Blur Busters Forums

Argus wrote: ↑

03 Feb 2026, 11:37

correct me if I'm wrong but it seems like low fps gaming <120 ish fps on pulsar isn't looking too good
I'm really disappointed since it seems like the one of the key points of pulsar is allow low fps to have better clarity and I was hoping I could play some classic games on this monitor without issues
I'm not a fan of framegen either so playing a 60fps locked game doubled to 120 is a no go for me. 30 fps, forget about it since there's too many artifacts. For 120fps locked games and below, it seems better to just keep your refresh rate locked at 240hz or 360hz with vrr disabled.
Just gonna have to wait for the mythical 1080hz monitor at this point if they don't work on improving pulsar at all

Until the firmware update comes the best way to play 60fps content is with lossless scaling activated to whatever frame rate you want, yes there are artifacts, but it does a surprisingly good job even up to 360Hz, it's not a perfect solution but better than not having the option at all and pulsar magic does the rest.

bbuser wrote: ↑

04 Feb 2026, 02:26

Argus wrote: ↑

03 Feb 2026, 11:37

correct me if I'm wrong but it seems like low fps gaming <120 ish fps on pulsar isn't looking too good
I'm really disappointed since it seems like the one of the key points of pulsar is allow low fps to have better clarity and I was hoping I could play some classic games on this monitor without issues
I'm not a fan of framegen either so playing a 60fps locked game doubled to 120 is a no go for me. 30 fps, forget about it since there's too many artifacts. For 120fps locked games and below, it seems better to just keep your refresh rate locked at 240hz or 360hz with vrr disabled.
Just gonna have to wait for the mythical 1080hz monitor at this point if they don't work on improving pulsar at all

Until the firmware update comes the best way to play 60fps content is with lossless scaling activated to whatever frame rate you want, yes there are artifacts, but it does a surprisingly good job even up to 360Hz, it's not a perfect solution but better than not having the option at all and pulsar magic does the rest.

Its not looking good either at 360 hz. The motion clarity is only a visible at 240 hz, at higher fps the effect seems to wear off and add crosstalk and not enough OD to pixels.

brownvim wrote: ↑

28 Jan 2026, 07:53

daviddave1 wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2026, 17:43

Pg27aqn and pg248qp cut nits with at least 30% when strobing is activated. I had both monitors. How is this on the pulsar monitor? Does pulsar affects brightness?

its around 540nits max brightness with pulsar on, measured with a i1Display Plus.

Thats fullscreen white too.

When you turn pulsar on the monitor goes a tiny bit brighter.

Hi! Can you tell me the minimum brightness when Pulsar is on? Thanks!

SixelAlexiS wrote: ↑

04 Feb 2026, 18:45

brownvim wrote: ↑

28 Jan 2026, 07:53

daviddave1 wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2026, 17:43

Pg27aqn and pg248qp cut nits with at least 30% when strobing is activated. I had both monitors. How is this on the pulsar monitor? Does pulsar affects brightness?

its around 540nits max brightness with pulsar on, measured with a i1Display Plus.

Thats fullscreen white too.

When you turn pulsar on the monitor goes a tiny bit brighter.

Hi! Can you tell me the minimum brightness when Pulsar is on? Thanks!

Its about 100 nits

SixelAlexiS wrote: ↑

04 Feb 2026, 18:45

brownvim wrote: ↑

28 Jan 2026, 07:53

daviddave1 wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2026, 17:43

Pg27aqn and pg248qp cut nits with at least 30% when strobing is activated. I had both monitors. How is this on the pulsar monitor? Does pulsar affects brightness?

its around 540nits max brightness with pulsar on, measured with a i1Display Plus.

Thats fullscreen white too.

When you turn pulsar on the monitor goes a tiny bit brighter.

Hi! Can you tell me the minimum brightness when Pulsar is on? Thanks!

123nits

Dyac2 144hz has a higher effective motion clarity than pulsar at 360hz, pulsar at 360hz around 900hz from kyube, so basically a 600hz oled clarity, this tech is starting to seem underwhelming

MSIfanboy wrote: ↑

06 Feb 2026, 01:13

Dyac2 144hz has a higher effective motion clarity than pulsar at 360hz, pulsar at 360hz around 900hz from kyube, so basically a 600hz oled clarity, this tech is starting to seem underwhelming

I’m surprised about all the mixed takes on the monitor. Maybe it’s because of different use cases, not sure.

