Blur Busters Forums

Has anyone had any IPS glow/backlight bleed on their pulsar monitors at all?

Argus wrote: ↑

29 Mar 2026, 18:07

Has anyone had any IPS glow/backlight bleed on their pulsar monitors at all?

IPS glow is normal, so yes. But my Asus monitor has very minimal backlight bleed. Looks very good at ~120nits.

Ok, so RTINGS review has now been out for few days! Turns out all the MPRT stuff I was measuring previously was incorrect for the most part. Their pursuit photos suggest next:

Pulsar:
- Pulsar @360 Hz at: 358, 240, 165, 144, 120, 100, 80 fps
- It is ~25% duty cycle as advertised, except above ~240 fps where blur stops improving.
- As for the crosstalk: at least one leading-ghost image is visible all the time. First is visible up to ~100 fps, the second one appears above that, and third trailing-image around 240 fps. The first one is from the compensation pulse which actually never settles down completely. That's where most of the crosstalk is coming from. By design this pulse is always positioned at half the frame. The more pale second and third are caused by GtG/pulse width and they go in line with GtG vs crosstalk physics - improves as frame rate goes down, and worsens as it goes up. Interestingly 360 fps looks cleaner than 240 fps, and ~144 fps appears cleaner than nearby frames like 120 or 165 fps. Not sure why is that.
- Measured brightness: 501-117 nits.
- They included some oscillographs. With the way they formed it, I'm assuming these are Pulsar: Max brightness, Min brightness, Outside FPS range. Pulsing is more stepped compared to MUB and TFTCentral's graphs.

ULMB 2:
- ULMB 2 @360 Hz fps at PW: 100, 50, 10
- ULMB 2 @120 Hz fps at PW: 100, 50, 10
- ULMB 2 @60 Hz fps at PW: 100, 50, 10
- The poor diffusion of edge-lights raises the minimum MPRT floor due to way pulse/zone time is shortened. The shorter the PW, the more MPRT deviates from intended target (in the higher refresh rate range). What used to be a straight forward duty cycle setting (PW 100-10) no longer scales as consistently.
- Multi-strobing/stepping effect becomes increasingly noticeable as PW decreases (motion speed dependant). A good example is 120 Hz with PW 10. A perceived blur closely matches the shape of the pulse. At 60 Hz this is imperceptible for the most part.
- At 360 Hz pulse width does almost nothing in terms of MPRT (roughly 38-30% duty cycle, merely a ~0.3 ms range). There may be some minor crosstalk improvements somewhere below PW 50. Rtings did not test, but probably same goes for 240 Hz. At 120 Hz pulse width does something, but is still held back quite a bit (roughly 31-16% duty cycle).
- At 60 Hz, duty cycles are achieved via different method. It seem to behave more consistent with previous-gen ULMB where PW 100-10 is 25-2.5% duty cycle. It is adjustable in ~0.25% increments (steps of 1). Each increment exchanges ~4.8 nits for ~0.25%. Fun fact: If that is the case, CRT-like clarity without phosphor trails should be at PW ~12 (~0.5 ms). Another fact is that ULMB is on average 3.7x brighter than XG2431 PureXP at same/siimlar MPRT. At higher rates story is a bit different. This is based on average ULMB brightness data we have online, do keep in mind they can vary from reviewer to reviewer.
- At 120 Hz, I can see a very faint leading-ghost image positioned exactly at half the frame, just like Pulsar, which suggest they didn't completely remove the compensation pulse from the non-VRR mode. Same was visible on MUB shots. Possibly a slip from Nvidia. At 60 Hz there's no signs of crosstalk, at least at the recorded screen section.
- Same comment regarding GtG vs crosstalk physics applies here.
- Measured brightness: longest PW is 470 nits, shortest PW is 50 nits.
- As always flicker photo @max Hz is included. I'm again assuming this is ULMB, but it is unclear. There is also oscillograph @360 Hz.

I'm still trying to solve this edge-lights physics puzzle. I'll keep you guys updated.

Outside blur reduction:
- Somehow I missed it or no one mentioned that there is now a user customizable overdrive on the Asus. 0-400 gain adjustable in increments of 1. It's probably a gain multiplier that simply offsets factory tuned range line (multiplier on top of multiplier). Basically a variable overdrive gain offset. Nvidia finally listened. This is what we were waiting for since forever.
- OD 95 or Normal is pretty much spot on for all frame rates.
- Perhaps they could have included a larger “LFC-like GtG multiplier” boost across a wider range. Like the PG248QP was doing x3 for ~60-80 fps, and x2 for ~100-144 fps. Here only 60 Hz is doing a x2 boost.

