Really wanting to get a 240hz monitor? Opinion?

T

tangoseal

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Dec 18, 2010
Messages
9,743
There are tons of threads on the subject but since the 240hz market isn't exactly moving along at blistering speed I wanted to ask freshly and not resurrect old posts (rules and all to regard as well).

I have a Predator x34 and it is an AMAZING IPS display @ 100hz. Even works great in games except my refresh can't keep up with the speed I First person shoot at. I have been playing FPS games since Quake and Quake 2 etc.... I hav 500 fps eyes even at 36 years old.

I am not looking to replace my x34 only looking to possibly add a dedicated FPS monitor into my setup.

I run a 1950x and dual 1080ti Asus Poseidons under water cooling. So I have insane GPU horsepower so I have no doubt I could easily peg a 240hz 1080p.

I just dont know which damn one to get. I was looking at Frys and the Benq had a really nice display and colors for a TN panel, and I am an avid IPS user.

But that is the only one I have been exposed too. I am looking as early as next week to get one maybe if I can find one to my liking.

Any ideas my friends? Anyone own a 240? Any regrets? I see there are some 27's coming out but it seems that the pixel pitch is going to be awful because they are staying at 1080p.

Thanks if you want to offer insight.
 
Your Ryzen may struggle with those levels of refresh, dispite it's power, it just doesn't have the per-core agility to hit 240Hz. That said, 240Hz 1080p monitors out now are all really average looking on the image quality side, so only get one if you REALLY want to get that extra 4ms lead time advantage.
 
theyre cheap enough, grab one with a high ULMB mode.

benq only allows blur reduction at 240hz which is hard to always maintain:

As with Benq’s prior high-speed monitors, it uses Blur Reduction technology, but is now referred to as Dynamic Accuracy technology. We used the benchmarks at www.blurbusters.com to see how well this worked. It turns out that this technology is highly reliant upon being served 240 frames per second by your GPU. Any lower and blurring becomes extremely apparent. Unfortunately it seems that Benq has removed the ability to lower the strobing of the backlight, unlike past models, which means this blur is here to stay if you can’t hit 240 fps.
 
Last edited:
AOC make an affordable enough 165Hz IPS QHD GSync screen that I can personally attest to. Being damn good.
 
It's only worth it if you want to try to give yourself every advantage in competitive FPS. There is virtually no other purpose.

I have a 240hz monitor that I use for Overwatch. I use in-game FPS cap of 237 with G-Sync to make sure I stay below 240hz, since I do not like tearing either. Though presumably 300fps cap or unlimited would have slightly lower input lag but tearing is too undesirable for me.

I prefer this to 144hz backlight strobing (ULMB, Blur Reduction, whatever branded name).

144hz backlight strobing does reduce motion blur which helps motion tracking. Yes, it makes tracking objects in motion clearer than even 240hz! But is has the following drawbacks:

1) It adds crosstalk which I find hurts tracking in its own way.

2) It also has tearing unless you want to use V Sync (defeating the competitive advantage).

3) And importantly as smooth as it is, the object you are tracking still only refreshes every 6.9ms vs ~4.2ms at nearly 240hz. So fast jumping, moving characters seem like they teleport more at "only" 144hz. That's the true tracking advantage of 240hz because I hate how jumping = teleporting. TBH I still want much more than 240hz.

For any other type of gaming 144hz 2560x1440 is better because 1920x1080 just doesn't pop as much and you hardly benefit from over 144fps in most games. Though I do enjoy Redout (racing game) at high hz too. I only recommend 1920x1080 240hz monitors as a second display. Not primary unless you actually make money from competitive FPS games.
 
tangoseal said:
I hav 500 fps eyes even at 36 years old.
Click to expand...

Sorry, just had to comment here, but this is simply amazing! To be able to see and recant detail at 500 fps is remarkable! I mean trained ace fighter pilots top out at ~255 fps. Man, you need to offer up your skills to science so they can study your incredible abilities and help future generations!

I would argue for a better quality monitor and use free-sync or G-sync. Then properly tune your system to match the frequency. Increasing whole frames being drawn to the screen and eliminating tearing effects would be the better solution.
 
I couldn't do it. 1920x1080 needs to die already. It's especially horrible on anything over 24" in size.
 
Dan_D said:
I couldn't do it. 1920x1080 needs to die already. It's especially horrible on anything over 24" in size.
Click to expand...

