liquidshadowfox wrote: ↑14 Feb 2026, 17:32Honestly though my testing it's been really frustrating because in some games the motion clarity is noticeable, in other games it's not and it has 100% to do with precise frame times. If the frame times aren't ABOSULTELY perfect to what the gsync module considers "stable" gsync pulsar is constantly doing the secondary compensation pulse which blur the image a little more than I'd like and it only gives marginally more motion clarity than without. Some games I had to resort to using lossless scaling frame gen to get the perfect frame times in exchange for visual artifacts, some games I had to disable "passive waiting" in riva and I had to play with the different sync modes (typically async worked best if I had to use reflex or frame gen that forces reflex) and in other games it worked better with front edge (but it increases input lag as a downside). This technology is amazing and great but it's very inconsistent given the landscape of how badly games are optimized these days (I'm running on 9800X3D + 5090 so my PC should in theory be "best case scenario"). I hope to see they will improve the consistency with the next firmware update and maybe allow the 2ndary compensation pulse to come on less often in exchange for slight phase shifting when the frame times aren't perfect but they will need to fix the lower FPS ranges because that's where pulsar makes the biggest difference in motion clarity.
Have you tried simply disabling Gsync, Vsync, all frame rate caps, enabling ULMB 2 and setting a fixed refresh rate that is just low enough for 99% or more of the frame times (let's say a particular game stays above 200 FPS in all scenes, except occasional single frames near 150 FPS, you may set 200Hz fixed, or perhaps 150Hz fixed)? Seriously, I know this must be counterintuitive to many people after all the Gsync marketing, but think about it. This monitor's strobing is different (also the 600Hz FHD TN models and CRTs) in that the part of the picture that becomes visible is continuously rolling over time, so controlling the place on the screen where the next frame starts becoming visible (*sync) is not anywhere near as important as it is on monitors where the whole picture is visible at the same time. And with the setup I'm proposing you're still getting a lot of the benefits of your full frame rate even when it is higher than the refresh rate.liquidshadowfox wrote: ↑14 Feb 2026, 22:01Gsync + Vsync + Reflex doesn't give the perfect frames which leads to artifacts using pulsar so it's not as cut and dry as it should be. I rather take the input latency con than the imperfect frame pacing reflex gives that causes artifacts with Gsync pulsar in the games I play. Reliably lossless scaling really fixes the frame pacing with adaptive frame gen at the expense of artifacts. Although many here will disagree with how I use pulsar, it looks better to my eyes not having motion blur and I don't really feel the input lag even with frame gen enabled.
From the way you're describing your experience it seems that:
1. You're not going after the lowest possible latency; and
2. You're more annoyed by the whole picture becoming somewhat blurred for a second or longer than by occasional artifacts that only affect parts of a single frame.
If that's the case, if you try unsynced, uncapped, rolling strobe you'll have only one value to fiddle with per game: the fixed refresh rate. You'd get slightly higher latency than a higher refresh rate scenario, but much less added latency than the full frame times from things you mention. If you're eye-tracking and an occasional single frame takes 30% longer than the fixed refresh time, you'd see a momentary doubled image that covers 30% of the screen (not even the whole screen, so it's less likely to be even noticed than in other setups) and no lasting blur after that moment. That may be less of an annoyance than Pulsar's copium. And if even that kind of artifact is too much, you may lower the refresh rate to cover even those momentary frame rate dips, because in this setup, and with your latency tolerance, lower refresh rates have fewer downsides than in other setups and use cases (think how CRTs even at 75Hz are able to compete very well against higher refresh rate monitors; you still get some benefits from a frame rate that is higher than the refresh rate). On these Pulsar monitors, when lowering the refresh rate, you do, however, get a longer strobe time (persistence), which corresponds to a lower maximum eye-tracking speed beyond which you start getting the effects of the persistence motion blur. But from what you're describing (correct me if I'm wrong) I think that you're more concerned with the picture staying sharp while eye-tracking things at moderate speeds, than getting the most out of every fast mouse flick or other fast motion that inevitably causes some amount of motion blur on a monitor that achieves a MPRT of over 1ms (as someone measured it). And if you do want to eye-track faster than what the frame rate implies in some games, then frame generation is still an option with this configuration.
So while with Pulsar on you're able to get less motion blur when you're eye-tracking fast AND the scene you're playing has a frame rate that is significantly higher than the minimum for the game AND relatively stable, (all 3 conditions must be true) with a refresh rate fixed at the minimum for the game you'd get less or the same amount of blur in pretty much all other cases (depending on how you feel about the look of the occasional frame time spike above the refresh time in this setup vs. Pulsar).
Hopefully this is a lot less frustrating to configure and with a much lower latency penalty. And for others in the same situation I'd also say it's worth trying. You don't have to go so far out of your way to use Pulsar just because they made it. The way they got to Pulsar (rolling strobe) may be the real hero here.
Edit: After thinking about it again, no cap and no sync with framerates a little above the refresh rate would still result in a faint double image when eye tracking, which I think is what would bother you (for many it would be okay, though). So you may still want to also enable Adaptive Vsync (or something similar) if you want to avoid that. Initially I was thinking of very high frame rates, where this issue isn't visible.