Now that Rtings revamped things I'm not sure if they'd appreciate me sharing their photos, but I guess it was their choice to make things shareable?

Discorz wrote: ↑

30 Mar 2026, 02:50

Ok, so RTINGS review has now been out for few days! Turns out all the MPRT stuff I was measuring previously was incorrect for the most part. Their pursuit photos suggest next:

Pulsar:
- Pulsar @360 Hz at: 358, 240, 165, 144, 120, 100, 80 fps
- It is ~25% duty cycle as advertised, except above ~240 fps where blur stops improving.
- As for the crosstalk: at least one leading-ghost image is visible all the time. First is visible up to ~100 fps, the second one appears above that, and third trailing-image around 240 fps. The first one is from the compensation pulse which actually never settles down completely. That's where most of the crosstalk is coming from. By design this pulse is always positioned at half the px/frame speed. The more pale second and third are caused by GtG/pulse width and they go in line with GtG vs crosstalk physics - improves as frame rate goes down, and worsens as it goes up. Interestingly 360 fps looks cleaner than 240 fps, and ~144 fps appears cleaner than nearby frames like 120 or 165 fps. Not sure why is that.
- Measured brightness: 501-117 nits.
- They included some oscillographs. With the way they formed it, I'm assuming these are Pulsar: Max brightness, Min brightness, Outside FPS range. Pulsing is more stepped compared to MUB and TFTCentral's graphs.

ULMB 2:
- ULMB 2 @360 Hz fps at PW: 100, 50, 10
- ULMB 2 @120 Hz fps at PW: 100, 50, 10
- ULMB 2 @60 Hz fps at PW: 100, 50, 10
- At 360 Hz pulse width does almost nothing in terms of MPRT (roughly 38-30% duty cycle, merely a ~0.3 ms range). However, crosstalk starts to decrease slightly somewhere below PW 50. Rtings did not test, but probably same goes for 240 Hz. At 120 Hz pulse width does something, but is still held back quite a bit (roughly 31-16% duty cycle).
- The poor diffusion of edge-lights raises the minimum MPRT floor. The lower the PW or higher the refresh rate, the more MPRT deviates from intended target. So what used to be a straight forward 25-2.5% duty cycle setting (PW 100-10) is now distorted and no longer scales consistently. This is of course assuming Nvidia here was going for the same 25-2.5% duty cycle as before.
- Multi-strobing/stepping effect becomes increasingly noticeable as PW decreases (motion speed dependant). A good example is 120 Hz with PW 10. A perceived blur closely matches the shape of the pulse. At 60 Hz this is imperceptible for the most part.
- At 60 Hz, duty cycles seem to behave reliably, consistent with previous-gen ULMB. PW 100-10 is 25-2.5% duty cycle, adjustable in 0.25% increments (steps of 1). Each increment exchanges ~4.8 nits for 0.25%. Fun fact: CRT-like clarity without phosphor trails is at PW ~12 (~0.5 ms). Another fact is that ULMB is on average 3.7x brighter than XG2431 PureXP at same MPRT. At higher rates story is a bit different. This is based on average ULMB brightness data we have online, do keep in mind they can vary from reviewer to reviewer.
- At 120 Hz, I can see a very faint leading-ghost image positioned exactly at half the px/frame speed, just like Pulsar, which suggest they didn't completely remove the compensation pulse from the non-VRR mode. Same was visible on MUB shots. Possibly a slip from Nvidia. At 60 Hz there's no signs of crosstalk.
- Same comment regarding GtG vs crosstalk physics applies here.
- Measured brightness: longest PW is 470 nits, shortest PW is 50 nits.
- As always flicker photo @max Hz is included. I'm again assuming this is ULMB, but it is unclear. There is also oscillograph @360 Hz.

Outside blur reduction:
- Somehow I missed it or no one mentioned that there is now a user customizable overdrive on the Asus. 0-400 gain adjustable in increments of 1. It's probably a gain multiplier that simply offsets factory tuned range line (multiplier on top of multiplier). Basically a variable overdrive gain offset. Nvidia finally listened. This is what we were waiting for since forever.
- OD 95 or Normal is pretty much spot on for all frame rates.
- Perhaps they could have included a larger “LFC-like GtG multiplier” boost across a wider range. Like the PG248QP was doing x3 for ~60-80 fps, and x2 for ~100-144 fps. Here only 60 Hz is doing a x2 boost.

