![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
-
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.
PWM vs ULMB
- Thread starter riffcho
- Start date
No, if anything the ulmb is potentially harder on the eyes at it operates at a much lower frequency like 100, 120 or 144Hz to match the refresh rate. However ulmb is used only in gaming where it helps reduce motion blur and where because of the dynamic content, the flickering is less noticeable and less of an issue. You’re also only keeping it turned on while you game for relatively short periods of time in general, and you always have the option to not use it if you don’t like it or find the flickering a problem.
PWM on the other hand would be operating at all times with no ability to disable it. And it’s most harsh when you’re viewing static images like webpages, office etc. It might operate at much higher frequencies, and you’d generally never see the flickering (whereas you might see ulmb at the lower freq) but you might experience longer term issues like eye strain and headaches
PWM on the other hand would be operating at all times with no ability to disable it. And it’s most harsh when you’re viewing static images like webpages, office etc. It might operate at much higher frequencies, and you’d generally never see the flickering (whereas you might see ulmb at the lower freq) but you might experience longer term issues like eye strain and headaches
RPGWiZaRD
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2009
- Messages
- 1,217
I might be wrong here but isn't there a substantial difference as to how the "flicker" happens in those two cases? pwn flicker I think is a total on-off at a time and ULMB is a top-to bottom refresh partially at a time but again I might be wrong. I have had issues with a work monitor due PWM flicker but I use BenQ Blur Reduction now at home at 144Hz which is turned on all the time and haven't had any issues. I didn't have any issues with CRTs at 100Hz and above, 85Hz was sorta edge case, 75 and 60Hz could cause issues in the long run.
Most monitors used PWM at a high rate that wasn't related to or synced with the refresh rate, it was just fixed. This produces artifacts and sometimes eye strain in certain individuals and conveys absolutely no benefit to the user. The only benefit of PWM(in LED backlight monitors, ccfl is different but irrelevant in 2019) is to the manufacturer, it's easier to implement. ULMB is still flicker and will still cause eye strain in certain individuals, and at a low enough rate it can be noticeable and annoying to almost everyone. But it is synced with refresh rate and it produces a major benefit in motion clarity.
Everyone hates PWM because it literally makes monitors worse, ULMB is an optional mode that has pros and cons and is generally only used for gaming when very high motion clarity is desired(such as in high fps competitive multiplayer titles).
I still wouldn't use ULMB when reading text or doing work, it's just adding potential eye strain for no reason, but since it is optional you can just turn it on and off as needed. PWM is rarely optional aside from just leaving your monitor at 100% brightness.
Everyone hates PWM because it literally makes monitors worse, ULMB is an optional mode that has pros and cons and is generally only used for gaming when very high motion clarity is desired(such as in high fps competitive multiplayer titles).
I still wouldn't use ULMB when reading text or doing work, it's just adding potential eye strain for no reason, but since it is optional you can just turn it on and off as needed. PWM is rarely optional aside from just leaving your monitor at 100% brightness.
EniGmA1987
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- May 2, 2017
- Messages
- 429
Top to bottom on-off in sections is called a scanning backlight. It is different than ULMB/strobing backlight which uses full on-full off. Scanning backlight also looks much nicer and smoother than strobing backlight does, but there are almost no monitors or TVs that use scanning backlight.
As others have mentioned, backlight strobe and PWM are different. While both do flicker, PWM usually tuns off the backllight for less time (unless your brightness is turned way down). strobing is a full off of the backlight. Scanning just has a single set of LEDs on at a time and always only has 1 set on. The monitor is never fully off or fully on, and always produces the same amount of light, just in different areas of the screen. It not only looks nicer than strobing, it gives me less eye strain than strobing does as well, and allows higher refresh rates than strobing does. Reason being that with strobing you must wait until all lines have been scanned and transitions, then do a strobe, then turn off and start a new scan. While scanning backlight transitions the lines and when it does the top 25% of the screen that section of LEDs turns on, when it does the next 25% the top section turns off and the second section of LEDs turns on, and so on and repeat. So the backlight just goes as fast as the refresh and continually cycles, rather than doing a full refresh then a pulse cycle, then you can start a new refresh cycle.
