Blur Busters Forums

Hey y'all.

Yep. 360 Hz and IPS in the same sentence.

More fuel for the refresh rate race!

The TN and IPS leapfrogging continues.



ASUS and DELL in Race to Launch New 360 Hz Gaming Monitor

Dell Alienware wrote:"For gamers who demand an incredibly fast and responsive display, the upcoming Alienware 25 Gaming 360Hz Monitor (AW2521H) in our signature Legend ID will pull gamers right into the action. This 24.5-inch monitor has a 360Hz refresh rate – three times faster than most gaming monitors – coupled with NVIDIA G-SYNC®. Thanks to fast IPS technology, PC games will run buttery-smooth with virtually no screen tearing or blurring, with consistent colors from every angle. It will be available in Dark Side of the Moon color later this year. More details to come your way soon."

At this stage, might as well leave G-SYNC on since no caps are needed for most games because few games can reach 360fps. The scanout latency is so tiny (2.8ms full-refresh-cycle scanouts!) and the VSYNC ON halftime latency penalty (~1.4ms) for screen centre for the lowest-lag VSYNC ON technologies, means latency of all the sync technologies are gradually starting to converge in these refresh rate stratospheres.

One big step in the Journey to 1000 Hz displays.

Great news, I was expecting a year or two from now.
This will probably be the ultimate monitor of the year.
Actually just cancelled pre-order on benq xl2546s.

Holy, that means the choice between IPS panel between Asus and MSI for me, might be postponed and this new Dell might be the best monitor with its high refresh rate.
This is for sure will be the most wanted monitor in the future (if the monitor will meet our expectations)
Asus vs Dell, easy choice for me since one is IPS and the other one is TN. (Unless Dell would be really worse)
Now I really need to know the range of price for this monitor and save up for this one lol.

360hz IPS?! Didn't see that coming.

Cant wait!

I always love reading stuff like this the day after my AW2521HF arrived.

This is nice. Will there be a 27" version? Also what about BFI? AW seems to neglect adding that feature to their displays.

1/360Hz is only 0.8ms less than 1/280Hz

but sure i'll buy one if it's not outrageously expensive

flood wrote: ↑

15 May 2020, 17:06

1/360Hz is only 0.8ms less than 1/280Hz

Still human visible benefit in the MPRT context -- 0.8ms translates 2.4 fewer pixels of motion blur per 3000 pixels/sec motion.

We're getting closer to strobeless ULMB with these refresh rate stratospheres.

In my opinion, 360Hz is the next natural progression after 144Hz:

60Hz->144Hz = 2.4x better
144Hz->360Hz = 2.5x better

Refresh rates need to increase geometrically to continue human-visible benefit, in the journey to future 1000Hz+ displays.

i don't think "better" should be defined by ratios.

consider this:
the difference between 20000Hz and 10000Hz is far less than the difference between 60Hz and 30Hz.

flood wrote: ↑

15 May 2020, 17:14

i don't think "better" should be defined by ratios.

consider this:
the difference between 20000Hz and 10000Hz is far less than the difference between 60Hz and 30Hz.

This be true.

However, ratios are far better than incrementals, from the perspective of shopping for a refresh rate improvement.

Exact incremental 30Hz is noticeable at 60Hz, but almost unnoticeable at 240Hz.
30Hz->60Hz = big visible difference
240Hz->270Hz = almost unnoticeable difference

Also, this is part of the Vicious Cycle Effect. Where all the variables interacts each other, bigger displays, wider FOV, higher resolutions, more HDR, less motion blur, closer viewing distances, etc. Doubling horizontal resolution means twice as many pixels to motionblur over. So you have to double Hz to compensate. At least up to retina resolution, fastest eye tracking speeds, over the widest FOV. This is why motion blur is more noticeable on higher resolution displays. 60fps blur is harder to see at 1024x768 than at 3840x2160. And HDR can make faint ghosting/coronas/crosstalk easier to see due to higher contrast ratios.

The diminishing curve does disappear at beyond roughly 10,000Hz. (There will be a human visible difference between sample-and-hold 1000fps@1000Hz and sample-and-hold 10,000fps@10,000Hz for a retina-resolution 180-degtree FOV virtual reality headset, given a slow head turn can go 10,000 pixels per second, creating 10 pixels of motion blur on a sample-and-hold display that is only 1000fps@1000Hz)

The problem is incrementalism (144Hz->165Hz) and (240Hz->280Hz) hurting the claims ("Human eyes can't see past 144Hz" then "Human eyes can't see past 240Hz!" and so on). By requiring geometricals, you can keep more visibly improving until the diminishing curve disappears. That incrementalism sometimes hurts the refresh rate race if we keep up this incrementalism, because it creates a false sense of "it's over". Blur Busters' job is to educate, so that's why we recommend geometric increases in refresh rate if you're one of those "Wow, 60Hz vs 144Hz is huge!" and "Ugh, 144Hz vs 240Hz is subtle".

But I have seen 360Hz with my eyes, and the leap is more comparable to 60Hz-vs-144Hz upgrade, even if more subtle, but it's more representative of a true upgrade than 240Hz-vs-360Hz.

Geometric differences do disappear, but they disappear much more slowly than incremental absolute differences.

Long term aspiration is that in two or three decades, 1000Hz is a free feature in a display, much like 4K is free -- 4K costs no more than 1080p. 4K isn't a $10,000 invention anymore, you can get 4K at Walmart for $299 to $499 nowadays. Technically, 1000Hz someday can be cheap as a method of strobeless low-persistence. Especially when it becomes power-efficient with the help of various frame rate amplification technologies to generate 1000fps more cheaply with less power in the future.