Lightboost Trick - Zero response time LCDs

What you see is what you get, including photography, displays, and video equipment.

Moderators: Dposcorp, SpotTheCat

Re: Lightboost Trick - Zero response time LCDs

Postposted on Fri Feb 08, 2013 7:33 pm

auxy wrote:Well, you've definitely sold me on it. ¦3c I'm very excited about the idea of reducing perceived motion blur. Unfortunately, I don't think my hardware is up to the task of running games at >60FPS to really benefit from Lightboost -- nor do I have an appropriate monitor -- and I think the colors of something like the VG series might bother me. I don't know. Can anyone with experience with good IPS monitors chime in further on that topic?
It's important to note that not everyone is sensitive to the poor motion of LCD's. Some people didn't care about CRT's motion clarity. But if you were one of those people, then that's where the benefit comes in. As a rule of thumb, if you can't really tell apart CRT from LCD, then you won't really be interested in LightBoost. Another option is to get a LightBoost monitor with a money-back guarantee (or a low restocking fee), so you can try it out. But I knew I would like it so much, because I really hated the poor motion of LCD (even 120Hz) compared to CRT. I bought sight-unseen, and was impressed right away, since I am used to the CRT clear motion effect.

FWIW, Vega from HardForum has the Catleap 2B 1440p IPS display, and an ASUS VG248QE LightBoost display. He got a BENQ XL2411T, was wowed by the motion clarity, then sold it. But this time, apparently, he is keeping the ASUS VG248QE. He has had tough decisions about which is better gaming. The color and 1440p of IPS, or the CRT-style 'perfect clear' motion of LightBoost LCD.

It's worth saying that LightBoost can be turned on/off, too.

It's, however, a hugely exciting development for people like me, because it satisfies a very major LCD complaint by a niche of gamers like me!
Thanks
Mark Rejhon
mdrejhon
Gerbil
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2013 11:50 am

Re: Lightboost Trick - Zero response time LCDs

Postposted on Fri Feb 08, 2013 8:02 pm

mdrejhon wrote:It's important to note that not everyone is sensitive to the poor motion of LCD's. Some people didn't care about CRT's motion clarity. But if you were one of those people, then that's where the benefit comes in. As a rule of thumb, if you can't really tell apart CRT from LCD, then you won't really be interested in LightBoost.
Well, I'm young; I'm only 22. I've only been gaming myself since 2003, and coming from an upper-middle-class family headed by an engineer (and thus with an emphasis on having new technology) I've always played on LCDs. I have no idea if I would prefer a CRT. However, I've recently found that in playing fast FPS games (like the aforementioned Blacklight: Retribution) I do frequently get beat on reaction time, despite having a professionally measured reaction time of less than 150ms. I wonder if some of this isn't due to motion blur on my slow 60Hz IPS LCD -- you know, because of the blur, it then takes more time for my eyes to resolve the blurry image into shapes I can recognize and react to.
mdrejhon wrote:the Catleap 2B 1440p IPS display
I tried to get one of these, but they're outrageously expensive now. :( Spending $300 on a monitor is in the upper limits of acceptable for me; spending four digits is just impossible.
mdrejhon wrote:a hugely exciting development for people like me, because it satisfies a very major LCD complaint by a niche of gamers like me!
I hang out a lot on Freenode IRC ##hardware, and a few of the regulars in there still stand by their old CRTs (including one with that famous Sony display, whatever it is -- FW900 I think?). Most of us younguns think it's foolishness, but this thread has made me wonder a bit ...
i5-3570K @ 4.4 (NH-C14), 4x8GB DDR3-1866, GA-Z68MA-D3H-B2, ASUS GTXTITAN-6GD5, 128GB Vertex 4 / 2x60GB Vertex Plus R2 / 2x2TB Barracuda 7200.14 RAID0 / ANS-9010 (4x4GB), SST-DA1000 (PSU), 2x VS229H-P, 1x VG248QE, 1x MIMO 720F, Corsair Vengeance K90+M95
auxy
Gerbil Elite
 
Posts: 781
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 4:25 pm
Location: the armpit of Texas

Re: Lightboost Trick - Zero response time LCDs

Postposted on Fri Feb 08, 2013 10:09 pm

auxy wrote:Well, I'm young; I'm only 22. I've only been gaming myself since 2003, and coming from an upper-middle-class family headed by an engineer (and thus with an emphasis on having new technology) I've always played on LCDs. I have no idea if I would prefer a CRT.
You younguns make this 38-year old feel old. Grown adults exist today who have never gamed on CRT. :D
auxy wrote:I hang out a lot on Freenode IRC ##hardware, and a few of the regulars in there still stand by their old CRTs (including one with that famous Sony display, whatever it is -- FW900 I think?). Most of us younguns think it's foolishness, but this thread has made me wonder a bit ...
Oh, I understand these people. The FW900 is still widely revered for good reason, and motion blur (reaction time) is one big reason.