I mostly agree with this, but I don't play ultra competitively anymore. Hell in my Madden games, I am always at a disadvantage because I play them on my 120" screen and can't quite process the whole image as quickly as if I played on a much smaller 55" screen. On my computer I play most of my games in 4k and am still annoyed I don't get an option for a bigger environment from it like I would with widescreen.

But the OP clearly seems to be wanting to get the most of his gameplay in a competitive nature and I have personally seen the benefits from that. It just isn't enjoyable to me when the quality isn't nearly the same.
 
500 fps eyes was just a joke guys. But I am very keen at spotting tearing from years of FPS.

I play fast paced shooters and am extremely competitive. Games like TitanFall2 always placing number 1 about 8/10 matches, overwatch is another I love. I also am gearing up for the new Quake thats dropping soon.

I could always rent to buy from Frys or Microcenter lol. If I dobt loke it take it back and if I do keep it. But good recommendations. Im just fearful that gping from 100hz gsync to 166hz gsync wont make a impactful difference. Makes me miss CRT in regards to refresh rate and no tearing.
 
As an eBay Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
OpenSource said:
I have a love/hate relationship with these monitors. When they were the big thing to have... me and my friends had them.. only problem was when we would LAN I was the only one that could pick them up.. lugging 6 of these things up and down stairs for a weekend LAN sucked
Click to expand...

Jeebus...yea I am a big strong guy too, but mine is on the floor in the closet where it will sadly remain until I move. Putting it on my desk, the thought sends a shudder down my lower back, is alot like deadlifting 600lbs...I am patiently waiting for the 4k 27" 144hz FALDS
 
I don't think there are any video cards that can both play modern games at 200+ FPS and output an analogue signal at the quality required for high-end CRTs. If you convert the digital signal, you introduce latency, which kind of negates most of the advantages...
 
KazeoHin said:
I don't think there are any video cards that can both play modern games at 200+ FPS and output an analogue signal at the quality required for high-end CRTs. If you convert the digital signal, you introduce latency, which kind of negates most of the advantages...
Click to expand...

Well the CRTs are like winning the lottery for a good price so it would be a no go anyways.
 
No one mentioned the PG258Q? It's the only 240 Hz panel that's highly recommended by tftcentral

This is the baby I'll be buying to replace my middle U3011.
 
Don't get the PG258Q, i just returned mine recently. I was diving into the realm of 240hz displays myself lately and so far I've tried the Acer /Asus brands and disregarded the benq because of the lack of G-sync on it. However, THIS monitor is superior to the Asus in every way. Don't laugh because it's alienware because the displays are actually by Dell, but get this while it lasts and don't turn back.

Same specs, 240hz / Gsync at 24.5inch 1080p TN panel. Trust me, they put alot of effort into the build of this display compared to the cheaper Asus/Acer models.
https://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/new...18h/apd/210-amsr/monitors-monitor-accessories
 
Vatican said:
Don't get the PG258Q, i just returned mine recently. I was diving into the realm of 240hz displays myself lately and so far I've tried the Acer /Asus brands and disregarded the benq because of the lack of G-sync on it. However, THIS monitor is superior to the Asus in every way. Don't laugh because it's alienware because the displays are actually by Dell, but get this while it lasts and don't turn back.

Same specs, 240hz / Gsync at 24.5inch 1080p TN panel. Trust me, they put alot of effort into the build of this display compared to the cheaper Asus/Acer models.
https://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/new...18h/apd/210-amsr/monitors-monitor-accessories
Click to expand...

Would you mind sharing the points that to you make it better than the Acer, Benq, and Asus? Truly truly Curious and I have owned Dell LCDs in the past and they are always top notch literally. I could have sworn that Benq had Gsync on it. I know the other two do and the dell does.
 
Vatican said:
Don't get the PG258Q, i just returned mine recently. I was diving into the realm of 240hz displays myself lately and so far I've tried the Acer /Asus brands and disregarded the benq because of the lack of G-sync on it. However, THIS monitor is superior to the Asus in every way. Don't laugh because it's alienware because the displays are actually by Dell, but get this while it lasts and don't turn back.

Same specs, 240hz / Gsync at 24.5inch 1080p TN panel. Trust me, they put alot of effort into the build of this display compared to the cheaper Asus/Acer models.
https://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/new...18h/apd/210-amsr/monitors-monitor-accessories
Click to expand...

