Sirius wrote: ↑14 Feb 2026, 01:31
Obsolete? It remains a very good, exceptional screen among IPS displays tho. Even though its price is sill very high. I heard that the brightness would be low on new screens with Pulsar enabled, that would be a shame.
• Too high of a pricepoint, which can get you one of the Pulsar models.
• The exact same line-up of the panel (M270DAN10.0 on PG27AQN vs M270DAN10.6 on Pulsar models)
• The Pulsar models have more OD adjustment steps, compared to the fixed 2-3 ones of the PG27AQN
• QD backlight on Pulsar making ULMB2 viable (relatively speaking) compared to the KSF/PFS backlight of the PG27AQN.
• Same detriments in form of port output. (HDMI 2.0 & DP1.4; forced DSC)
• A negative, compared to it's predecessor line-up, is the lack of pulse width adjustments in the ULMB2 mode on the Pulsar models.
The Pulsar models are, by all metrics, rendering the PG27AQN obsolete in every aspect.
Sirius wrote: ↑14 Feb 2026, 01:31
That's what I thought. As for "GSYNC+VSYNC+Reflex does not add additional processing latency."
Could I ask you for clarification on one point?
The fact is, I've always found the opposite. It's not a variable issue I've noticed, nor a placebo effect on two or three monitors, but on every monitor I've owned.
Indeed, I've never liked playing with G-Sync + V-Sync (even if reflex settings are enabled/ultra or not). I feel like the game doesn't run the same; I don't like the feeling (especially with the mouse). When I turn off G-Sync, everything seems faster. It's very very subtle, but I feel it during intense sessions.
I know there have already been concrete measurements, but I clearly feel it. Also, are we talking about true G-Sync? Or adaptive Sync?
For example, on my XL2546x with adaptive sync (so G-Sync enabled) + V-Sync + Reflex (Ultra or Enabled), the in-game feel is definitely slower, even with 223/225fps set in riva tuner or in Nvidia App/In-game, i've tested all scenarios. That's a fact for me.
Or maybe something's wrong with the games I play (Overwatch/Apex Legends). I've always read that Reflex cancels latency with G-Sync, which is certainly true. However, for some reason, I find the feel incredibly sluggish, slow, compared to without G-Sync.
I believe you're likely noticing the frametime difference of fixed refresh rate & uncapped VS variable refresh rate (where frame rate is much larger than refresh rate), as you're on a 240Hz LCD model.
I've also read of people complaining about Zowie's VRR implementations, though I haven't found any credible source confirming this claim.
If you were to run the GSYNC+VSYNC+Reflex setup, you'd be looking at 225FPS @ 240Hz.
Always rely on the auto-cap, never on external frame rate limiters (exception being NvLimiter V3, but only in conjucton with Reflex)
If you play games such as OW2/CS2/Fortnite, the frametime difference is massive enough to warrant not using it.
Apex is a slight exception, as the game is limited to 300FPS internally. Though, a higher refresh rate still nets you lower total display latency in form of a faster scan-out.
I believe your perception of GSYNC might change with a non-Zowie product of a higher refresh rate. E.g.: a 600-750Hz TN.
To be specific, trying it in a scenario where your general frame rate is encapsulated entirely by your refresh rate.
Perhaps even a GSYNC+Strobing setup, if your game is limited internally such as OW2.
GSYNC, the technology itself, does not add processing latency. Neither does running a GSYNC+VSYNC setup.
Reflex is a separate entity of GSYNC. "Ultra" Reflex doesn't exist, that's Nvidia's 'Low Latency Mode' (former Maximum Pre-rendered frames), a driver-level toggle. Reflex works on a lower-level.
Sirius wrote: ↑14 Feb 2026, 01:31
Perhaps because, since I usually play with DyAc 2, what I perceive as "lower latency" is actually a trick of my brain.
Technically, because the image is less blurry, I react faster because I'm less constrained by motion blur. Is my theory correct?
There is a strong chance that this can also be the case, yes.
DyAc2 clarity benefits are much more massive than the "tearing-free" experience for esports games, especially in faster-paced games such as Apex & OW2.
This is a personal struggle of mine, where I'm trying to balance total clarity in motion and the light flicker aspect of PWM.
Hence why I think exposing yourself to flicker unnecessarily (when MPRT isn't <1ms) is ridiculous. (e.g.: as is the case with <200FPS Pulsar)
Sirius wrote: ↑14 Feb 2026, 01:31
1. OLED flicker, I'm not talking about VRR flicker related to G-Sync, but the typical flicker of an OLED.
Why did I experience refraction issues with my eyes and occasional mild nausea in front of the screen, while on an XL2546x with DyAc 2 I have absolutely zero problems? I know that on smartphones like some low-end Samsung AMOLED screens give me a slightly similar feeling of visual discomfort compared to Xiaomi/Honor phones with higher PWM frequencies. Does this Asus OLED Tandem have a particular flicker implementation? Did LG handle this panel differently? Because it was quite severe; I couldn't even concentrate 100% to read text. Both my wife and my friend had the same issues. On my LG OLED TV, there's no problem, and it's the same on smartphones in general.
The OLED flicker isn't that grand of an issue, relatively speaking.
No desktop OLED has a measurable light flicker akin to mobile AMOLED devices.
The only light flicker they exhibit is the display scan-out related one, which happens due to the internal capacitance of the voltage driver circuitry inside the OLED panels.
LCDs are
voltage-driven electronic visual displays, while OLEDs are
current-driven electronic visual displays.
You could be sensitive to the dithering algorithm employed by OLED or perhaps the different subpixel structure messing with you.
You could also be sensitive to DSC's visual artifacting, which isn't impossible.
