• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

G-Sync Pulsar monitors worth waiting for? Or should I side grade to current IPS monitor?

I mean, I'm sure nVidia is interested. We'll see if it happens but I don't see a technical reason it couldn't.
 
I'm going to take a stab in the dark of it being a minimum of 2 years before we see this in televisions unless there's a software way that this can be added. Probably sooner on large monitors (40"+) assuming good availability of the chipset needed.
 
For sure there's no software way this could be added. This is something that requires very precise, very high speed, control over the backlights. That has to be done in hardware.
 
Will LG be making a Pulsar monitor? Seems like these are the announced models so far and all likely use the same panel:

Acer Predator XB273U F5
360 Hz
Matte AG
$649

MSI 272QRF X36
360 Hz
Matte AG
$649

AOC Agon Pro AG276QSG2
360 Hz
Matte AG
$599

ASUS XG27AQNGV
360 Hz
Display Surface : Anti-Glare
$649.00


I know I'm probably in the minority, but I prefer matte over glossy so happy that there is one panel that seems to offer it. Waiting for Monitors Unboxed/Rtings to review some though. Hoping there will be some slightly cheaper models without the RGB back lights (why is that even a thing ASUS?), or without G-SYNC Ambient Adaptive. Not sure I need that, and seems like it adds a bit of cost.
 
Flogger23m said:
I know I'm probably in the minority, but I prefer matte over glossy
Click to expand...
This I am not sure. I mean what is majority or minority on matte vs glossy is anyone's guess.
I only know that some people claim that matte coating affect contrast and colors very negatively and they are very vocal about it suggesting they are majority but that doesn't make them majority.
Not to mention all this contrast and color vibrancy reduction on matte is nonsense. I have never seen it.
 
Flogger23m said:
Will LG be making a Pulsar monitor? Seems like these are the announced models so far and all likely use the same panel:

Acer Predator XB273U F5
360 Hz
Matte AG
$649

MSI 272QRF X36
360 Hz
Matte AG
$649

AOC Agon Pro AG276QSG2
360 Hz
Matte AG
$599

ASUS XG27AQNGV
360 Hz
Display Surface : Anti-Glare
$649.00


I know I'm probably in the minority, but I prefer matte over glossy so happy that there is one panel that seems to offer it. Waiting for Monitors Unboxed/Rtings to review some though. Hoping there will be some slightly cheaper models without the RGB back lights (why is that even a thing ASUS?), or without G-SYNC Ambient Adaptive. Not sure I need that, and seems like it adds a bit of cost.
Click to expand...
They are all 27 😔
 
xDiVolatilX said:
They are all 27 😔
Click to expand...

Yeah I think that is the sweet spot for 1440. I'm assuming they'll do 32" 4K later, maybe some 1440. I'm assuming they're targetting gamers who play games were strong motion clarity can be helpful. 1440 and 27" seem to be what most in that market would want.
 
XoR_ said:
This I am not sure. I mean what is majority or minority on matte vs glossy is anyone's guess.
I only know that some people claim that matte coating affect contrast and colors very negatively and they are very vocal about it suggesting they are majority but that doesn't make them majority.
Not to mention all this contrast and color vibrancy reduction on matte is nonsense. I have never seen it.
Click to expand...

Not gonna matter much. The Pulsar tech can't really do HDR or really enhance the contrast with FALD either when its active... so all of these displays are going to get a contrast ratios around 1000ish or lower with typical IPS like gray blacks when Pulsar is on.
 
TrunksZero said:
Not gonna matter much. The Pulsar tech can't really do HDR or really enhance the contrast with FALD either when its active... so all of these displays are going to get a contrast ratios around 1000ish or lower with typical IPS like gray blacks when Pulsar is on.
Click to expand...

I imagine this will be doable with local dimming eventually. And, God willing, OLED.

But yeah, for now, these are just really good "esports" monitors.
 
TrunksZero said:
Not gonna matter much. The Pulsar tech can't really do HDR or really enhance the contrast with FALD either when its active... so all of these displays are going to get a contrast ratios around 1000ish or lower with typical IPS like gray blacks when Pulsar is on.
Click to expand...
Matte vs glossy is not only affecting OLEDs.
I remember some people being so bothered by matte coating they risked it to remove matte coating.