I'm a little weary of a monitor that doesn't have proper reviews and data. Subjective reviews like "It looks great." means little to me.

Between the Display lag and average G2G response time, the PG258Q is the best choice as it's got their full praise. the AOC Ag251FZ has a better lag score, but it's got some problems like only being Freesync.
 
Last edited:
I was also looking at 1080p gsync monitors and there are only few and all are 240hz.
I wanted 1080p just because it's easier to drive. I dont care for 240hz...

I am also interested what makes alienware better since AOC is quite cheaper 251FG
 
Just because it's a 240 Hz monitor doesn't mean you will drive it at 240. Many people won't even see 240 during gameplay.
 
RogueTadhg said:
Just because it's a 240 Hz monitor doesn't mean you will drive it at 240. Many people won't even see 240 during gameplay.
Click to expand...

Its not about 240 fps. Its abkut having excessive overhead to cover all the frames you can throw at it without tearing and max smoothness. At least thats whats selling me on it. My twin 1080tis can push my 3440x1440 to gsync 100hz and it feels sluggish comparwd to gsync off with higher fps and tearing. But onlt in shooters. Other games the 100hz works beautifully.
 
tangoseal said:
Its not about 240 fps. Its abkut having excessive overhead to cover all the frames you can throw at it without tearing and max smoothness. At least thats whats selling me on it. My twin 1080tis can push my 3440x1440 to gsync 100hz and it feels sluggish comparwd to gsync off with higher fps and tearing. But onlt in shooters. Other games the 100hz works beautifully.
Click to expand...

You have a way with words. I agree, fully, smoothness is the main point of a 240 Hz monitor.



Coupled with decreased input lag and higher G2G response times. They're just meant to be a gaming monitor.

But this Alienware has my interest.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Skott
like this
That video is an example of what I mean by less teleportation at 240hz, even compared to 144hz. It doesn't take a fighter pilot to appreciate the difference. Just play against a good Genji, suddenly they are actually jumping and dashing rather than stuttering and teleporting.
 
RogueTadhg said:
I'm a little weary of a monitor that doesn't have proper reviews and data. Subjective reviews like "It looks great." means little to me.

Between the Display lag and average G2G response time, the PG258Q is the best choice as it's got their full praise. the AOC Ag251FZ has a better lag score, but it's got some problems like only being Freesync.
Click to expand...

There's a freesync and gsync model to the alienware. I bought the Gsync for only $509 on amazon here https://www.amazon.com/Dell-AW2518H-Alienware-Gaming-Monitor/dp/B0733VW5QB. This is significantly cheaper than the Asus due to the sale. Also spec wise, the Asus / Acer are both using the same panels. The Alienware is using a panel developed by AU Optronics; the same panel is used for the already released AOC AGON AG251FZ and the ViewSonic XG2530 240Hz gaming displays according to this review https://www.144hzmonitors.com/reviews/dell-alienware-aw2518hf-review/.

Just price point wise at the moment, there's no reason to pay $600 for a 240hz display by Asus when you can get the Dell for $500. The specs are the same, but i feel the quality control is always better with Dell vs Acer/Asus, i had terrible uniformity issues when i was using their 240hz displays, really unacceptable for such a price standard. Aesthetically, the alienware beats both hands down.
 
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
Vatican said:
There's a freesync and gsync model to the alienware. I bought the Gsync for only $509 on amazon here https://www.amazon.com/Dell-AW2518H-Alienware-Gaming-Monitor/dp/B0733VW5QB. This is significantly cheaper than the Asus due to the sale. Also spec wise, the Asus / Acer are both using the same panels. The Alienware is using a panel developed by AU Optronics; the same panel is used for the already released AOC AGON AG251FZ and the ViewSonic XG2530 240Hz gaming displays according to this review https://www.144hzmonitors.com/reviews/dell-alienware-aw2518hf-review/.

Just price point wise at the moment, there's no reason to pay $600 for a 240hz display by Asus when you can get the Dell for $500. The specs are the same, but i feel the quality control is always better with Dell vs Acer/Asus, i had terrible uniformity issues when i was using their 240hz displays, really unacceptable for such a price standard. Aesthetically, the alienware beats both hands down.
Click to expand...

