ULMB experience?

[Kinawa]

Hi all,

I have 2 ULMB questions please :

1/ Does using ULMB tire your eyes more of give any headaches or such?

2/ I read ULMB is great in games if the GPU can give you 120fps but what about desktop?
As someone who never used ULMB, it sounds great to use it in desktop.
I would love smooth scrolling...

I want to replace my old TN 26" 1200p 60hz and considering (Asus/Acer) 34" 100hz IPS 1440p ultra wide without ULMB or the Acer Z35 35" 1080p VA 144hz with ULMB. The Z35 seems perfect with the nice VA constrast & no IPS glow but I don't know if ULMB will but worth it in desktop vs the low pixel density. I now have 87ppi and the Z35 is 79ppi. I do see the pixels but I'm use to it, the z35 will be worse. Perhaps also 27" 144hz IPS 1440p with ULMB but I prefer ultra wide. I have had 120 hz laptop for 2 years so I know what that is like. I also used the Philips 40" VA 4k for 2 weeks but returned it. Static picture on this VA was great but movement was not smooth and it bothered me.

Thank you

 

[Drags]

it's a technology that strobes your backlight off and on very fast, but still only at 120Hz maximum. so for games, where the content is moving and changing very quickly you can't really see the flickering it causes and it certainly brings about lots of blur reduction benefits. it may lead to more eye strain and hedaches in some users because of the strobing of the backlight but in games etc it's not as obvious because of the content changing all the time.

you'd never want to use it for desktop use as it would create a visible flicker and almost certainly lead to eye strain and headaches. there'd be no real benefit either in that kind of use

 

[Kinawa]

Thanks for your fast reply ;-)

No one ever writes/says anything about ULMB in desktop use so I was wondering why this was never mentioned...
I guess the Asus/Acer 34" 100hz IPS 1440p ultra wide without ULMB will then be the safest option for mixed surfing/gaming.
But I still prefer the Z35 that can oc to 200hz for the smoothness & VA contrast. But ULMB is not on my wishlist anymore.

 

[rabidz7]

it's a technology that strobes your backlight off and on very fast, but still only at 120Hz maximum. so for games, where the content is moving and changing very quickly you can't really see the flickering it causes and it certainly brings about lots of blur reduction benefits. it may lead to more eye strain and hedaches in some users because of the strobing of the backlight but in games etc it's not as obvious because of the content changing all the time.

you'd never want to use it for desktop use as it would create a visible flicker and almost certainly lead to eye strain and headaches. there'd be no real benefit either in that kind of use

Maybe you should read up a bit before posting bolonga.

 

[rabidz7]

ULMB eliminates motion blur. It canreduse persistace to about 1ms, which is similar to moderately fast CRT phosphor. You should always use ULMB. The other person in this thread has no idea why they are talking about, so ignore him/her. ULMB is THE biggest thing to look for in a LCD. Without it, even scrolling text or a map degenerates into a blur of pixels. And no, you cannot ever see a 120Hz flicker unless you are in the .1% of people. 100Hz+ is perfect for almost everyone, 85+ for most.

 

[Polar_Fox]

ULMB is THE biggest thing to look for in a LCD

That's just your opinion. I will take a picture quality perfect but slow display over anything, including 120hz+ monitors.

These features are necessary if the only thing you do with your pc is to play CS:GO all day long. For anyone else, actual panel quality might be way more important.

Also, I have a strobing mode in my tv and it's absolutely horrendous, not only it decreases the brightness way too much, completely ruining the picture quality, but it simply hurts to look at, it might be not nearly as good as its implementation in the gaming monitors, but if ULMB is anything similar to that, I would never consider using it.

 

[Drags]

ULMB eliminates motion blur. It canreduse persistace to about 1ms, which is similar to moderately fast CRT phosphor. You should always use ULMB. The other person in this thread has no idea why they are talking about, so ignore him/her. ULMB is THE biggest thing to look for in a LCD. Without it, even scrolling text or a map degenerates into a blur of pixels. And no, you cannot ever see a 120Hz flicker unless you are in the .1% of people. 100Hz+ is perfect for almost everyone, 85+ for most.

i don't know what i'm talking about?! yeah ok....give me one reliable source where they recommend using ULMB or any blur reduction backlight technology in LCD monitors in normal desktop use?! no one in their right mind would use ULMB for general desktop viewing, it;s just not needed. sure, it will reduce pixel persistance, but that's not something you worry about in office or windows use is it?!

you're getting confused between the days of CRT and LCD's. an LCD strobing the backlight on and off at 85, 100 or 120Hz IS visible to most people (not 1% of people) if you looked at a static desktop or in office applications., it doesnt refresh in the same way as a CRT from top to bottom. in CRT usage, 85Hz is genreally considered ok for most people to avoid visible flicker, but that isn't turning the whole backlight off and on in the same way.