...or maybe today it is only affecting OLEDs - after all it seems to be an imaginary issue 🤣
 
Flogger23m said:
First heard about these G-Sync Pulsar (Nvidia & MediaTek scaler) almost two years ago, then seemingly any information about them dried up as it seems like they were delayed. Now I'm seeing a bit more about some upcoming models like this one:

https://www.displayspecifications.com/en/news/2bfaeeb

I'm interested in these as I am looking for a new monitor that has little to zero VRR flicker. Seems like motion clarity will be greatly increased as well. From what I understand G-Sync compatible (without module) will have various levels of VRR flicker on IPS, and even more so on VA and OLED monitors. G-Sync Pulsar should be closer to the older G-Sync modules (G-Sync Ultimate) in eliminating VRR flicker, at least that is what they are suggesting.

I'm wondering if we have any information on any potential downsides to G-Sync Pulsar monitors, and if pricing will be cheaper for the IPS monitors. If they're priced like OLEDs... that might kill my interest in them.

Currently I use an Acer Predator XB271HU with a G-Sync module, but going to a monitor that might have VRR flicker would seem like a downgrade. The only reason I am wanting to upgrade semi urgently from it is the screen seems to be pressed in slightly in the right resulting in some semi dark circles emitting from the right (shows up more in pictures, only noticeable on flat backgrounds but not in games/movies):

View attachment 775497

90% of the time I don't notice it. But it still is annoying nonetheless.

I purchased an ASUS XG27ACS ($190) and LG 27GR83Q-B ($280) as they were on sale but have yet to open them. They have some advatnages in producting better darks (for an IPS) but will probably have VRR flicker... and if G-Sync Puslar is a notable step up in motion clarity and has no VRR flicker I'd consider returning both and waiting a few more months.

TLDR: Should I side grade to either of those monitors, or am I better off waiting for a G-Sync Pulsar monitor?
Click to expand...

“Nvidia G-Sync Pulsar Tested: A Massive Leap in LCD Clarity​

Insane Motion Clarity”​


https://www.techspot.com/article/3078-nvidia-gsync-pulsar/
 
Flogger23m said:
First heard about these G-Sync Pulsar (Nvidia & MediaTek scaler) almost two years ago, then seemingly any information about them dried up as it seems like they were delayed. Now I'm seeing a bit more about some upcoming models like this one:

https://www.displayspecifications.com/en/news/2bfaeeb

I'm interested in these as I am looking for a new monitor that has little to zero VRR flicker. Seems like motion clarity will be greatly increased as well. From what I understand G-Sync compatible (without module) will have various levels of VRR flicker on IPS, and even more so on VA and OLED monitors. G-Sync Pulsar should be closer to the older G-Sync modules (G-Sync Ultimate) in eliminating VRR flicker, at least that is what they are suggesting.

I'm wondering if we have any information on any potential downsides to G-Sync Pulsar monitors, and if pricing will be cheaper for the IPS monitors. If they're priced like OLEDs... that might kill my interest in them.

Currently I use an Acer Predator XB271HU with a G-Sync module, but going to a monitor that might have VRR flicker would seem like a downgrade. The only reason I am wanting to upgrade semi urgently from it is the screen seems to be pressed in slightly in the right resulting in some semi dark circles emitting from the right (shows up more in pictures, only noticeable on flat backgrounds but not in games/movies):

View attachment 775497

90% of the time I don't notice it. But it still is annoying nonetheless.

I purchased an ASUS XG27ACS ($190) and LG 27GR83Q-B ($280) as they were on sale but have yet to open them. They have some advatnages in producting better darks (for an IPS) but will probably have VRR flicker... and if G-Sync Puslar is a notable step up in motion clarity and has no VRR flicker I'd consider returning both and waiting a few more months.

TLDR: Should I side grade to either of those monitors, or am I better off waiting for a G-Sync Pulsar monitor?
Click to expand...
OP I would wait. It was announced earlier this year that Pulsar monitors will support single strobing down to 48hz. https://blurbusters.com/nvidia-list...te-range-widened-to-optionally-include-60-hz/

I have the Viewsonic OLED that supports 60hz single strobing and it's wonderful. The only thing I don't like is that Viewsonic clearly rushed it to market and it feels incomplete and has a crappy firmware.

