How does 144Hz+blur reduction look at ~60fps?

[kuhla]

I'm really close to making a new purchase but now I've realized something: I'm thinking of investing in a monitor that I would be running at 144hz + blur reduction (BenQ XL2720Z) all the time but based on the settings I use in-game, I'm only going to be around 40-70fps. I've tried doing some google searches but just about every similar discussion devolves into "if you bought a monitor that can run that fast you really should be shooting 100+ fps" which may be true but it isn't really answering my question.

Anyone have a 120-144Hz monitor with Lightboost/ULMB/blur reduction technology that they use for gaming but still have middle of the road fps numbers... how does that look? Is it any improvement?

 

[wabbitseason]

What do you mean by "blur reduction"? Lightboost/ULMB? If so, you cannot use a strobed backlight with low FPS. It is going to flicker and bother you.

In fact, if you are only getting 60 FPS average you gain absolutely nothing by going from a 60 Hz to a 144 Hz monitor.

So yeah, you've prematurely dismissed correct advice while failing to understand the fundamentals of the technology.

 

[Meeho]

What do you mean by "blur reduction"? Lightboost/ULMB? If so, you cannot use a strobed backlight with low FPS. It is going to flicker and bother you.

Monitor refresh is unrelated to FPS. It flickers at a constant frequency.

In fact, if you are only getting 60 FPS average you gain absolutely nothing by going from a 60 Hz to a 144 Hz monitor.

You do gain something. Picture sharpness/blur reduction, possible tearing reduction with vsync off.

So yeah, you've prematurely dismissed correct advice while failing to understand the fundamentals of the technology.

Hmm...

 

[Rattle]

You absolutely still gain at 60fps with a 144hz screen. No smoothness or tearing and 1ms and I never use vsync I only cap all fps at 144.

 

[dmonkey]

I'm really close to making a new purchase but now I've realized something: I'm thinking of investing in a monitor that I would be running at 144hz + blur reduction (BenQ XL2720Z) all the time but based on the settings I use in-game, I'm only going to be around 40-70fps. I've tried doing some google searches but just about every similar discussion devolves into "if you bought a monitor that can run that fast you really should be shooting 100+ fps" which may be true but it isn't really answering my question.

Anyone have a 120-144Hz monitor with Lightboost/ULMB/blur reduction technology that they use for gaming but still have middle of the road fps numbers... how does that look? Is it any improvement?

FYI backlight strobing (Lightboost/ULMB/Blur Reduction) doesn't work at 144 hz due to sync issues between backlight and panel at that frequency. 120 hz is as high as it goes.

Another FYI, with backlight strobing, if your display's refresh rate is set to 120 hz you will get double-images and juddering below 120 fps because that's how things work without motion interpolation. You can use the Blurbusters Strobe Utility (blurbusters.com) with the BenQ XL series to enable single-strobe Blur Reduction at 60 hz if that is closer to your average framerate.

 

[wabbitseason]

Monitor refresh is unrelated to FPS. It flickers at a constant frequency.

Fails to understand what lightboost/ULMB is. I'll give you a little hint: 60 Hz lightboost is like looking at a 60 Hz CRT.

You do gain something.Picture sharpness/blur reduction, possible tearing reduction with vsync off.

Fails to understand that 60 FPS on a 60Hz screen looks exactly the same as 60 FPS on a 144Hz screen. Or are you forgetting how to isolate your variables? No scientific or logical background whatsoever? Two displays with the same pixel transition times, one 60 Hz the other 144 Hz, will provide the exact same motion resolution when fed 60 FPS content.

Picture sharpness is influenced by DPI, not FPS, refresh rate, pixel transition time, or backlight strobing. Maybe you meant motion resolution? Nah, you just don't know what you're talking about.

There's no mystical "picture sharpness/blur reduction" improvements when running 60 FPS on a 144Hz monitor. Live in your fantasy world, just don't try to spread your ignorance as fact. Or do you believe that, nevermind facts, all perspectives are equally valid?


Really, if you have no idea about display technology it might be nice for you to rest your fingers for a while. You should be embarrassed by this post.

 

[dowant120hz]

Higher refresh rates always give you less tearing and less input lag - no matter the FPS

If a game is fixed at 60FPS though you usually wanna use 120hz over 144hz because there is less judder

 

[wabbitseason]

You absolutely still gain at 60fps with a 144hz screen. No smoothness or tearing and 1ms and I never use vsync I only cap all fps at 144.

So you cap your FPS to 144 on a fast-pixel 144Hz screen, and get smooth gameplay with no tearing. Awesome.

What does this have to do, remotely, with with 60 FPS on a 144Hz screen?

 

[Meeho]

Fails to understand what lightboost/ULMB is. I'll give you a little hint: 60 Hz lightboost is like looking at a 60 Hz CRT.

Lightboost at 120 Hz is Lightboost at 120 Hz, no matter if it is displaying 5 FPS or 500 FPS.

Fails to understand that 60 FPS on a 60Hz screen looks exactly the same as 60 FPS on a 144Hz screen. Or are you forgetting how to isolate your variables? No scientific or logical background whatsoever? Two displays with the same pixel transition times, one 60 Hz the other 144 Hz, will provide the exact same motion resolution when fed 60 FPS content.

Monitors with 144 Hz refresh don't have the same pixel transition times as 60 Hz ones.

Picture sharpness is influenced by DPI, not FPS, refresh rate, pixel transition time, or backlight strobing. Maybe you meant motion resolution? Nah, you just don't know what you're talking about.

Less motion blur = sharper picture, it is not hard to understand.

There's no mystical "picture sharpness/blur reduction" improvements when running 60 FPS on a 144Hz monitor. Live in your fantasy world, just don't try to spread your ignorance as fact. Or do you believe that, nevermind facts, all perspectives are equally valid?