just look at all the people who complain about PWM on LCD monitors. that is functioning in the exact same way as ULMB, simply strobing the backlight on and off. it's not in sync with the refresh rate so it doesnt offer the blur reduction benefits, but it's the same principle. PWM operating at 400 - 600Hz causes people problems with eye strain and headaches. you may not see the flicker but many people have issues with it. in fact most people try and avoid ANY PWM at all if they can for flicker free displays. if PWM was running at 120Hz it would be ludicrous and would certainly produce visible flicker. so saying that you should run ULMB all the time is completely mad and totally false. it's not THE biggest thing you should look for in a display at all, unless you're a gamer and that's specifically your issue with perceived motion blur.

check your own facts before you say i'm talking rubbish!

 

[Drags]

Thanks for your fast reply ;-)

No one ever writes/says anything about ULMB in desktop use so I was wondering why this was never mentioned...
I guess the Asus/Acer 34" 100hz IPS 1440p ultra wide without ULMB will then be the safest option for mixed surfing/gaming.
But I still prefer the Z35 that can oc to 200hz for the smoothness & VA contrast. But ULMB is not on my wishlist anymore.

don't forget ULMB can be turned on and off. so it is certainly good for gaming and reducing motion blur if you find it problematic. see here for more info if needed: http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/articles/motion_blur.htm

although note that if youre planning to use G-sync you cant use them both at the same time anyway, so you wouldn't need or use the ULMB feature.

if you were thinking of it for general desktop/office use, then i would definitely suggest forgetting about it as it really isn't the kind of thing you want to use for those kind of uses

 

[schoolslave]

Maybe you should read up a bit before posting bolonga.

Oh the irony.....

ULMB is terrible for anything outside of fast-paced/competitive FPS games.

 

[General Lee]

You can control between G-Sync and ULMB with the control panel. ULMB is good for stuff like 144 FPS CSGO gaming, but otherwise it should be kept off. Possibly a monitor like the Z35 if it really works at 200 Hz keeping the blur reduction might be a possibility depending on how well it works on the monitor and how sensitive you are to flicker.

 

[rabidz7]

i don't know what i'm talking about?! yeah ok....give me one reliable source where they recommend using ULMB or any blur reduction backlight technology in LCD monitors in normal desktop use?! no one in their right mind would use ULMB for general desktop viewing, it;s just not needed. sure, it will reduce pixel persistance, but that's not something you worry about in office or windows use is it?!

you're getting confused between the days of CRT and LCD's. an LCD strobing the backlight on and off at 85, 100 or 120Hz IS visible to most people (not 1% of people) if you looked at a static desktop or in office applications., it doesnt refresh in the same way as a CRT from top to bottom. in CRT usage, 85Hz is genreally considered ok for most people to avoid visible flicker, but that isn't turning the whole backlight off and on in the same way.

just look at all the people who complain about PWM on LCD monitors. that is functioning in the exact same way as ULMB, simply strobing the backlight on and off. it's not in sync with the refresh rate so it doesnt offer the blur reduction benefits, but it's the same principle. PWM operating at 400 - 600Hz causes people problems with eye strain and headaches. you may not see the flicker but many people have issues with it. in fact most people try and avoid ANY PWM at all if they can for flicker free displays. if PWM was running at 120Hz it would be ludicrous and would certainly produce visible flicker. so saying that you should run ULMB all the time is completely mad and totally false. it's not THE biggest thing you should look for in a display at all, unless you're a gamer and that's specifically your issue with perceived motion blur.

check your own facts before you say i'm talking rubbish!

PWM is harmless other than creating motion artifacts. The artifacts and out of sync nature cause eyestrain. A CRT with 1ms phosphor has equal visible flicker to a LCD at the same refresh rate and persistence. And yes, I prefer to be able to quickly scroll text an maps without blurm

 

[rabidz7]

don't forget ULMB can be turned on and off. so it is certainly good for gaming and reducing motion blur if you find it problematic. see here for more info if needed: http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/articles/motion_blur.htm

although note that if youre planning to use G-sync you cant use them both at the same time anyway, so you wouldn't need or use the ULMB feature.

if you were thinking of it for general desktop/office use, then i would definitely suggest forgetting about it as it really isn't the kind of thing you want to use for those kind of uses

GSINK is NOTHING compared to ULMB. GSINK takes out a few tears that are barely noticeable anyway. ULMB is HUGE.

