Blur Busters Forums

jorimt wrote: ↑

19 Jun 2024, 15:56

daviddave1 wrote: ↑

19 Jun 2024, 12:31

The weird thing is that the 250 nits of my oled 271qrx makes the screen brighter then the 320 nits my pg248qp tn ulmb2 screen produce. Tft tweeted me that luminance is luminance no matter what monitortech is used. This is def. Not the case. I can highly reccomend the 271qrx it's quite insane.

An increased contrast ratio can cause a perception of higher average luminance, even if the display is actually dimmer; raw nits aren't the be all and end all where perceptual brightness is concerned.

Anyway, my point was the nit output expectation of the typical consumer has become absurdly high and is only possible due to the advent of modern display backlight technology, with ~300 nits seeming to be the bare minimum acceptable average (with or without strobing/BFI), which is already a 3x times increase over the ~100 nits that we simply had to settle with in the CRT-era.

I heard the Sony FW900 CRT is the best monitor there is period. Only downside is the low brightness and 45kg weight. It has unmatched low motion blur. It's simply not there. The ufo test should be perfect on it. Not 100% sure about the responsetimes though. I think it's 0. Oh the last downside is it's price tag. They usually go for $3000. Did u ever considered getting one?

daviddave1 wrote: ↑

20 Jun 2024, 17:18

Did u ever considered getting one?

Heh, no, but I've heard similar things about that model. Last CRT I had was the Sony KV-24FS120 back in 2004. Was a pretty decent consumer-level set for the time.

daviddave1 wrote: ↑

20 Jun 2024, 17:18

Not 100% sure about the responsetimes though. I think it's 0.

!!VERY IMPORTANT for avoid any confusion!!
The faster *response* time does NOT belong less motion blur but yes the lower *persistence* time reduces the motion blur.

nuninho1980 wrote: ↑

21 Jun 2024, 02:04

daviddave1 wrote: ↑

20 Jun 2024, 17:18

I heard the Sony FW900 CRT is the best (...) It has unmatched low motion blur. It's simply not there. The ufo test should be perfect on it. Not 100% sure about the responsetimes though. I think it's 0.

Disagreed. I follow to any object ultra-fastly moving on CRT display and... I do NEVER get any motion blur on any CRT display!

!!VERY IMPORTANT for avoid any confusion!!
The faster *response* time does NOT belong less motion blur but yes the lower *persistence* time reduces the motion blur.

I don't understand where u disagree. I said I heard crt simply does not have any blur u disagree cause u never get any motion blur on crt? Confused smiley face.

daviddave1 wrote: ↑

21 Jun 2024, 03:49

I don't understand where u disagree. I said I heard crt simply does not have any blur u disagree cause u never get any motion blur on crt? Confused smiley face.

I edited with "Disagreed" deleted included in my past post. Sorry.

OLED has the response time of 0.03ms but this has MPRT (Motion Picture Response Time - it means the persistence time) of only down to 4 ms (= not less than 4 ms).

nuninho1980 wrote: ↑

21 Jun 2024, 05:24

OLED has the response time of 0.03ms but this has MPRT (Motion Picture Response Time - it means the persistence time) of only down to 4 ms (= not less than 4 ms).

It varies on OLED.

For example, some OLEDs go down to 1ms or 2ms, but you've got to cherrypick.
For example, the Oculus Rift has a pulsewidth of 2ms. (strobed 2ms on OLED)
And the new 480 Hz OLED has 2ms persistence at 480fps. (sample and hold 2ms on OLED).
And the upcoming 1000 Hz OLED has 1ms persistence.

Make sure you study this chart very carefully to understand strobed persistence versus sample-and-hold persistence:



That said, LCD strobe backlights can easily go briefer than 1ms, and there is the Tablot-Plateau Theorem, it's easier to strobe an external light source (backlight) brighter, than the direct pixels brighter. However, OLED at 2ms persistence and less simply looks wonderful, and you're fine with 1-2ms for Sonic Hedgehog scroll speeds (at low retro resolutions) and 4ms for Super Mario Brothers scroll speeds (at low retro resolutions).

Now that said, if you're needing to motion-blur-reduce much higher resolution content, and you're somebody who sees the difference between 0.5ms and 1ms and 2ms persistence (which is easy to see with fast-scrolling high-resolution content like www.testufo.com/map at 3000 pixels/sec), that becomes a bottleneck.

