Chief Blur Buster wrote:Actually, after actually getting it, I found out the strobe length is just a bit under 2.3 milliseconds, which is better than LightBoost=100% but worse than LightBoost=100%. In addition, it has the minor pre-strobe (<0.5ms) between the bright strobes, which slightly affects motion clarity but not too substantially. I think they added this to reduce flicker (and advertising 240Hz) and they had to come up with a strobe algorithm for that. All in all, the improved color quality in many games can outweigh this all. I find FG2421 simply stunning for certain games, such as Bioshock Infinite, which is nicely and richly saturated on the monitor, but that's also because I now have a GeForce GTX Titan, which allows Bioshock Infinite to run capped-out 120fps@120Hz at nearly-Ultra settings (with minor tweaks to keep it capped-out at 120fps).
I think you meant something different there, but I understood anyway

. I think I'll wait for some time. 2.3 ms (same miliseconds as 100Hz Lightboost at 50% brightness) seems too long for me. Even if it's only a bit of blurring, I wouldn't be able to stop thinking about it, like a dead pixel in the center of the screen (you can't stop looking at that

). If that number could be halved via firmware, and the pre-strobe eliminated... it would be almost perfect. Besides that, 120Hz is the only real good frequency for that monitor. I would be "forced" to play at 120fps.
I currently play at 75Hz (thanks to ToastyX CRU) on my ASUS VW246H, bought in 2009. I notice the difference in motion blur compared to 60Hz. Most of the games I play reach 75fps easily, but 120fps would be more difficult. And that's when the new BenQ XL????Z monitors come into play, as their strobe mode ranges from 75Hz to 144Hz. Now I have to ask you: what can you tell us about that strobe mode? Does it avoid the bad colors, contrast and brightness of Lightboost? Is the strobe length customizable, or at least equal/shorter than Lightboost?
I would probably play at 75Hz for recent games, like BF3 and modded Skyrim, and at 144Hz for older games.
In my opinion:
- Bad colors/contrast + short strobe ~ Good colors/contrast + long strobe (different compromises).
- Normal TN colors/contrast + short strobe > Good colors/contrast + long strobe.
- Good colors/contrast + short strobe >>>>> everything else.
As you can see, my preference is motion clarity. My brother is currently using an old CRT monitor, 800x600@85Hz. Whenever I see him using that, I tell him "Go to testufo.com, NOW!".
Chief Blur Buster wrote:A better option is to use 120Hz strobing, and use software based black-frame insertion (e.g.
http://www.testufo.com/blackframes ) with emulators -- certain emulators including MAME and WinUAE plus one other -- now support software-based black frame insertion to simulate 60Hz strobing out of 120Hz strobing. Very creative and good solution. Eizo FG2421's strobing works perfectly for that and actually looks really good. it appears superior to LightBoost for emulator 60Hz black-frame insertion, since there's less LCD inversion artifacts (checkerboard artifact), the type found at
http://www.testufo.com/inversion
IIRC, there was a glitch involving Lightboost and 3D Vision that made the screen strobe at 60Hz. Has ToastyX considered adding that function to his program (maybe it's difficult)?
Also, a program that could insert black frames in Windows, affecting everything (including games) would be a great idea (but probably impossible

), because most emulator creators don't care/want to support a black frame insertion feature.
Well, whatever I buy, be it EIZO or BenQ, I'll pass you the amazon links (if I buy through amazon) and then you'll give me new links so I can support you and your awesome website. I've learned a lot thanks to you

.
tl;dr: I'll probably wait to see how the new BenQ monitors behave, because they'll have more frequency options and probably better motion blur reduction.