I have the pulsar, been gaming on it the past week (Black Myth Wukong from my backlog I’m trying to get through). I went back to my OLED and it looks horrible in motion now.

I should state the oled is only 175hz but this is a heavy game to run and that’s around the same frame rate I’m running it on the Pulsar. I find the OLED irritating/jarring/off putting to look at because of the blur now.

brownvim wrote: ↑

06 Feb 2026, 01:39

MSIfanboy wrote: ↑

06 Feb 2026, 01:13

Dyac2 144hz has a higher effective motion clarity than pulsar at 360hz, pulsar at 360hz around 900hz from kyube, so basically a 600hz oled clarity, this tech is starting to seem underwhelming

I’m surprised about all the mixed takes on the monitor. Maybe it’s because of different use cases, not sure.

I have the pulsar, been gaming on it the past week (Black Myth Wukong from my backlog I’m trying to get through). I went back to my OLED and it looks horrible in motion now.

I should state the oled is only 175hz but this is a heavy game to run and that’s around the same frame rate I’m running it on the Pulsar. I find the OLED irritating/jarring/off putting to look at because of the blur now.

This has been my experience. I sold my 4k 240hz OLED after a week of using this. 4K HDR OLED is great for so many things, but this is just something else entirely.

brownvim wrote: ↑

06 Feb 2026, 01:39

I’m surprised about all the mixed takes on the monitor. Maybe it’s because of different use cases, not sure.

I have the pulsar, been gaming on it the past week (Black Myth Wukong from my backlog I’m trying to get through). I went back to my OLED and it looks horrible in motion now.

I should state the oled is only 175hz but this is a heavy game to run and that’s around the same frame rate I’m running it on the Pulsar. I find the OLED irritating/jarring/off putting to look at because of the blur now.

The point is that these models don't have a clear-cut use-case they solve.
There are models which cost 1/4 the asking price of these models without their detriments (TMDS standard "HDMI 2.1" port, locked down PW adjustments in ULMB2 mode, DP1.4 only for Pulsar, Nvidia GPU vendor lock-in, added processing latency)
Fixed refresh rate strobing (Dyac1/+/2, ULMB 1, PureXP), when being limited by the game's frame rate for chasing eye-tracked motion performance, is a far better clarity target than variable refresh rate strobing (Pulsar).
Even the older single-strobe BenQ models (e.g.: XL2411P) or others listed here do a far better job for a “retro” (<100FPS) use-case. Even a CRT with an adapter is a much better option.
VSYNC exists for fixed refresh rate as well. SK's Latent-Sync exists. RTSS' Scanline-Sync exists.
700€ gets you a 610Hz TN (e.g.: AOC CS24A / AG246FK6) or +360Hz OLED (e.g.: Philips 27M2N8500), both of which come with HDMI 2.1. as of Q1 2026
250€ gets you a AOC Q25G4SR (24.5" QHD 300Hz KSF/PFS IPS LCD)

Clear cost cutting.
The Mediatek MT9810 (scaler IC) found in these Pulsar models is able to do HDMI 2.1 FRL6.
If they've launched it <500€ with HDMI 2.1 FRL6, I could somewhat understand it's appeal in today's market.
But now?
OLED exists within the same price range, making it's sample & hold performance irrelevant.
Better backlight strobing exists within the same price range, making it's impulsed performance irrelevant.
What use-case does it have?

Can anyone test this claim with their Pulsar monitor? Is pulse width ~25% (~0.7 ms) as advertised or ~40% (~1.1 ms)?

I recommend this test for quick approximate MPRT measurements. I adjusted the parameters for this test specifically (~3840 px/sec speed, 4 indicators, decimal), but feel free to test other speeds too, preferably 2880 px/sec or faster.
https://testufo.com/mprt#pps=3840&count ... er=decimal

One must eye track the moving pattern and look for following: display's approximate persistence will be shown as perfectly joined lines/bands with no horizontal overlapping or separation. Imperfect convergence means persistence is somewhere in-between the embedded values. What does it lean more towards to? 0.7 or 1.1 ms? You'll probably want to pixel peep for this test.



Testing it only at 360 Hz 360 fps (testufo scenario) should be enough to confirm since that's where it supposedly deviates the most. Normally testufo doesn't work with VRR, and should not be used for testing VRR range. But for max refresh and frame rate, like in this case it is fine.