So lets discuss the panels then. You say the Asus and Acer have the same panel but the dell uses AUO. I understand AUO optronics is a good screen is this correct? Is the Dell going to have better colors and img quality over the others? I think the dell has the ugliest stand ever but that is just a stand no one looks at but me so not a big deal.
 
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
Vatican said:
There's a freesync and gsync model to the alienware. I bought the Gsync for only $509 on amazon here https://www.amazon.com/Dell-AW2518H-Alienware-Gaming-Monitor/dp/B0733VW5QB. This is significantly cheaper than the Asus due to the sale. Also spec wise, the Asus / Acer are both using the same panels. The Alienware is using a panel developed by AU Optronics; the same panel is used for the already released AOC AGON AG251FZ and the ViewSonic XG2530 240Hz gaming displays according to this review https://www.144hzmonitors.com/reviews/dell-alienware-aw2518hf-review/.

Just price point wise at the moment, there's no reason to pay $600 for a 240hz display by Asus when you can get the Dell for $500. The specs are the same, but i feel the quality control is always better with Dell vs Acer/Asus, i had terrible uniformity issues when i was using their 240hz displays, really unacceptable for such a price standard. Aesthetically, the alienware beats both hands down.
Click to expand...
I think those 1080p gsync 240hz monitors all use the same panel. It's a new panel from auo not used in any previous 1080p 144hz monitors.

On the topic - AOC Ag251FG is 600$ where I live (poland) and Alienware gsync is 700$ (ips 144hz starting at 800$).
I kinda think I want a TN gsync monitor because I want to avoid ips lottery and glow. AOC have good reviews on pcmonitors.

Tell us more about that Alienware. What is gamma? Did dell include gamma settings? how are colors? how is overdrive?
 
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
As a BenQ XL2540 owner here's a few comments from my experiences. I'm someone who is quite into fast paced arena shooters, certainly no pro level but still pretty advanced but I've also always been sorta a motion smoothness fanatic ever since I was young so my interest into high hertz monitors is more due the psychological satisfaction than whatever competitive edge it may have, I just appriciate any motions being smooth as it feels more like real life and pleasurable to me.

There's a couple of things that comes to my mind when talking about this refresh race.

1. How much FPS/Hertz is enough? 144 -> 240Hz is definitely noticeable still but it's nowhere as mindblowing as going from say 60~75 to 120~144. This is pretty invidual how much it matters, it also affects the mouse input lag that may be very important for some, perhaps even more so than the motion smoothness improvement even. It's more the kind of thing you notice when going back to a lower value, more so than what is perhaps noticeable at the first glimpse.

2. Native refresh vs strobing. What's more is that ULMB, BenQ Blur Reduction/strobing of any kind is EVEN MORE beneficial to percieved motion smoothness, I saw some calculations somewhere but cannot remember exactly but in terms of motion smoothness strobing at was it 120 or 144Hz already would be like equal to 500Hz-something native refresh rate and I do believe it, the difference is still huge comparing to 240Hz IMO. Take TestUFO as an example, it still slightly blurs at 240Hz with no strobing but it's pretty much perfectly clear with strobing @ 144Hz, no blurring at all. I think people shouldn't be so focused on using 240Hz if going for these, I'd take a good look at 144Hz + ULMB (previously 120Hz was max) or 144Hz BenQ Blur Reduction, that 120->144Hz jump with strobing enabled is enough of a reason of an upgrade to my personal tastes. Plus, it's much more economical to maintain 144Hz than 240Hz.

3. 240Hz panels offer strobing up to 144Hz in GSYNC, BenQ allows BenQ Blur Reduction to be turned on through service menu and this in turn allows you to use it with ANY refresh rate setting, that includes even 240Hz. BUT, it's not recommended at all to use at 240Hz, it ruins the experience more than it helps due to very exaggerated reverse ghosting, it actually blurs MORE as a result due to panel not being able to keep up. Some wise men in Blurbusters forum predict the panel should be roughly good for ~180'ish Hz with BenQ Blur reduction which would be the very best motion smoothness any retail monitor could achieve today, it requires creating custom res as well as it might need a few VT, area etc value adjustments for how the refreshing of the screen is taking place to get a good result with such high refresh rates. The BenQ strobing utility allows tweaking with this as well with various impact to brightness levels. I did give it a brief go with the conclusion, IMO it wasn't worth it, in fact I thought when installing the utility I managed to only get it looking worse. The default BenQ setting in regards to brightness VT, area settings is very good, the perfect compromise regarding performance vs image quality to me at 144Hz in particular, but also in particular to the following reason in my next bulletinpoint:

4. Higher refresh rates impacts image quality, mainly sharpness and contrast ratio. While it's clear, these panels use more expensive components compared to the lousy panel that supports overclocking from 144 to 180Hz previously so the impact of having native 240Hz refresh support in these particular panels are way way less but at 240Hz the hit still becomes clear (whereas the 24" 180Hz overclockable TN monitors the contrast ratio dropped to some outrageous ~530:1 or something like that at 180Hz => not worth using. These on the other hand I think were more like around 100~150:1 ratio drop at the 240Hz setting). For me with current panels, I'd say from a performance vs image quality standpoint, 144~165Hz is roughly where it is at where there's barely any IQ hit to speak of versus 60Hz.

BenQ's XL2540 also doesn't have any crosstalk issues (at least not the two ones I bought anyway or perhaps because I'm not running at 240Hz, idk), I've seen reports from some ASUS PG258Q users of crosstalk. Also red color on the ASUS is said to be a bit off, a bit more torwards pink than actual red, that's not the case with BenQ which I percieve have very accurate colors once you fix the default horrible settings targeted for CSGO competitive gamers where you purposedly squash darker shades in favor for enemy visibility (washed out colors due way off gamma setting, slightly too cold temp, overly bright which all can easily be adjusted through the OSD menu). I read a comparison in a finnish computer hardware magazine where those 2 were also compared and they gave favorable rates for BenQ in color accuracy there too (comparing after tweaking OSD settings on both). Even compared to my relatively expensive 2016 model Sony Bravia 32" 1080p TV I use as TV/secondary monitor for its ultralow input lag, the color balance & temp I percieve is way more closer to that standard 6500k on the BenQ, I can't quite get it perfect on the TV for my tastes but the monitor is spot on with my configured settings. The consistency regarding BLB and whitelevels seem also excellent, something today's IPS 144Hz panels can only dream of.

I bought mine for a very good sales price and for this price I've been very happy running it constantly at 144Hz with BenQ Blur Reduction enabled in service menu (standard settings, no strobing utility installed) and the performance vs image quality is probably among the best you'll get for TN panel. I was going back n forth between GSYNC or not to GSYNC but in the end, I made the right decision for me that the lower 144Hz with strobing is much more easier to maintain than 240Hz on my lackluster i5-4670K @ 4.3GHz and GTX 970 setup and when the FPS is constant the motion smoothness is way better than what 240Hz with GSYNC would offer so for me, the lack of GSYNC/Freesync support (since I have a Nvidia GPU on a Freesync monitor) wasn't really any issue (+ the fact I personally didn't like the slight image quality hit going to 240Hz, I'm more interested in the best image quality vs performance ratio so strobing @ 144Hz was it for me).
 
Last edited:
Update: I just got AOC AG251FG. It is supposedly using the sme panel as asus, acer or alienware. That is 24,5 240hz, gsync. TN, AUO.
I am only coming from 60hz amva monitor but high Hz is amazing. And there is a noticeable difference between 144hz and 240hz even on desktop.

Frst - Quality of picture:
Being a TN panel, I was expecting a bad viewing angles and really - those are not that bad. Better than TN I had 10 years ago (226bw). So to me this is totally a non issue. Gamma shifts at extreme angles but I've found ips glow more distracting. TN is probably a problem if someone want to watch a movie or play a game from their bed. But straight it's ok.
The colors seem good. Default profile is named "warm" and It looks about the same as my iiyama xb2483hsu-b2, except the whites seem whiter while seemed more yellowish on iiyama.
Contrast if ofc worse than amva monitor but again - not as bad as I was expecting. It does the job and black looks black in normal scenes. Only on fullscreen black test image there is some clouding patches visible(looks like difussion layer is not entirely flat). But there is no corners glow.
I also had a dell u2417h 2/3 weeks ago for testing. So I had recent contact with good IPS, AMVA+ and now TN.... and surprisingly, the TN have least annoying problems imo. There is no glow, no silvering. On ips and to some extent va, it always looks like if there was a window or light souce behind my back. While TN looks flat with no silvering.
Overall, IPS was crushing blacks with glow a lot and I couldn't get the screen to look good without crushing corners and so on. And TN is solid if you seat reasonably in front o it. I am surprised and like it a lot.
So for general use, It should suffice.

