

My view is that they will arrive in "Box in Middle" products like Retrotink 4K's and cheaper 2030s descendants thereof. Basically you put a box between your console and your future 240Hz+ TV.

For more information, and how to help make it inexpensive eventually, see www.blurbusters.com/open-source-display

That's why I started the Blur Busters Open Source Display Initiative.

It will be "Bring Your Own Algorithm" (BYOA) -- See Why?
____

Thankfully, more Hz lets us BYOA.

The TV industry plans to bring more native 240Hz signal input to the premium television market in the coming years, though very niche in late 2020s but more common in 2030s. By end of the decade, it is likely that Mac's (Pro) will also be 240Hz in the 2030s, so that decade will be the slow-mainstreaming of 240Hz much like 2020s is the slow-mainstreaming of 120Hz.

See "Target Audience" in the Version 1.02 Specification section.

Thanks for the heads up! RetroTINK4K it is.

I'll have to back track and recheck some of the older replies you sent my way about it's 60hz BFI, and it's limitations. I really hope it can run 60fps games at 1080p, while using '144hz' BFI(58% MB reduction) while only adding 6.94ms of input lag from it's BFI, since you mentioned BFI input lag is identical to the motion persistence itself. And then there's 165hz(With Samsung's 2025 flag ship QD-OLED), or even 240hz QD-OLED monitors. Would its 60fps BFI @1080p be compatible with those two refresh rates as well by cutting down 64% & 75% of motion blur?

Or is TINK4K's BFI, when gaming at 60fps, restricted to just 120hz/8.3ms/50% blur reduction? Thanks again.

NeonPizza wrote: ↑

26 Feb 2025, 15:53

Thanks for the heads up! RetroTINK4K it is.

I'll have to back track and recheck some of the older replies you sent my way about it's 60hz BFI, and it's limitations. I really hope it can run 60fps games at 1080p, while using '144hz' BFI(58% MB reduction) while only adding 6.94ms of input lag from it's BFI, since you mentioned BFI input lag is identical to the motion persistence itself. And then there's 165hz(With Samsung's 2025 flag ship QD-OLED), or even 240hz QD-OLED monitors. Would its 60fps BFI @1080p be compatible with those two refresh rates as well by cutting down 64% & 75% of motion blur?

Or is TINK4K's BFI, when gaming at 60fps, restricted to just 120hz/8.3ms/50% blur reduction? Thanks again.

Before you get one, what video sources do you need to blur-reduce? Retro resolution material or modern resolution material?

Output is limited to 4K60, 1440p120 and 1080p240. It's currently best for 240p/480p input, 1080p/1440p/4K output

Keep in mind you have some severe limitations if you use 1080p240Hz output with BFI or CRT simulation, in that it can do only retro-resolution sources (e.g. 240p maybe and possibly 480p).

Limitations will undoubtedly reduce in the future (2030s) when we gain far more capable boxes.

Retrotink 4K is only one of the world's first external video processors to gain BFI and CRT simulation; so first-timer limitations also apply, as impressive as it may be -- but keep expectations in check. It's not going to motion-blur-reduce your 4K60 content on 4K240 displays ....YET.

This is just simply the dawn of box-in-middle motion blur reduction.

The new beginning of BYOA (Bring Your Own Algorithm). The Wright Brothers era of software-based / injection-based motion blur reduction.

Chief

I was wondering. Is there a way for you to contact people at Sony and/or AMD to highlight the value of 480Hz output support?

Sony sadly has a track record of not supporting even more mainstream things even when the hardware is capable. I am afraid of Playstation 6 never getting 480Hz output support.

And they're sitting on a huuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuge library of retro games which would greatly benefit from CRT simulation.
Playstation 1, 2 and 3. All the games in 60fps.

This + CRT aperture grill simulation would open the door to outstanding games which would be basically free remasters for Sony. No invenstment whatsover, just release the old games as PS6 remaster with this and people would not only buy but also be greatful for perfect re-release (unless they'd eF up the the price, of course. I'm not going to pay 60€ for a PS2 game )

It would be such a stupid miss of great opportunity.

It's either too late already or the last time to act. When the PS6 project gets finalized, there may be unsolvable problems rooted in hardware. I hope 480Hz doesn't require any hardware and there are not problems with custom refreshrates, as long as it fits inside the bandwidth and pixel clock. If PS6 comes out with upcoming HDMI 2.2, the hardware should not be a problem, I think, but I'm a layman in temrs of HDMI/DP standards and HDMI/DP controllers.

Chief Blur Buster wrote: ↑

26 Feb 2025, 22:16

NeonPizza wrote: ↑

26 Feb 2025, 15:53

Thanks for the heads up! RetroTINK4K it is.

I'll have to back track and recheck some of the older replies you sent my way about it's 60hz BFI, and it's limitations. I really hope it can run 60fps games at 1080p, while using '144hz' BFI(58% MB reduction) while only adding 6.94ms of input lag from it's BFI, since you mentioned BFI input lag is identical to the motion persistence itself. And then there's 165hz(With Samsung's 2025 flag ship QD-OLED), or even 240hz QD-OLED monitors. Would its 60fps BFI @1080p be compatible with those two refresh rates as well by cutting down 64% & 75% of motion blur?

Or is TINK4K's BFI, when gaming at 60fps, restricted to just 120hz/8.3ms/50% blur reduction? Thanks again.