 

[rabidz7]

You can control between G-Sync and ULMB with the control panel. ULMB is good for stuff like 144 FPS CSGO gaming, but otherwise it should be kept off. Possibly a monitor like the Z35 if it really works at 200 Hz keeping the blur reduction might be a possibility depending on how well it works on the monitor and how sensitive you are to flicker.

ULMB should always be kept on. GSINK should not be used because it can't be combined with ULMB.

 

[Comixbooks]

It flickers like a BI$CH so yeah it sucks....... If you have a high refresh monitor and it functions with it off just do that.

 

[Drags]

PWM is harmless other than creating motion artifacts. The artifacts and out of sync nature cause eyestrain. A CRT with 1ms phosphor has equal visible flicker to a LCD at the same refresh rate and persistence. And yes, I prefer to be able to quickly scroll text an maps without blurm

i'm beginning to wonder if you're just trolling for fun, or whether you really are just totally misinformed. I think I know where all your info is coming from, it's from blurbusters i assume, but the things they've covered there are only telling half the story and are all based on looking at reducing motion blur. saying that PWM is only a problem because of the artefacts and the out of sync (With refresh rate i assume you mean) is nonsense. If you're looking at a static image like an office document for instance, you won't see any artefacts from PWM anyway. Even on moving images, it is very hard to pick out PWM artefacts in most cases, and they are certainly nowehere near as obvious as the artefacts you see from pixel overdrive, being used to reduce response times (and blur).

On a static image you will still be able to see the flickering if the PWM frequency is low enough. for many people, even if it is quite high they can "feel" it, and end up with eye strain issues, nausea and headaches. if you had a PWM backlight operation at 120Hz to be in sync with a 120Hz refresh rate and looked at a static image you would absolutely see flickering at that kind of requency.

GSINK is NOTHING compared to ULMB. GSINK takes out a few tears that are barely noticeable anyway. ULMB is HUGE.

That really depends on the system, graphics card, games, settings. saying G-sync (lol at "GSINK" ) does nothing is again pretty uninformed. you only need to look at the hundreds of reviews, user comments etc to know that G-sync makes a big different to smoothness of gaming, especially when you have lower end systems or frame rates which fluctuate between low (like 30fps) and higher levels. ULMB is very good at reducing blur, but it isnt for everyone. some people just don't like it and don't like the flickering and massively reduced max brightness. some people don't have powerful enough systems to run reliably at 120Hz (with ULMB on at the same frequency) and so although they might reduce perceived blur, they end up with stuttering, tearing etc from the out of sync monitor and graphics card refresh rate. so some people may have far more benefit by using G-sync.

 

[Chaoss]

If you used a CRT at 75hz back in the day or currently use the Oculus Rift a lot and found it usable, then you will very likely find this usable

 

[Odellus]

It flickers like a BI$CH so yeah it sucks....... If you have a high refresh monitor and it functions with it off just do that.

75 Hz flicker on a CRT is barely visible and i'm sure most people here have experienced that, 120 Hz is nothing...

 

[Armenius]

Something to keep in mind with ULMB is that it will lower the brightness of the image dramatically due to the backlight no longer being persistent, depending on the pulse width used. The lower the pulse width, the better the blur reduction but the lower brightness. At 120 Hz on the PG278Q I really find the pulse width needs to be at least at 35 to be noticeable, but at that point the brightness falls to around 80 nits with the brightness setting in the OSD turned all the way up. It can really save your eyes in low-light conditions, though.

 

[rabidz7]

Something to keep in mind with ULMB is that it will lower the brightness of the image dramatically due to the backlight no longer being persistent, depending on the pulse width used. The lower the pulse width, the better the blur reduction but the lower brightness. At 120 Hz on the PG278Q I really find the pulse width needs to be at least at 35 to be noticeable, but at that point the brightness falls to around 80 nits with the brightness setting in the OSD turned all the way up. It can really save your eyes in low-light conditions, though.

Do people use monitors in places that aren't dark? I keep heavy blinds on my windows as ambient light hurts CRT black levels.

 

[rabidz7]

i'm beginning to wonder if you're just trolling for fun, or whether you really are just totally misinformed. I think I know where all your info is coming from, it's from blurbusters i assume, but the things they've covered there are only telling half the story and are all based on looking at reducing motion blur. saying that PWM is only a problem because of the artefacts and the out of sync (With refresh rate i assume you mean) is nonsense. If you're looking at a static image like an office document for instance, you won't see any artefacts from PWM anyway. Even on moving images, it is very hard to pick out PWM artefacts in most cases, and they are certainly nowehere near as obvious as the artefacts you see from pixel overdrive, being used to reduce response times (and blur).

On a static image you will still be able to see the flickering if the PWM frequency is low enough. for many people, even if it is quite high they can "feel" it, and end up with eye strain issues, nausea and headaches. if you had a PWM backlight operation at 120Hz to be in sync with a 120Hz refresh rate and looked at a static image you would absolutely see flickering at that kind of requency.