Now that Rtings revamped things I'm not sure if they'd appreciate me sharing their photos, but I guess it was their choice to make things shareable?

Thanks for the detailed breakdown and for sharing the RTINGS analysis — really appreciate it.

This matches exactly what I’ve been seeing in my own testing:

At 60 Hz ULMB2, lowering pulse width gives a very noticeable clarity boost.
At 120/240/360 Hz ULMB2, lowering the pulse width slider has almost no effect on clarity — it mostly just dims the screen. I wish the 120hz mode acted the same atleast!

It really does feel like the higher refresh rate ULMB2 modes are still locked (or limited) around the same ~25% duty cycle that normal VRR Pulsar uses, while only the 60 Hz mode got the full adjustable treatment.

Would it be worth asking NVIDIA to give the 120/240/360 Hz ULMB2 modes the same full adjustable pulse width range as the 60 Hz mode? Even if brightness drops at very low PW settings, many of us would like the option for maximum clarity at high frame rates.

Also, I’d love to see a proper brightness review of the Acer Predator XB273U F5. I believe mine goes noticeably brighter than the ASUS version (I’m measuring ~560 nits full white at 360 Hz with Pulsar on). Not sure if my calibrator is off or if the Acer really is brighter.

Finally, I wasn’t even aware there was now a user-customizable overdrive slider (0–400 gain). What benefits does this actually give in practice? I’m curious how much it helps with overdrive tuning across different frame rates.

Thanks again for the great post!

Discorz wrote: ↑

30 Mar 2026, 02:50

Outside blur reduction:
- Somehow I missed it or no one mentioned that there is now a user customizable overdrive on the Asus. 0-400 gain adjustable in increments of 1. It's probably a gain multiplier that simply offsets factory tuned range line (multiplier on top of multiplier). Basically a variable overdrive gain offset. Nvidia finally listened. This is what we were waiting for since forever.

It's been there since day 1 on my Asus (I got it pre firmware update). I'm only interested in using the monitor strobed though, and the OD settings have no effect there.

- OD 95 or Normal is pretty much spot on for all frame rates.

Looking at all the transitions there, it doesn't really make sense to me why at least 120hz ulmb mode isn't clear like 60hz mode. The slowest transitions look like they are done in about 5-6ms. If the rolling backlight is supposed to pulse at the last possible moment before the next frame's scanout reaches that part of the screen, shouldn't this mean that transitions have an ~8 ms window to complete at 120hz? Am I missing something obvious here or is crystal clear 120hz on the table potentially? I run the 60hz mode at 10-15PW so I'll gladly take the brightness hit.

Discorz wrote: ↑

30 Mar 2026, 02:50

- The poor diffusion of edge-lights raises the minimum MPRT floor. The lower the PW or higher the refresh rate, the more MPRT deviates from intended target. So what used to be a straight forward 25-2.5% duty cycle setting (PW 100-10) is now distorted and no longer scales consistently. This is of course assuming Nvidia here was going for the same 25-2.5% duty cycle as before.

Considering BenQ managed to do ~10% duty cycle on their DyAc2 model, there's no excuse for Nvidia to not achieve the same behavior

Discorz wrote: ↑

30 Mar 2026, 02:50

- At 120 Hz, I can see a very faint leading-ghost image positioned exactly at half the px/frame speed, just like Pulsar, which suggest they didn't completely remove the compensation pulse from the non-VRR mode. Same was visible on MUB shots. Possibly a slip from Nvidia. At 60 Hz there's no signs of crosstalk.

Would be hillarious if true

Discorz wrote: ↑

30 Mar 2026, 02:50

- Another fact is that ULMB is on average 3.7x brighter than XG2431 PureXP at same MPRT.

Blown into irrelevancy

Discorz wrote: ↑

30 Mar 2026, 02:50

ULMB 2:
- ULMB 2 @360 Hz fps at PW: 100, 50, 10
- ULMB 2 @120 Hz fps at PW: 100, 50, 10
- ULMB 2 @60 Hz fps at PW: 100, 50, 10
- At 360 Hz pulse width does almost nothing in terms of MPRT (roughly 38-30% duty cycle, merely a ~0.3 ms range). However, crosstalk starts to decrease slightly somewhere below PW 50. Rtings did not test, but probably same goes for 240 Hz. At 120 Hz pulse width does something, but is still held back quite a bit (roughly 31-16% duty cycle).