The thought of having Nvidia's Pulsar quality control and having OLED monitors which support and conform to this standard is music to my ears. It seems like it's right around the corner so I would probably wait if it was me.
 
jbltecnicspro said:
OP I would wait. It was announced earlier this year that Pulsar monitors will support single strobing down to 48hz. https://blurbusters.com/nvidia-list...te-range-widened-to-optionally-include-60-hz/

I have the Viewsonic OLED that supports 60hz single strobing and it's wonderful. The only thing I don't like is that Viewsonic clearly rushed it to market and it feels incomplete and has a crappy firmware.

The thought of having Nvidia's Pulsar quality control and having OLED monitors which support and conform to this standard is music to my ears. It seems like it's right around the corner so I would probably wait if it was me.
Click to expand...

From what I understand, it would not be doable on OLED as there is no back lighting. What I'd be interested in is mini-LED with Pulsar, but seems like that is a bit more complicated and I can't find any models of those.
 
Flogger23m said:
From what I understand, it would not be doable on OLED as there is no back lighting. What I'd be interested in is mini-LED with Pulsar, but seems like that is a bit more complicated and I can't find any models of those.
Click to expand...
They would have to do it differently but they could, in theory, do something like it. How well it would work I don't know. What you'd do is to increase the brightness of the OLED pixels but display them in a rolling scan. Since the data actually comes in like that, it would be feasible. You just start turning off lines of pixels after a certain amount of new ones are illuminated. So say you keep 10% of the screen lit at any given time. As more data comes in, you draw the new part of the screen, which has previously been black, and for each line (or pixel) or draw, you remove the oldest one. That way there'll be a rolling scan of the image.

Now the question is if this is feasible to implement in silicon or not. On the surface it sounds like it shouldn't be a problem to me, but then I'm not an ASIC engineer, there could well be something about this that would be computationally infeasible for how displays work currently. Given that it hasn't been done yet, I'd guess it is more complex to implement than it seems to me. It also might be possible but maybe they just aren't bright enough, that if you did this the effective brightness would be too low even with the OLED driven as bright as it can.

But that would be the way it could be done. Instead of doing a rolling strobe of a backlight, you just do a rolling illumination of pixels.
 
Sycraft said:
They would have to do it differently but they could, in theory, do something like it. How well it would work I don't know. What you'd do is to increase the brightness of the OLED pixels but display them in a rolling scan. Since the data actually comes in like that, it would be feasible. You just start turning off lines of pixels after a certain amount of new ones are illuminated. So say you keep 10% of the screen lit at any given time. As more data comes in, you draw the new part of the screen, which has previously been black, and for each line (or pixel) or draw, you remove the oldest one. That way there'll be a rolling scan of the image.

Now the question is if this is feasible to implement in silicon or not. On the surface it sounds like it shouldn't be a problem to me, but then I'm not an ASIC engineer, there could well be something about this that would be computationally infeasible for how displays work currently. Given that it hasn't been done yet, I'd guess it is more complex to implement than it seems to me. It also might be possible but maybe they just aren't bright enough, that if you did this the effective brightness would be too low even with the OLED driven as bright as it can.

But that would be the way it could be done. Instead of doing a rolling strobe of a backlight, you just do a rolling illumination of pixels.
Click to expand...

I don't think it would be hard to do at all. In many ways it is much easier to do on OELD than what they had to do to get it to work with LCDs.

The software/firmware programming to make an OLED do it is trivial.

The hardware that allows much faster control of the OLED is what they need to develop. Which seeems like it shouldn't be too hard do, but someone like LG has to actually do it. And I don't think they've even tried to do it There is not a lot of motivation for them to do it.
 
sharknice said:
I don't think it would be hard to do at all. In many ways it is much easier to do on OELD than what they had to do to get it to work with LCDs.

The software/firmware programming to make an OLED do it is trivial.

The hardware that allows much faster control of the OLED is what they need to develop. Which seeems like it shouldn't be too hard do, but someone like LG has to actually do it. And I don't think they've even tried to do it There is not a lot of motivation for them to do it.
Click to expand...
The only thing I can think of is maybe the communications with the panels don't work that way. If they panel has to be updated in a purely serial fashion, you couldn't then update it to remove pixels without having a second communication line to do that which allowed for it in parallel. Of the panel itself would have to do it. I'm not sure if that is an issue, but that is the only one that comes to mind as a reason it would be hard to implement.
 
