Blur Busters Forums

BTRY B 529th FA BN wrote: ↑

08 Sep 2021, 14:43

There's no issue, according to the post by SirensOW it's only 1ms faster.. at one point I was seriously considering it even without any data/review. Maybe there will be a review in the future that changes my mind but I'm content and not obsessing about it atm, and in my case the price shot up also so there's that too

lizardpeter wrote: ↑

08 Sep 2021, 16:31

BTRY B 529th FA BN wrote: ↑

08 Sep 2021, 14:43

There's no issue, according to the post by SirensOW it's only 1ms faster.. at one point I was seriously considering it even without any data/review. Maybe there will be a review in the future that changes my mind but I'm content and not obsessing about it atm, and in my case the price shot up also so there's that too

I don't use BFI, but that 2.7 ms difference between the XV252QF and the PG269QN with BFI is pretty significant for latency differences between monitors. The 3.6 ms difference between the XV252QF and the ZL2546K with BFI is also pretty large. What is interesting to me is just how much of a difference there is when BFI is off on the XV252QF and Dyac is on with the Zowie monitor. A difference in latency of 4.4 ms is, for me, not worth it to go with Dyac compared to native 390 Hz. That is more because of the games I play and wanting the lowest latency possible. I think that review finally giving us some objective latency measurements is what I needed to make my purchase.

Zace wrote: ↑

08 Sep 2021, 19:12

To be fair I thought the latency with VRB on would have increased like 2-4ms, but based on optimum tech VRB only increased 0.8ms. Which is really good.

gbmaster wrote: ↑

08 Sep 2021, 08:08

wow, it looks so blurry in comparison to the 240hz with ulmb

lablaka wrote: ↑

09 Sep 2021, 14:42

I believe that Optimum Tech might have screwed up his UFO testing.

There aren't many comparisons for the 390Hz Acer yet, but his 360Hz Asus results both with and without ULMB look pretty much just as awful and that's not in line with what we can see over in the 360Hz Asus thread.

I've had the 360Hz Alienware, which has the same panel with almost the exact same tuning as the Asus and it wasn't even remotely as bad. It actually was superior to my old 240Hz TN Omen X25f. Couldn't test ULMB, though. It just didn't work at all, wouldn't turn on.

NeXuS wrote: ↑

25 Jul 2021, 23:35

wlundstrom wrote: ↑

19 Jul 2021, 10:54

I tested out this monitor yesterday for a whole day but ended up returning it. There was just something with the input lag that didnt feel right,t and my aim got really inconsistent. Maybe it was just my monitor that was defective, or that I needed more time to get used to it. but my PG259QN felt way better.

I had the exact opposite experience. I have the aopen. The input is extremely fast compared to my xl2546k. On my xl2546k in pubg my character feels stuck in the mud. Bullets don’t reg. Longer kill times vs the Acer 390hz. Character feels responsive and kill time is very low. So, either I have a faulty xl2546k. Or the Acer is better. Now I prefer the look of the xl2546k. The Acer makes my eyes hurt from the fast moving image. Not sure why. Anyway. If anyone has any clarity. I’d love to know why my xl2546k feels less responsive and makes my game feel very very much delayed. Player stuck in mud feeling

lablaka wrote: ↑

09 Sep 2021, 14:42

I believe that Optimum Tech might have screwed up his UFO testing.

There aren't many comparisons for the 390Hz Acer yet, but his 360Hz Asus results both with and without ULMB look pretty much just as awful and that's not in line with what we can see over in the 360Hz Asus thread.

I've had the 360Hz Alienware, which has the same panel with almost the exact same tuning as the Asus and it wasn't even remotely as bad. It actually was superior to my old 240Hz TN Omen X25f. Couldn't test ULMB, though. It just didn't work at all, wouldn't turn on.