Generally, 2ms MPRT sample and hold OLED looks better than 1ms MPRT strobed LCD, but the problem is that getting 2ms sample and hold motion blur is you need 2ms frametimes (aka ~500fps!) to achieve that persistence without strobing/flicker/pulsing.

Chief Blur Buster wrote: ↑

22 Jun 2024, 13:20

It varies on OLED.
(...)
Generally, 2ms MPRT sample and hold OLED looks better than 1ms MPRT strobed LCD, but the problem is that getting 2ms sample and hold motion blur is you need 2ms frametimes (aka ~500fps!) to achieve that persistence without strobing/flicker/pulsing.

Can you remember me for many years? I'm sorry for bad english. But I got confusion with *bad orthography* of @daviddave1.

But you say *new* OLEDs (non-VR) with less than 2ms MRPT (for strobe/BFI only) on... only TODAY despite no any new better strobed monitor from BlurBusters.com. Still no any new OLED with *very good or excellent* single-strobe for 50Hz for years!??

daviddave1 wrote: ↑

19 Jun 2024, 03:19

I got the 271QRX I am very happy with it.
its even brighter then the pg24 540hz asus with ulmb2.

looks insane.

I returned the 271QRX OLEDmonitor cause is to blurry.
The 271qrx monitor is much brighter then i thought it would be.
Games look jaw dropping good. Apex Legends looks very good also.
Games like Elden Ring looks like never I ever seen before. This is the way Elden Ring needs to be played. Its almost a sin playing this game on a other monitor. U miss so much if u do.
Now here s the thing. I also play Quake Live, and PUBG. Those games look better but I have the feeling that on the pg248qp I got more frags in PUBG. The motion clearity is better with ULMB 2. In Quake Live im still on top sometimes but not with leaps. Chances are I am gonna get the XL2586X zowie or the ASUS ROG Swift OLED PG27AQDP if the strobing is top notch.

daviddave1 wrote: ↑

24 Jun 2024, 00:01

daviddave1 wrote: ↑

19 Jun 2024, 03:19

I got the 271QRX I am very happy with it.
its even brighter then the pg24 540hz asus with ulmb2.

looks insane.

I returned the 271QRX OLEDmonitor cause is to blurry.
The 271qrx monitor is much brighter then i thought it would be.
Games look jaw dropping good. Apex Legends looks very good also.
Games like Elden Ring looks like never I ever seen before. This is the way Elden Ring needs to be played. Its almost a sin playing this game on a other monitor. U miss so much if u do.
Now here s the thing. I also play Quake Live, and PUBG. Those games look better but I have the feeling that on the pg248qp I got more frags in PUBG. The motion clearity is better with ULMB 2. In Quake Live im still on top sometimes but not with leaps. Chances are I am gonna get the XL2586X zowie or the ASUS ROG Swift OLED PG27AQDP if the strobing is top notch.

I'm looking forward to PG27AQDP. I don't think my 3080Ti can maintain 480FPS at native 1440p in modern titles, but I should be able to get away with 1440p 240fps/240Hz using the BFI feature. Depending on the game, I need to use DLSS or play at lower resolutions than 1080p to get 500+ fps for my PG248QP. Maybe when the RTX 5090 comes out I can upgrade and run everything at native 1440p 480FPS.

Boop wrote: ↑

24 Jun 2024, 00:44

I'm looking forward to PG27AQDP. I don't think my 3080Ti can maintain 480FPS at native 1440p in modern titles, but I should be able to get away with 1440p 240fps/240Hz using the BFI feature. Depending on the game, I need to use DLSS or play at lower resolutions than 1080p to get 500+ fps for my PG248QP. Maybe when the RTX 5090 comes out I can upgrade and run everything at native 1440p 480FPS.

ULMB 2 generally works at a lower refresh rate, but what's annoying is that ULMB has a refresh rate restriction at the moment.

Hardware-based native-Hz strobing is so good that sometimes 120fps 120Hz ULMB looks better than anything 120-480fps @ 480Hz unstrobed, from a motion clarity perspective. However, native unstrobed is brighter and more colorful.

Just saying that lower refresh rate can have better motion clarity, if the pulsewidths are briefer than the frametimes you can get at a higher refresh rate.

Motion blur of strobed = pulsewidth (but you want framerate=Hz)
Motion blur of unstrobed = frametime (which makes it harder to have less blur than strobed)

The two distrinct methods of blur busting (strobing vs brute framerate) have separate pros/cons.