You obviously have no idea how LCD screens work.

Really, if you have no idea about display technology it might be nice for you to rest your fingers for a while. You should be embarrassed by this post.

Oh, the irony.

 

[Meeho]

Here you go.

 

[wabbitseason]

Lightboost at 120 Hz is Lightboost at 120 Hz, no matter if it is displaying 5 FPS or 500 FPS.

Yes, and 120Hz lightboost is about as useful at 60 FPS as it is at 5. What is the point of a strobed backlight? Direct synching between frame-delivery-to-monitor and monitor refresh to eliminate motion blur.

To answer the OP, "144Hz+blur reduction at ~60fps" is a waste of your money. Or is there some other nugget of deeply useful insight on the tip of your tongue to the contrary?

 

[Meeho]

Yes, and 120Hz lightboost is about as useful at 60 FPS as it is at 5. What is the point of a strobed backlight? Direct synching between frame-delivery-to-monitor and monitor refresh to eliminate motion blur.

To answer the OP, "144Hz+blur reduction at ~60fps" is a waste of your money. Or is there some other nugget of deeply useful insight on the tip of your tongue to the contrary?

It doesn't need to sync to provide benefit. I'm getting tired of your attitude, so I'll sign off here.

 

[GoldenTiger]

It doesn't need to sync to provide benefit. I'm getting tired of your attitude, so I'll sign off here.

You're not alone .

 

[flod]

how does it look? you'll see double images and tearing when there is eye tracking. that is all

most 144hz monitors have the option for strobing ("blur reduction") anyway and i dont know of any good monitor which doesnt. so don't worry about it when picking a monitor. once you get the monitor, try it yourself

how much of an improvement?
ignoring strobing/blur reduction, let's just say that 144fps on a 60hz display is better than 60fps on a 144hz display.

 

[kuhla]

Yes, I was referring to strobe backlight technologies that help eliminate motion blur by combating persistence.

Trying to think of how the technology works, I imagine that 60fps content should look very very similar on a 60Hz screen and a 120Hz screen with strobe tech enabled (keeping other variables the same). The point of this post was to see if there was any reason that same content would look WORSE on the 120Hz+strobe.

There may be some advantage to the 120Hz because any tearing would be on the screen for a very short amount of time.

The strobing would probably be of close to zero value because there wouldn't be "enough" of a new image between frames for "clean up" (strobe) to make a real difference.

As I was shopping around I realized that I was putting a lot of weight on the reviews and opinions of people that were primarily running low-impact FPS games allowing them to push 120-144 and thus taking full advantage of strobe tech. That only represents a fraction of the gaming I do.

 

[dmonkey]

Yes, I was referring to strobe backlight technologies that help eliminate motion blur by combating persistence.

Trying to think of how the technology works, I imagine that 60fps content should look very very similar on a 60Hz screen and a 120Hz screen with strobe tech enabled (keeping other variables the same). The point of this post was to see if there was any reason that same content would look WORSE on the 120Hz+strobe.

There may be some advantage to the 120Hz because any tearing would be on the screen for a very short amount of time.

The strobing would probably be of close to zero value because there wouldn't be "enough" of a new image between frames for "clean up" (strobe) to make a real difference.

As I was shopping around I realized that I was putting a lot of weight on the reviews and opinions of people that were primarily running low-impact FPS games allowing them to push 120-144 and thus taking full advantage of strobe tech. That only represents a fraction of the gaming I do.

In fact one could say it does look worse, depending on what you're used to. 60 fps on a 60 hz monitor will not show double-images as 60 fps on a 120 hz strobed monitor does, instead it will show blur. Both are equally jarring TBH.

 

[flod]

Yes, I was referring to strobe backlight technologies that help eliminate motion blur by combating persistence.

Trying to think of how the technology works, I imagine that 60fps content should look very very similar on a 60Hz screen and a 120Hz screen with strobe tech enabled (keeping other variables the same). The point of this post was to see if there was any reason that same content would look WORSE on the 120Hz+strobe.

60fps looks better on strobed 60hz than strobed 120hz. because you're getting two strobes for every frame, and so you'll see a duplicate image when you move your eyes around. idk about you but i'd consider that "worse"

for instance on my crt, set to run at 150hz:
http://i.imgur.com/rzYmIg3.jpg

 

[Armenius]

G-sync or Adaptive-sync would be better options for you if you're getting "middle-of-the-road" FPS on a 144 Hz monitor running at 144 Hz. Your strobing frequency should always match your framerate, and you should make sure your framerate does not deviate much from that frequency.

 

[wabbitseason]

60fps looks better on strobed 60hz than strobed 120hz. because you're getting two strobes for every frame, and so you'll see a duplicate image when you move your eyes around. idk about you but i'd consider that "worse"

for instance on my crt, set to run at 150hz:
http://i.imgur.com/rzYmIg3.jpg

Not necessarily, because flickering is easy to detect below 80 or 90 Hz. That is why 60Hz lightboost is not marketed. Even if you can't detect it consciously, it will cause unpleasant physiological responses eventually (eyestrain, nausea, dizziness, etc).

Of course 60FPS looks terrible on 120Hz lightboost as well, for reasons mentioned in your post and earlier in the thread. And that's provided the OP can actually frame-limit his content to 60FPS and maintain that FPS at all times. Dips to 40 FPS and jumps to 70 FPS will be even more unpleasant with a 120Hz lightboost display than an ordinary 60Hz sample-and-hold.

The idiotic argument has been made in this thread that strobed backlights provide a major and tangible benefit regardless of FPS. This is categorically and hilariously false. As Armenius correctly states in the post above, your strobing frequency should always match your framerate. Otherwise strobing not only provides zero benefit; it is frequently detrimental to your experience.