38-30% duty cycle.... dreadful values.

Discorz wrote: ↑

30 Mar 2026, 02:50

- Multi-strobing/stepping effect becomes increasingly noticeable as PW decreases (motion speed dependant). A good example is 120 Hz with PW 10. A perceived blur closely matches the shape of the pulse. At 60 Hz this is imperceptible for the most part.

I wouldn't be surprised if this behavior is present on 360 & 240 as well, since 60Hz & 120/240/360 are separate toggles in the OSD menu

Discorz wrote: ↑

30 Mar 2026, 02:50

As for the crosstalk: at least one leading-ghost image is visible all the time.

Doesn't that mean the monitor has always 1 frame of lag?

https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1PqXrB9ERv/
Well, this is funny.... they're seemingly not even using a QD layer for these QHD@360Hz panels....
It's using a YAG phosphor WLED backlight



2000 cd/m² voltage boosting target, which should roughly coincide with the reports of 1800 cd/m² in this thread.


Uses the AUO M270DAN10.6 (successor of ASUS PG27AQN panel)
It's still locked down to TMDS sadly....

Overall, I still fail to see who this monitor release is supposed to target?
-700€ price point for a YAG phosphor LCD (narrow color gamut)
-Locked down BW of HDMI to TMDS (HDMI 2.0)
-Lacks adjustable PW in a wide enough range in its ULMB2 mode on 120/240/360 (limitation which the predecessor didn't have)
-Lacks Reflex Latency Analyzer (previous model have it)
-Limited to Nvidia GPUs for Pulsar (VRR+PWM) functionality
-Limited to DP1.4 (forced DSC) for QHD@360Hz on PC

The only 'positive' I can think of is the stronger voltage boosting target being better for 60Hz strobing... but who in their right mind would expose himself to 60Hz light flicker (which is seemingly global scan, from all oscilloscope data we have thus far) of any kind?

At that point, for the 60-100Hz range (which DyAc1/+/2 doesn't cover), get a trinitron CRT, a XL2411P or XG2431 @ 60Hz and call it a day.
You save 500–650€.

Or even better, one can get the KTC M27P6 @ 120Hz and run Special-K's Latent Sync feature (fixed tearline position feature) to have a much lower strobe 'on' period (0,75–0,875ms), less eye strain (it's not multi-strobe PWM) & almost identical tearing management as VRR.
You also get the functionality of MiniLED, a QD layer for a wider color gamut & a much better pixel density / display resolution.
You also avoid the compensation pulse degrading the strobing experience (as it's fixed refresh rate).
Pulsar has no problem it solves, it only adds more issues.
Pulsar is supposed to be a solution tearing & S&H blur at the same time... but it's very bad at it.
A fixed refresh rate strobing (DyAc1/+/2 or ULMB1) & SK Latent Sync / RTSS Scanline (released in November 12, 2018) solved this use-case 8 years ago?

What a extremely subpar release from Nvidia.... announced in January 8, 2024, yet so extremely mediocre in it's implementation.

I genuinely can't believe they've targeted this price point for such a mediocre product.
Even 400€ is too much for such a product....

Your Imgur links are region-blocked in the UK so I can’t see the photos, unfortunately.

I think an updated pros/cons list would be more helpful than just the negatives. I remember seeing a Reflex Latency Analyzer option in the monitor menus (I’ll double-check when I’m home).

I’m all for putting pressure on NVIDIA to improve the monitor, it clearly still has room to grow, but constantly focusing only on the flaws does take away from what’s actually good about it. The 60 Hz ULMB2 mode in particular is a genuine step forward for a lot of people. I know you think its a global scan for this mode, but its nothing like the flickering you see with OLED BFI, alot less flicker than that.

Dynamic Frame Generation and x6 Frame Gen dropped today, so it’ll be interesting to see how those work with Pulsar.

kyube wrote: ↑

31 Mar 2026, 08:06

Overall, I still fail to see who this monitor release is supposed to target?
700€ price point for a YAG phosphor LCD (narrow color gamut)

Well, that part makes sense, because it's not HDR so wide gamut doesn't matter, and also it doesn't have much crosstalk (last thing you want on a Pulsar display is seeing three images instead of one during motion.)