I can't see the technology coming to OLED anytime soon unfortunately. The Pulsar screens backlight is over 2000nits I believe, with light scanning down 25% of the screen per frame. So we then perceive the roughly 500nits brightness of the display.

I think the latest Tandem OLEDs only can do around 1300nits in 1% windows and 500ish nits 25% window. Needs to be alot higher for decent brightness.

Thinking more about it, if they set the tandem OLEDs up like CRTs drawing 1 line at a time at 1300nits it could possibly work.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, I don't have a deep understanding of how the technology works, but to look good it would definitely need high transient luminance.

Ideally I'd like to do strobing and HDR at the same time, too. So they'd need to be running those pixels quite hard.
 
Enhanced Interrogator said:
Yeah, I don't have a deep understanding of how the technology works, but to look good it would definitely need high transient luminance.

Ideally I'd like to do strobing and HDR at the same time, too. So they'd need to be running those pixels quite hard.
Click to expand...
Yes brightness would be reduced for sure. That is the biggest downside. It would be totally worth it to me though.
 
This genuinely looks insane WTF. Needs to come to OLEDs ASAP.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_2777.jpeg
    IMG_2777.jpeg
    743.4 KB · Views: 0
I want a 4k version (or 5k) of this. Hopefully those exist by the time I'm upgrading to an RTX 6xxx and Nova Lake cpu.
 
Last edited:
brownvim said:
Yeah its crazy how good it looks, I think its actually better clarity than CRT at that 10 Pulse Width setting. However, its only around 54nits brightness.
Click to expand...

Yeah but I'm sure CRT holdouts will probably talk about how CRT delivers better image quality or black levels than an IPS panel or something. Once an OLED with this level of motion clarity comes out then that will be the final nail in the coffin for CRT.
 
MistaSparkul said:
Yeah but I'm sure CRT holdouts will probably talk about how CRT delivers better image quality or black levels than an IPS panel or something. Once an OLED with this level of motion clarity comes out then that will be the final nail in the coffin for CRT.
Click to expand...
Nah, there will never be a final nail in the coffin for the people who are still on CRT. At this point it really isn't about image quality for any of them, it is ego or faith or something like that. They are stuck on it not because on a balance it offers better image quality, but because they've convinced themselves it is the One True Way(tm) and fuck all that other stuff. That's why the arguments are ever shifting. New display technologies get better and better and so they'll find increasingly niche reasons why CRT is the best, no really trust me bro, and just ignore all the downsides as though they don't matter at all.

You see similar shit in the vinyl head community. Many people just like them because it is fun and retro, but the hardcore people insist it has better sound. Doesn't matter that it measurably doesn't, doesn't matter that you can record a record, and all its flaws, in digital and people can't ABX it. Nope, it is a matter of faith to them that this is the best, the only, true way to listen to music. Analog good, digital bad, etc, etc. They'll never get off of it because it isn't logic based, it isn't a case of "Well when digital can do X then I'll switch," since there is no X that digital can't do.

As a side note: A hilarious thing happened with regards to that in the vinyl community. There is a company, the name escapes me at the moment, who does great vinyl re-releases. They go and get the master tapes and do a good transfer and make really good records. They have an excellent process and the results basically give the best sound quality you are going to get out of the medium. They were held up as the superiority of analog... but then it came out their capture of the master is actually digital. This is unsurprising, for a ton of reasons, but man did it cause whining and wailing in the vinyl community. They loved the products these guys made... but it had been an article of faith the only reason they could be so good is because they were 100% pure analog, no nasty digital in there!
 
I really want to try this out, but I can’t bring myself to use something smaller than 42”. It’s going to be a long wait.
 
There’s a 5k 31.5 inch model being worked on I read, maybe out end of the year.

Acer Predator XB323QX

Still IPS though and not as high Hz.
 
brownvim said:
There’s a 5k 31.5 inch model being worked on I read, maybe out end of the year.

Acer Predator XB323QX

Still IPS though and not as high Hz.
Click to expand...

I just want an OLED Pulsar monitor even if it's only 1440p. From reading TFT's review, it seems like fixed ULMB at lower Hz can provide better motion clarity than Pulsar does?