Before you get one, what video sources do you need to blur-reduce? Retro resolution material or modern resolution material?

Output is limited to 4K60, 1440p120 and 1080p240. It's currently best for 240p/480p input, 1080p/1440p/4K output

Keep in mind you have some severe limitations if you use 1080p240Hz output with BFI or CRT simulation, in that it can do only retro-resolution sources (e.g. 240p maybe and possibly 480p).

Limitations will undoubtedly reduce in the future (2030s) when we gain far more capable boxes.

Retrotink 4K is only one of the world's first external video processors to gain BFI and CRT simulation; so first-timer limitations also apply, as impressive as it may be -- but keep expectations in check. It's not going to motion-blur-reduce your 4K60 content on 4K240 displays ....YET.

This is just simply the dawn of box-in-middle motion blur reduction.

The new beginning of BYOA (Bring Your Own Algorithm). The Wright Brothers era of software-based / injection-based motion blur reduction.

I plan on using TINK4K for modern material, like Streaming(with a FireStick 4K Max) & a 4K Blu-ray Player, using it's 144hz triple strobe BFI so i can reduce my 144hz QD-OLED's motion blur by 58% @1080p, and reduce the film judder, which you mentioned prior surpasses both Plasma & CRT. I hear that setting introduces occasional image artifacts, and there's flicker, but the flicker as you said is tamer and less noticeable compared to regular 60hz BFI.

As for gaming, modern gaming that is, with Switch & PS5, I'm not entirely sure if i want to use TINK4K just yet if i can't get the latency low enough. I need to know the exact total amount of lag. I'm perfectly content with being capped at 1080p on a 65" OLED for 60fps titles, if i can cut down nearly 60% of the blur with a 144hz compatible OLED TV.

And I didn't realize that CRT simulation was a part of TINK4K. Unless I'm getting things mixed up again.
Question is, for modern gaming can it do 1080p @144hz BFI and reduces nearly 60% of the blur, or is it limited to 120hz at 1080p, and can it only reduce 50%?

I'm probably wrong but, in terms of lag >

2ms - Just by using TINK4K.
6.94ms - TINK4K BFI for 60fps gaming on a 144hz QD-OLED.
10ms - QD-OLED's Game mode when playing games at 60fps.

18.94ms - Total lag.

Does using TINK4K's Frame lock(Which i'm assuming is a must) add any additional latency into the mix? Also, if CRT Simulation is separate from the TINK4K's BFI that i'm describing, how much lag would it introduce at 1080p(or up to 4K if possible) + 144hz?

And no I don't plan on using it for retro gaming(Sticking with CRT for now), or 240hz just yet. Maybe 165hz or more possibly next year when Samsung releases a flagship QD-OLED without a Matte finish. 165hz would of been great with their new S95F this year, But i have to fall back to 144hz since it's got a glossy screen. And maybe I'm better off Using TINK4K's CRT simulation if it has less draw backs than TINK4K's BFI?

Be careful -- there's severe bandwidth limitations at play because of bandwidth limitations -- since Retrotink 4K was designed for retro so make sure you are able to work with the bandwidth limitations. The higher the output is configured to, the less input resolution you can support, and vice-versa.

In my opinion CRT simulation should be pushed by display manufacturers ie. sink devices and not source devices. No need for millions of different source devices to support any of this. Just plug any game console or whateverdevice to a display which supports CRT beam simulation. When beam simulation is enabled, game console would detect a display which only supports 60Hz or maybe 120Hz input and produces images accordingly. Display would then match beam simulation to native 240Hz/480Hz/960Hz refresh rate output to the panel.

Blurnabi wrote: ↑

27 Mar 2025, 06:23

In my opinion CRT simulation should be pushed by display manufacturers ie. sink devices and not source devices. No need for millions of different source devices to support any of this. Just plug any game console or whateverdevice to a display which supports CRT beam simulation. When beam simulation is enabled, game console would detect a display which only supports 60Hz or maybe 120Hz input and produces images accordingly. Display would then match beam simulation to native 240Hz/480Hz/960Hz refresh rate output to the panel.

You should see www.blurbusters.com/open-source-display

I am a big fan of "Bring Your Own Algorithm". A box between the console & the TV, that adds CRT simulation.

Someday, this will be inexpensive. Not right now (Retrotink 4K), but it's possible that in 10-20 years this becomes an easy dongle.

Chief Blur Buster wrote: ↑

23 Mar 2025, 03:18

Be careful -- there's severe bandwidth limitations at play because of bandwidth limitations -- since Retrotink 4K was designed for retro so make sure you are able to work with the bandwidth limitations. The higher the output is configured to, the less input resolution you can support, and vice-versa.

I'm guessing the bandwidth limitations are what's causing the occasional image artifacts when pushing triple strobe BFI @1080p for 24-30fps, to cut down 58% of motion blur(with a 144hz QD-OLED)movie/tv content?

The best case scenario would be if Microsoft / AMD / Nvidia / Valve - one of those 4 implements it on a low level/driver level.

This way the user doesn't have to pay a premium (tink4k, etc.)
And isn't stuck with a "black box" (closed source display software) without potential future code improvements (you'd have to buy a new display for the newest software)

I think the two most likely companies to offer this are Valve (via Gamescope) and Nvidia (they'll rebrand it to Pulsar ULTRA or something...)

In the unlikely case of Microsoft offering the needed API changes requested by potential developers, we could also achieve it through ReShade or SpecialK