05/22/2020 UPDATE. The IPS 240hz monitor tier list.(I've measured/tried the all) and my honest explanation why.

[Blehhh]

How long till PART 3 VG259QM MINI REVIEW?

Also can you add in your mini review a section of ELMB without G-Sync with the numbers etc. I get around 150 FPS in Warzone, So would that mean i have to change the OD to 240 @ 80 for the best experience. But in other games i get over 240 so is the best setting 280@80 with or without ELMB-Sync/ELMB?? am i also right to say 280 @ 80 With ELMB is the closest thing to a CRT currently?

I can see clearly below 240fps the MSI is the one to go for, but you clearly stated that the ASUS is the fastest in the world for peak proformance which appeals to me greatly in the games i hit 280FPS on, even if its motion clarity and not g2g speeds.

Im litterally waiting for this review as my questions in the past 2 days are unanswered... Hopefully i can go ahead and spend my hard earned money on this monitor when i see the results. Thanks

Im with you, waiting patiently for the VG 259QM review. i check this forum everyday too for the review before i decide on the MAG 251RX or VG 259QM

[Siye]

How long till PART 3 VG259QM MINI REVIEW?

Also can you add in your mini review a section of ELMB without G-Sync with the numbers etc. I get around 150 FPS in Warzone, So would that mean i have to change the OD to 240 @ 80 for the best experience. But in other games i get over 240 so is the best setting 280@80 with or without ELMB-Sync/ELMB?? am i also right to say 280 @ 80 With ELMB is the closest thing to a CRT currently?

I can see clearly below 240fps the MSI is the one to go for, but you clearly stated that the ASUS is the fastest in the world for peak proformance which appeals to me greatly in the games i hit 280FPS on, even if its motion clarity and not g2g speeds.

Im litterally waiting for this review as my questions in the past 2 days are unanswered... Hopefully i can go ahead and spend my hard earned money on this monitor when i see the results. Thanks

Im with you, waiting patiently for the VG 259QM review. i check this forum everyday too for the review before i decide on the MAG 251RX or VG 259QM

Yeah well im thinking more then VG259QM not only because it seems better for FPS games but because its only one that i can get in the UK rn... Id have to ship from US otherwise but yeh same boat waiting for this review to go ahead and buy it.

[thaleskbulozo]

someone points me to a 25 "monitor, with native g sync, 240hz, i will play with 2080 ti, games between 130 fps at 240 fps, i would like to have the best fluidity possible in this range of hertz, game cs, cod, rb6 and AAA

[WayUpGaming]

someone points me to a 25 "monitor, with native g sync, 240hz, i will play with 2080 ti, games between 130 fps at 240 fps, i would like to have the best fluidity possible in this range of hertz, game cs, cod, rb6 and AAA

there is no 25" with native g sync, only the acer predator xb273x

[Siye]

someone points me to a 25 "monitor, with native g sync, 240hz, i will play with 2080 ti, games between 130 fps at 240 fps, i would like to have the best fluidity possible in this range of hertz, game cs, cod, rb6 and AAA

there is no 25" with native g sync, only the acer predator xb273x

he probably means 24.5.

[thaleskbulozo]

I was analyzing the "ASUS ROG Swift PG258Q Game Monitor G-SYNC 24.5" Full HD 240Hz 1080p 1ms "but I believe it is outdated.
How should I choose my monitor?
* Native G-sync, or Compatible with G-sync?
Which of the two technologies will be better in a range of 130 to 240Hz?

[thaleskbulozo]

I am analyzing between the XB273 Xbmiprzx 27 "or the Predator XB253Q GX 24.5 'Full HD 240Hz 0.5ms IPS G-Sync
I was wondering if they both perform the same ...
is there a Tn panel with 240 Hz and Native Gsync that you indicate? For good fluidity between 144 to 240 hz

[Chief Blur Buster]

<Concern about Inaccurate Lag Measurement Methodology>

Perceived input lag (display lag) 1.27ms(half of my pixel g2g response time measurements) also known as response time element

0.01ms ACTUAL INPUT LAG(how snappy you feel when pressing a button relative to the game u are playing)(the moment you press a button, it should be instantaneous. 0.01ms signal processing lag.

Unless you misphrased accidentally or used the wrong phrase accidentally, that's mathematically impossible because "button to photons" latency is much bigger than "display lag + processing lag"

This is because "button to photons" (bigger number) is a superset that includes "display lag + processing lag" (smaller number). You can't do the latency equivalent of "2 + 2 = 1". Adding two positive numbers never creates a smaller number than the original number!

I have to uphold Blur Busters to the proper academic standards of latency disclosure, so please re-evaluate your latency measurements.

RLCSContender,

Still waiting for your reply.
I am currently concerned that you are quoting dishonest latency numbers since you haven't corrected your testing disclosure.

First. I agree with you here: The monitor is definitely ultra low latency (I agree) and deserve to be highlighted (I agree). It's an amazing specimen of a monitor!

However -- the world needs to see truthfully honest latency disclosure. When we're nitpicking over milliseconds, we need to see the proper truthful latency numbers here with proper margin disclosure.



The button get pressed by the human and has to go through ALL OF THAT before the pixels begins emitting photons.
So what you quoted was a "2 + 2 = 1" mistake, so I'm pretty concerned about your latency numbers.