"With a reduced Pulse Width setting the 60Hz ULMB 2 motion clarity can even look a bit better than the 360Hz mode which is amazing."

Honestly if 60Hz with PW 10 can look that good then I would imagine something like 120Hz with PW 30-40 can look just as good while have enough brightness to be useable. The latest OLEDs are now hitting 330 nits full field so a Pulsar OLED running at 120Hz with PW 50 should have useable brightness levels if LCD is able to hit 245 nits at those settings.
 
Yeah the clarity alone can be better than Pulsar when lowering the pulse width, but you’re sacrificing VRR, adding noticeable flicker and lowering Brightness.

Pulsar mode loses abit of clarity (still very good) for a stable high brightness with gsync and no flicker.

I can’t see OLED Pulsar happening anytime soon, years away, if ever. OLED would need to do 2000nits.

Closest thing is using ShaderBeam with a high hz OLED for now, maybe Nvidia could add that at hardware level on monitors or GPU but it’s going to be really low brightness.
 
brownvim said:
There’s a 5k 31.5 inch model being worked on I read, maybe out end of the year.

Acer Predator XB323QX

Still IPS though and not as high Hz.
Click to expand...
Yeah, it was supposed to come out last year, but it still hasn't showed :(.
 
GoldenTiger said:
Yeah, it was supposed to come out last year, but it still hasn't showed :(.
Click to expand...
Yeah, the TFTCentral Pulsar article mentioned it took Nvidia longer than expectesd moving to the new Mediatek chips, thats why all these monitors got pushed back a year I assume.
 
I totally forgot all about that 5K Pulsar monitor. Checking back at the TFTC article, they mention the possibility of it being glossy.

"

A glossy screen coating?​

The monitor is in an early prototype form at Computex so we can’t necessarily confirm it will stay this way, but the monitor appears to be glossy as well, although it was not easy to get a clear answer from Acer product reps. Time will tell if this ends up being a final product decision or not."

If it really turns out to be glossy then I'm going to jump on this. It's not OLED but hey a glossy screen at least gives some of that extra bit of depth and pop to the image, plus combine that with 5K resolution and it ticks just about every other box.
 
MistaSparkul said:
This genuinely looks insane WTF. Needs to come to OLEDs ASAP.
Click to expand...
Where did you get this screenshot? I ended up returning the viewsonic OLED. I think it was a panel issue so I'm back to having the XG-2431 as my motion clarity monitor now.
 
Sycraft said:
Nah, there will never be a final nail in the coffin for the people who are still on CRT. At this point it really isn't about image quality for any of them, it is ego or faith or something like that. They are stuck on it not because on a balance it offers better image quality, but because they've convinced themselves it is the One True Way(tm) and fuck all that other stuff. That's why the arguments are ever shifting. New display technologies get better and better and so they'll find increasingly niche reasons why CRT is the best, no really trust me bro, and just ignore all the downsides as though they don't matter at all.

You see similar shit in the vinyl head community. Many people just like them because it is fun and retro, but the hardcore people insist it has better sound. Doesn't matter that it measurably doesn't, doesn't matter that you can record a record, and all its flaws, in digital and people can't ABX it. Nope, it is a matter of faith to them that this is the best, the only, true way to listen to music. Analog good, digital bad, etc, etc. They'll never get off of it because it isn't logic based, it isn't a case of "Well when digital can do X then I'll switch," since there is no X that digital can't do.

As a side note: A hilarious thing happened with regards to that in the vinyl community. There is a company, the name escapes me at the moment, who does great vinyl re-releases. They go and get the master tapes and do a good transfer and make really good records. They have an excellent process and the results basically give the best sound quality you are going to get out of the medium. They were held up as the superiority of analog... but then it came out their capture of the master is actually digital. This is unsurprising, for a ton of reasons, but man did it cause whining and wailing in the vinyl community. They loved the products these guys made... but it had been an article of faith the only reason they could be so good is because they were 100% pure analog, no nasty digital in there!
Click to expand...
I think you're being a little too hard. Vinyl diehards are not the same as CRT enthusiasts. I'm a CRT enthusiast who would have gladly ditched all of my CRTs when I had them had OLED with this kind of motion clarity existed. Most of the dudes calibrating their FW900s on the huge FW900 thread are of a similar mindset.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top