What is not good is gamma. There are thankfully 3 modes. Default mode 1 is about 1.6... just washed out and accentuating banding visible in badly compressed images(not introducing it). 2mode is even brighter. Mode 3 is about 2.0-2.1. Still not ideal. A bit bright to my taste and still accentuating some banding but it's usable and I got used to it quickly. did nto messed with other settings or icc profiles yet. It is surprising because review unit on pcmonitors had 2.2 gamma out of the box...

Build quality:
It is very good. Stand is all metal, screen does not wobble, coating is medium and not very grainy. No complaints.

Now on the performance and features:
240hz is awesome. It is even better than 144hz. Just desktop alone feels so smooth. there is almst no ghosting at all. Gsync does fantastic work and it's a perfect ft wth 240hz. The experience is just something else.
The 144hz ulmb mode is crystal clear. Clearer than 240hz without ulmb. But I prefer 240hz because of gsync. The brightness of ulmb is very good. I actually had to lower it or pulse width because it's too bright.

edit: The screen does not make any whine noise and image quality does not change depending on refresh rate. It only changes in ulmb
 
HiCZoK said:
Update: I just got AOC AG251FG. It is supposedly using the sme panel as asus, acer or alienware. That is 24,5 240hz, gsync. TN, AUO.
I am only coming from 60hz amva monitor but high Hz is amazing. And there is a noticeable difference between 144hz and 240hz even on desktop.

Frst - Quality of picture:
Being a TN panel, I was expecting a bad viewing angles and really - those are not that bad. Better than TN I had 10 years ago (226bw). So to me this is totally a non issue. Gamma shifts at extreme angles but I've found ips glow more distracting. TN is probably a problem if someone want to watch a movie or play a game from their bed. But straight it's ok.
The colors seem good. Default profile is named "warm" and It looks about the same as my iiyama xb2483hsu-b2, except the whites seem whiter while seemed more yellowish on iiyama.
Contrast if ofc worse than amva monitor but again - not as bad as I was expecting. It does the job and black looks black in normal scenes. Only on fullscreen black test image there is some clouding patches visible(looks like difussion layer is not entirely flat). But there is no corners glow.
I also had a dell u2417h 2/3 weeks ago for testing. So I had recent contact with good IPS, AMVA+ and now TN.... and surprisingly, the TN have least annoying problems imo. There is no glow, no silvering. On ips and to some extent va, it always looks like if there was a window or light souce behind my back. While TN looks flat with no silvering.
Overall, IPS was crushing blacks with glow a lot and I couldn't get the screen to look good without crushing corners and so on. And TN is solid if you seat reasonably in front o it. I am surprised and like it a lot.
So for general use, It should suffice.

What is not good is gamma. There are thankfully 3 modes. Default mode 1 is about 1.6... just washed out and accentuating banding visible in badly compressed images(not introducing it). 2mode is even brighter. Mode 3 is about 2.0-2.1. Still not ideal. A bit bright to my taste and still accentuating some banding but it's usable and I got used to it quickly. did nto messed with other settings or icc profiles yet. It is surprising because review unit on pcmonitors had 2.2 gamma out of the box...

Build quality:
It is very good. Stand is all metal, screen does not wobble, coating is medium and not very grainy. No complaints.

Now on the performance and features:
240hz is awesome. It is even better than 144hz. Just desktop alone feels so smooth. there is almst no ghosting at all. Gsync does fantastic work and it's a perfect ft wth 240hz. The experience is just something else.
The 144hz ulmb mode is crystal clear. Clearer than 240hz without ulmb. But I prefer 240hz because of gsync. The brightness of ulmb is very good. I actually had to lower it or pulse width because it's too bright.

edit: The screen does not make any whine noise and image quality does not change depending on refresh rate. It only changes in ulmb
Click to expand...




ok I too bought an Acer Predator.

Mind blowing smoothness. I use Gsync and wont use ulmb.

However I wanted to ask if there was an external utility that can designate what monitor a game plays on?

I have it next to my Predator X34 3440x1440 IPS which is my default.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top