Blur Busters Forums

Chief Blur Buster wrote: ↑

20 Jan 2026, 22:40

Instead, your newer photos shows a fake 600Hz, showing only 240 out of 600 cable-delivered refresh cycles per second.

If I was scamming people like that, I'd sell this as a feature. "Display-based Fast Sync up to 600Hz" or "600Hz-Ready"

RealNC wrote: ↑

21 Jan 2026, 07:35

Chief Blur Buster wrote: ↑

20 Jan 2026, 22:40

Instead, your newer photos shows a fake 600Hz, showing only 240 out of 600 cable-delivered refresh cycles per second.

If I was scamming people like that, I'd sell this as a feature. "Display-based Fast Sync up to 600Hz" or "600Hz-Ready"

Incidentally, it's probably a QFT-friendly 240Hz, where you can create a custom 240Hz mode (in a Custom Resolution Utility, such as ToastyX or NVIDIA) where each 240Hz refresh cycle is cable-delivered in 1/600sec.

Assuming a common 1150 vertical total at 240Hz, you could use a vertical total of 600/240ths that -- so approximately a vertical total of 2875 in a Custom Resolution Utility = 240Hz mode with 1/600sec frame transport latency (average halftime = 0.5/600sec).

So if you are stuck with this display -- Then you can turn scammer lemon into lemonade.

By making this a "Uber low latency 240Hz Monitor, less lag than other 240Hz monitors" (theoretically) by creating the nonstandard 240Hz mode in ToastyX CRU or NVIDIA CRU.

Thank you all. I returned this monitor to the seller and received a full refund, namely $442. Now I strongly advise against buying unknown Chinese brands; they're often scams. Then I bought a Samsung S27FG602SI for almost $800. Yes, my country has terrible pricing; for example, in the US, this monitor sells for $600. I'm not happy with this pricing. It's an OLED 1440p 500Hz monitor, and you know, the difference between 240Hz and 500Hz is quite small; in games running at 500 fps, it's not as noticeable as you'd expect. In any case, enemy models look larger on a 27-inch monitor than on a 24.5-inch monitor.

F1zus wrote: ↑

26 Jan 2026, 02:04

Thank you all. I returned this monitor to the seller and received a full refund, namely $442. Now I strongly advise against buying unknown Chinese brands; they're often scams. Then I bought a Samsung S27FG602SI for almost $800. Yes, my country has terrible pricing; for example, in the US, this monitor sells for $600. I'm not happy with this pricing. It's an OLED 1440p 500Hz monitor, and you know, the difference between 240Hz and 500Hz is quite small; in games running at 500 fps, it's not as noticeable as you'd expect. In any case, enemy models look larger on a 27-inch monitor than on a 24.5-inch monitor.

500Hz is only as good as your weak link.

If your mouse is only 800dpi, moving mouse slowly at 0.25" per second for "tracking manoevers" in a game will only mouselook at 200 positions per second = 200fps effective (800dpi * 0.25 = 200 mouselook positions per second).

Try upgrading your mouse + mousesettings
- 1600-3200dpi+
- 2000Hz+ pollrate (above 1000Hz, but don't overload your game's mouseloop = degrades framerate)
- Low in-game mouse sensitivity
- Clean mousepad and mousefeet

Then it will milk 240-vs-500Hz differences better during slowtracks (medium-speed visual scanning-based style mouse movements, at 1 to 2 screenwidth per second panning/mouselooks). Like medium-speed panning in RTS, or "scanning the horizon" for camouflaged enemies in a tank game, or 3rd-person-view games where mouselook-blur is more amplified than 1st-person view.

Low mouse DPI sabotages the visibility refresh rate improvements for slow-track / slow-movement manoevers in game. (Doesn't affect aimtrainer / doesn't affect fastflicks / you might not see 240-vs-500 difference much for stare-at-crosshairs types of games).

Also, tiny jitters from any sources (mouse jitters, or game jitters, or fps-vs-Hz jitters) can obscure Hz differences. For example, 580fps at 500Hz VSYNC OFF is potentially 80 jitters/sec that blends into more motion blur. So you have an incentive to optimize your sync technology if you're prioritizing motion quality over low latency.

Your sweet spot for 240-vs-500 benefit will be motionspeeds of approximately one screen width per second. If you play any specific games that benefit from scrolling/panning roughly that fast (instead of slower pans or faster flick shoots), that's where 240-vs-500 start to really shine especially if you optimize all your jitters out.

Also if you play any emulation or use YouTube 60fps content, try out ShaderBeam. You can reduce your 60fps motion blur by up to approximately ~85% with the www.testufo.com/crt CRT-BFI simulation technique (can reduce more motion blur than hardware OLED BFI). The extra Hz is beneficial for large-ratio motion blur reduction of low frame rates too! (making 60fps look like 500fps 500Hz).