Eye-strain culprits is something I can only give you clues on... It's sadly a matter of trial & error, while being aware of different panel techonologies & display model intrinsics...
Sirius wrote: ↑14 Feb 2026, 01:31
2. This OLED (like all OLEDs) has a near-instantaneous response time,
zero latency; they're the perfect monitors for low latency and for reacting perfectly in games, right?
"Zero latency" doesn't exist. I like to frame it more as "lower total display latency than LCDs" or as "current refresh rates aren't limited by the G2G RTs; therefore much more truthful" than to call them "perfect".
They're the best sample & hold display technology we have on the market across all G2G RT combinations, yes.
They're not perfect for the extreme game optimization problem that plagues the vast majority of game engines, which limits their total clarity potential.
They can also be a side-grade or a non-upgrade if the games you play are within the strength's of a a particular LCD type (e.g.: rise times for IPS; fall times for TN)
Sirius wrote: ↑14 Feb 2026, 01:31
Again, you might bring up the strobing argument in comparison (and you might be right, I don't know), but is it normal that I absolutely hated the feel of this screen in games?
I'm a high-level player on Apex Legends and I'm "pretty good" at Overwatch, so I couldn't tell you how confused I was about this Asus, you might even say I'm crazy: I also own an Acer XV272UX 1440p 270hz QD-IPS (an old AUO panel from 2020) and well... I found my IPS to be "smoother", as if I had twice the refresh rate, it's disconcerting to say, maybe it's due to ghosting/motion blur which adds a "softness" to each frame on my IPS since OLED displays images "brutally" a bit like Zowie with strobing, it's harsher.
Yes, the experience you're describing here can be attributed to the 2x longer fall G2G RT's of IPS LCDs, making the total clarity feel "fuzzier/blurrier/more-vaseline-like".
Coating differences can also exacerbate & change your opinion.
Sirius wrote: ↑14 Feb 2026, 01:31
So I found my IPS more pleasing because it was smoother (admittedly blurry in motion), but I didn't find the OLED less blurry in motion than my IPS. Yet, concrete evidence proves that OLED does have less ghosting
(yes, I know, OLED needs a higher refresh rate to have less blur, I read it here on this site), but I also read that since there's no ghosting at all, the image would be much clearer, far more so than an IPS. So...is that wrong? You're going to say I'm crazy, but I found it blurrier...it doesn't make sense.
It's not the case that "OLED needs a higher refresh rate to have less blur".
This is the fundamental way that sample & hold works altogether. The underlying operation principle is the same on LCD & OLED.
All displays which function this way require raw refresh/sample rate to 'emulate' analog reality. It's the 'law of nature', if you want to frame it that way.
See this recent video
Your experience is heavily dependant on the in-game map (to phrase it differently — color combination of G2G values) you've tested both displays in.
You could've tried a in-game map, which was favorable to IPS LCD's strength (great rise G2G RTs), making the difference between OLED & LCD (relatively) indistinguishable from your PoV.
Sirius wrote: ↑14 Feb 2026, 01:31
Regarding the comparison with my TN panel, whether it's my Zowie with strobing compared to the OLED, they feel the same in terms of smoothness, though the frame rate is more "raw," so I might see a slight, constant juttering when I play, but it doesn't bother me too much.
The fact is, I play 500 times better on the TN than the OLED, even though it's 280Hz and the TN is 240Hz. But when I turn on strobing on the Zowie, I get insane and inhuman results at times, especially in Overwatch.
Yes, that's the removal of sample & hold blur, the limitation of low sample/frame/refresh rate of games & displays.
Backlight strobing is absolutely a competitive advantage, when implemented correctly.
Sirius wrote: ↑14 Feb 2026, 01:31
On OLED, it's not that smooth, I don't have a good keyboard/mouse feeling (even if it seems illogical or a placebo effect, I definitely felt that way), and regarding my reaction time in games and my scores, I tried OLED for 30 days, practically non-stop. I'm part of an Overwatch team, and my teammates literally all told me to get rid of the screen and that something was wrong. I was playing much worse, and in fast-paced scenes, I couldn't understand anything at all. Combine that with point "1" above, and you have an abominable experience with this OLED tandem monitor that I actually wanted to like...
So I'm wondering, will my experience be the same if I test another OLED, or this OLED had something off?
I thought I heard that QD-OLEDs were very good.
Let's put it this way:
(note: this completely disregards the stroboscopic effect; "effective refresh rate" is Nvidia's marketing term for the strobe on period)
With your XL2546X, your "effective refresh rate" exceeds far beyond what you could achieve with a 540FPS @ 540Hz OLED.
Overwatch is 'limited' to 600FPS/Hz, meaning that's the maximum you can achieve, which is relatively slow compared to the fast-paced gameplay of OW2.
With DyAc2, you can achieve +1000FPS @ +1000Hz of "effective refresh rate", which is
very noticable in games.
I suggest that you stick to displays with a good backlight strobing implementation, if you primarily play faster-paced games.
Wait till OLED fully switches to RGB stripe (perhaps in early 2027; as Q2 2026 is 27" 4K 240Hz only & 34" UW 360Hz is a bit meh for competitive) & till proper BFI implementations arrive (to be a pessimist — don't expect this to happen at all
)
Hope this helps.
bobbie424242 wrote: ↑14 Feb 2026, 09:18
- no OLED VRR flicker
- no OLED gray banding (model specific)
- no PWM at lower brightness
Desktop OLED display don't exhibit PWM light flicker at any setting.
This is solely a phone & portable screen OLED phenomena.
"Gray (vertical) banding" seems to be the most prevalent on LG's OLED panels.
Here's a recent article in regards to that.
I agree, LCD still has a market, as I've written above.