That's because if you measure a narrower section, it's a lower lag, than a wider section. Human doing a button press -- all the way to display photon -- is already the widest part of the lag chain -- the full width of the image above. That number of pretty much always bigger.

Even that diagram is a huge simplification. It gets even more complex than that -- e.g. scanout latency as seen in high speed video cameras.

Your lack of reply is telling. You haven't properly documented your lag stopwatch start location in this diagram, and your latency stopwatch end location in this diagram.

Latency is a very complex chain. It's easy to be accidentally dishonest about lag numbers, especially with the inaccuracy potentially found in the decimal digits.

Yes, yes, oscilloscopes are great, but there are millions of oscilloscope touch points along the whole latency chain (including inside a computer & inside a monitor). You have not even properly disclosed your oscilloscope touch points, so we don't even know what your latency stopwatch start location is, nor where your latency stopwatch ending location is. And if you're using a VSYNC-monitor dongle, you haven't even disclosed that (the electronic circuit that listens to the display signal). Just saying "Hey, I have an oscilloscope" doesn't necessarily mean truthful latency results: You must also write University professor/teacher approved testing disclosures!. Users here expect that of you.

Yes, opinions are also excellent too ("My opinion about the ACMETron 240 is that it's such an amazing monitor, I'm winning my CS:GO matches with it!"). And you can be popular with opinion alone too! This is fine.

But, measured lag numbers are not opinion. You need to attach proper testing disclosure -- and your testing disclosure is still woefully dishonest & incomplete.

The better monitors are definitely amazing. But you have to be careful about honest testing disclosure -- that's part of the truth needed in testing.

I hope you can understand!

If readers are to trust the latency numbers, one has to accept the truth & be honest about latency testing disclosure.

While you did have somewhat better disclosure than many sites, you left some very critical disclosure out, that I feel now needs to be filled because of these mathematically problematic numbers you just posted. Some numbers you quoted are currently mathematically impossible (because of simple issues that is nonsensical similiar to a "2 + 2 = 1" issue).

RLCSContender, I'm not targetting you in particular, or expressing ego things. Any professor (understanding the lag chain) would also agree with me that your disclosure is quite limited. I'm expressing genuine concern at the flawed information posted with some mathematical gotchas. A good university student is willing to listen to teachers.

It's possible that you accurately measured some lag numbers and messed up measuring other lag numbers. It's okay, people make mistakes. Everyone here just need to understand a better latency testing disclosure, to understand where you begin your latency stopwatch, and where you end your latency stopwatch. While this forum is small and niche, being the least popular Blur Busters website -- the main website get millions of views & TestUFO gets over ten million views annually.

Being a deaf man, born deaf, I'm a very text/math/logic/truth based person. I got a 99% grade (A+) in electronics class. I pay attention to forum posts very well. So I'm extremely interested in seeing accurate truthful latency numbers. Currently, you haven't disclosed the whole picture such as exact locations where the oscilloscope is attached (there are millions of locations in a latency chain, because of all those solder points all over a PC and monitor, if you're not using a VSYNC detector dongle). I hope you can appreciate this concern about truthful latency honesty.

That monitor is low lag. We agree. Lag is really low on the monitor. You can win a lot of scores. So that's a fairly honest opinion.

But the number (not an opinion) is somewhat dishonest. I have to disagree with the methodology non-disclosure occuring, given the unusually low "button-to-photons" numbers that is smaller than a smaller subset of the lag chain. A subset cannot ever be bigger than its original set!

</Concern about Inaccurate Lag Measurement Methodology>

[RLCSContender*]

Sorry it's taking me too long to post but i am nearly finished with my quintuple review that i will post next. I believe that these 5 reviews hold precedence over my original plan of posting ULMB crosstalk aggression results.

I will provide the tables of g2g 80% averages input lag results. What's new is im going to make these 5 reviews unique since i will include In Practice test results with pictures.

Teaser photos of the upcoming quintuple review msi mag251rx, Vg259qm, vg279qm, xg270qg nano viewsonic, and aw251hf remix.

I have a tier list.


BFI on
Horrendous tier


Excellent tier


Seizure waiting to happen tier



BFI off overshoot or smearing photos

Unplayable tier



WHERE MPRT fights with overshoot tracefree 100 on vg259qm giving a huge advantage in rocket league or sniping on FPS.(0.4ms g2g)



Lastly, ive decided to leave the 5 star/5 star review for the acer predator xb273x on amazon because my dead pixel is anecdotal and shouldnt reflect all xb3 panels. For any1 who want #1 ranked g2g and #1 ranked input lag, 240hz ips, the xb273x is the clear winner.

Fun observations of mine. The Nitro xv273x is dead last in g2g response times based off my finding. Yet the g sync acer predator xb273x is #1. Same exact panel , company, and release date. Just goes to show how important tuning is. Both are on top of the input lag chain as #1 and #3(#2 is the 25" xb253qgx predator)

[thaleskbulozo]

thanks a lot for the review, is the acer xb253qgx so fast when the xb273x?
what differs between the position?

I confess that I am afraid to acquire an acer, where I look at personal complaints, many failures.