That really depends on the system, graphics card, games, settings. saying G-sync (lol at "GSINK" ) does nothing is again pretty uninformed. you only need to look at the hundreds of reviews, user comments etc to know that G-sync makes a big different to smoothness of gaming, especially when you have lower end systems or frame rates which fluctuate between low (like 30fps) and higher levels. ULMB is very good at reducing blur, but it isnt for everyone. some people just don't like it and don't like the flickering and massively reduced max brightness. some people don't have powerful enough systems to run reliably at 120Hz (with ULMB on at the same frequency) and so although they might reduce perceived blur, they end up with stuttering, tearing etc from the out of sync monitor and graphics card refresh rate. so some people may have far more benefit by using G-sync.

Some people are bothered by high-frequency flicker. Most people are not. I can feel flicker on a CRT running at 100Hz, but 90+ isn't annoying for me. Other han the artifacts, PWM isn't a problem for most people.

 

[Drags]

you cannot compare CRT 90 - 100Hz with an LCD PWM at the same frequency though, they are operating in a totally different way and have totally different impacts on the user, both visibly and non-visibly. That's where your issue is coming from here, you're making comparisons with CRT's which just aren't relevant.

 

[kasakka]

ULMB is great for fast paced games that run at 60 fps or more. For anything else I usually use G-Sync instead. At 90% pulse width there isn't any noticeable dimming on my PG278Q but anything below it starts to get darker and darker. To me 90 still reduces motion persistence really well and you won't see any flicker. I've sometimes forgot ULMB enabled (before it became controllable from Nvidia Control Panel) even on the desktop and didn't notice it.

 

[MistaSparkul]

A lot of displays suffer from strobing crosstalk which is something that cannot be completely eliminated. May not bother a lot of people but just something to take note of.

 

[Falkentyne]

The problem with ULMB is that it does not increase current to the backlight to compensate for the strobing. This was the first thing people with modded VG248QE's noticed, besides the increased strobe crosstalk. Both the "Original" version--Lightboost, and Benq blur reduction (which was basically Benq adapting the lightboost tech directly into the scaler) increase backlight current by the same amount (forgot the value, I think display corner said it was 1.8x or something). that's why The benq blur reduction and lightboost panels were much brighter.

 

[rabidz7]

ULMB is great for fast paced games that run at 60 fps or more. For anything else I usually use G-Sync instead. At 90% pulse width there isn't any noticeable dimming on my PG278Q but anything below it starts to get darker and darker. To me 90 still reduces motion persistence really well and you won't see any flicker. I've sometimes forgot ULMB enabled (before it became controllable from Nvidia Control Panel) even on the desktop and didn't notice it.

Who plays games under 60FPS? I suppose I'm a bit spoiled with a CRT: if I have a framerate issue, I just reduce the resolution without having to deal with scaling or other nonsense. 90% pulse is only about 2.Xms response time. 10% is best if you are in a dark room.

 

[rabidz7]

you cannot compare CRT 90 - 100Hz with an LCD PWM at the same frequency though, they are operating in a totally different way and have totally different impacts on the user, both visibly and non-visibly. That's where your issue is coming from here, you're making comparisons with CRT's which just aren't relevant.

Before upgrading to a CRT, I had a VG248QE. 100Hz or 120Hz with LightBoost 10% was perfectly fine.

 

[rabidz7]

A lot of displays suffer from strobing crosstalk which is something that cannot be completely eliminated. May not bother a lot of people but just something to take note of.

You just need a panel with a fast response time. TN is prefered.

 

[Falkentyne]

There's more to this than meets the eye.

The Benq XL series are all extremely fast TN monitors, yet their blur reduction at 144hz is all but unusable because of extremely high crosstalk. The crosstalk increases at high refresh rates because the pixels have to refresh faster and don't have as much time to complete transitions between strobes. On monitors that can single strobe at 60hz, the crosstalk is about half as what you see at 120hz (crosstalk is at the bottom of the screen unless you can adjust where the strobe begins and ends (strobe phase / Area).

 

[kasakka]

Who plays games under 60FPS? I suppose I'm a bit spoiled with a CRT: if I have a framerate issue, I just reduce the resolution without having to deal with scaling or other nonsense. 90% pulse is only about 2.Xms response time. 10% is best if you are in a dark room.

You would have to be in a seriously dark room if you want to turn the pulse width really low. I often play games that might end up going under 60 fps (either due to bugs or because I run too high settings). With G-Sync I don't really notice it and I really can't tell much of a difference with the lower ULMB pulse widths, just that it gets so dark it's hard to see anything.