As others have said, I still wouldnt use strobing or scanning backlights outside of games though. I have gamed for hours and hours with a scanning backlight turned on, so it is doable. When I am done my eyes hurt though. But it is not really any more hurt than when I use a 240-360HHz PWM monitor, and those ones make my eyes hurt all the time I use them, not just when gaming for long periods.
RPGWiZaRD
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2009
- Messages
- 1,217
Well I'm used to like 20 years of avg daily 4-6 hrs or whatever screen flicker and my eye sight is still very sharp and rarely have any headaches, I get the feel you are overreacting as far as strobing goes. Makes you wonder how damaging it was for world population with all those 60Hz 8 hr daily work for such big masses going by how damaging it make you seem like people even had a choice before.
I love the improved motion smoothness in windows too when scrolling upside down or moving windows around etc when text stays sharp so I don't get reminded of the LCD smeariness. Besides on my BenQ it requires me to enter service menu to turn on/off the blur reduction and it takes some time to restart the monitor etc. Not very convenient. So unless someone shows me a legit study that says your eye sight will be 25% worse in 5 years or whatever then I'll consider, I'll happily continue with all-day-long strobing use. I'm very used to CRT 100Hz flicker so 144Hz should be a substantial improvement. Based on own longtime experience it works fine for me at least so far and I'm a motion smoothness lover which contribute to overall PC experience so unless it's proven to be very drastic damage to your eye sight it wouldn't stop me from using it. It's not like you can percieve any flicker to the naked eye either, that probably stops at around 100~120Hz for probably 90% of people.
What seems to be a very legit concern though is bright display useage in darkened rooms that can be seen with the youth's increase "bedtime" phone use, I always keep my room well lit when I sit at the PC or watch TV personally and never look at the phone whit lights turned off when I'm at home either, always trying to avoid dark room screen time. I mean there's even people that turned temporarily blind from such cases.
tl;dr Whether strobing should be used constantly is a personal thing and whether it is damaging is based on assumptions.
I love the improved motion smoothness in windows too when scrolling upside down or moving windows around etc when text stays sharp so I don't get reminded of the LCD smeariness. Besides on my BenQ it requires me to enter service menu to turn on/off the blur reduction and it takes some time to restart the monitor etc. Not very convenient. So unless someone shows me a legit study that says your eye sight will be 25% worse in 5 years or whatever then I'll consider, I'll happily continue with all-day-long strobing use. I'm very used to CRT 100Hz flicker so 144Hz should be a substantial improvement. Based on own longtime experience it works fine for me at least so far and I'm a motion smoothness lover which contribute to overall PC experience so unless it's proven to be very drastic damage to your eye sight it wouldn't stop me from using it. It's not like you can percieve any flicker to the naked eye either, that probably stops at around 100~120Hz for probably 90% of people.
What seems to be a very legit concern though is bright display useage in darkened rooms that can be seen with the youth's increase "bedtime" phone use, I always keep my room well lit when I sit at the PC or watch TV personally and never look at the phone whit lights turned off when I'm at home either, always trying to avoid dark room screen time. I mean there's even people that turned temporarily blind from such cases.
tl;dr Whether strobing should be used constantly is a personal thing and whether it is damaging is based on assumptions.
Last edited:
Well I can tell you I wore glasses from the age of maybe 11 or 12 up to a few years ago when I got laser surgery. I feel staring at a crappy CRT as a kid had an effect. For the record most CRTs did higher than 60 Hz, part of the issue was that they often weren't perfectly sharp due to calibration or aging issues.
Strobing is unnecessary for everything but gaming. Most of the time on the desktop you are looking at static screens.
PWM on displays can go to hell.