As you've never gamed on CRT -- hard to say -- you might still be sensitive to motion blur, but not know it yet. If you are at a disadvantage, look at your weak links -- good Internet connection (stable ping, low ping, good bandwidth), fast GPU (higher fps = lower input lag), and either a CRT or LightBoost (helps reaction time), a proper gaming mouse (1000Hz = reduce mouse lag to 1ms -- and for best natural low-lag mouse smoothness, set mouse sensitivity to high via mouse drivers, and mouse sensitivity low for in-game setting) and turn off software-based mouse smoothing (adds lag) in the game.
Last edited by mdrejhon on Fri Feb 08, 2013 10:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Thanks
Mark Rejhon
mdrejhon
Gerbil
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2013 11:50 am

Re: Lightboost Trick - Zero response time LCDs

Postposted on Fri Feb 08, 2013 10:15 pm

mdrejhon wrote:Supported zero motion blur LCD's: ASUS VG248QE*, BENQ XL2411T*, ASUS VG278H, ASUS VG278HE, BENQ XL2420T, Samsung S27A950D and Acer HN274H. *The best are the 1ms monitors, because of reduced crosstalk between refreshes.
Umm, are there any higher-DPI displays that are good for this? 24" 1080p is kind of ...
Well, you know...
i5-3570K @ 4.4 (NH-C14), 4x8GB DDR3-1866, GA-Z68MA-D3H-B2, ASUS GTXTITAN-6GD5, 128GB Vertex 4 / 2x60GB Vertex Plus R2 / 2x2TB Barracuda 7200.14 RAID0 / ANS-9010 (4x4GB), SST-DA1000 (PSU), 2x VS229H-P, 1x VG248QE, 1x MIMO 720F, Corsair Vengeance K90+M95
auxy
Gerbil Elite
 
Posts: 781
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 4:25 pm
Location: the armpit of Texas

Re: Lightboost Trick - Zero response time LCDs

Postposted on Fri Feb 08, 2013 10:23 pm

auxy wrote:
mdrejhon wrote:Supported zero motion blur LCD's: ASUS VG248QE*, BENQ XL2411T*, ASUS VG278H, ASUS VG278HE, BENQ XL2420T, Samsung S27A950D and Acer HN274H. *The best are the 1ms monitors, because of reduced crosstalk between refreshes.
Umm, are there any higher-DPI displays that are good for this? 24" 1080p is kind of ...
Well, you know...
As of right now, no monitors above 1080p have a motion-optimized strobe backlight.

The best one is the 120Hz "overclockable" IPS 1440p monitors, but they only reduce perceived motion blur by approximately 40%. (Vega found the pixel persistence was longer than a refresh, so it starts to affect motion blur above-and-beyond sample-and-hold effect). Motion is definitely smoother though, just not perceived blur-free.

If you're just playing slower games like Civilization, motion blur is not as important as it is for fast-twitch games such as TF2, BF3, Quake Live, etc -- that's where perceived motion blur starts bottlenecking your reaction time. You can also focus on other/cheaper means of improving your reaction time (reducing input lag via a gaming mouse (1000 Hz), via a faster GPU, via turning off VSYNC, via better keyboard like one of the Razor mechanical gaming keyboard, etc)
Last edited by mdrejhon on Fri Feb 08, 2013 10:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Thanks
Mark Rejhon
mdrejhon
Gerbil
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2013 11:50 am

Re: Lightboost Trick - Zero response time LCDs

Postposted on Fri Feb 08, 2013 10:34 pm

mdrejhon wrote:The best one is the 120Hz "overclockable" IPS 1440p monitors, but they only reduce perceived motion blur by approximately 40%. (Vega found the pixel persistence was longer than a refresh, so it starts to affect motion blur above-and-beyond sample-and-hold effect). Motion is definitely smoother though, just not perceived blur-free.
Well, 1440p at 27" is A) too big for my desk (I'm an extremely small person, and I sit very close to my displays), and B) not really any better DPI than my current 1080p @ 21". :lol: Even 24" would be pushing it a little, which is why I'm interested in smaller displays ... even something ilke 17" or 19" would be okay for me. I sit about 25cm (~10") from my monitors as it is, so I'm more concerned with DPI than size.
mdrejhon wrote:If you're just playing slower games like Civilization, motion blur is not as important as it is for fast-twitch games such as TF2, BF3, Quake Live, etc -- that's where perceived motion blur starts bottlenecking your reaction time. You can also focus on other means of improving your reaction time (reducing input lag via a 1000 Hz mouse, via a better GPU, etc)
I mostly play Blacklight: Retribution and Dark Souls, both of which are high-intensity action games -- especially the former. I already have a 1000Hz mouse (Corsair Vengeance M90) and a pretty decent GPU, although I'm looking at an upgrade there ... but if I buy a new monitor, a new GPU will be a few months off, eheh. ¦3c
Last edited by auxy on Fri Feb 08, 2013 10:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
i5-3570K @ 4.4 (NH-C14), 4x8GB DDR3-1866, GA-Z68MA-D3H-B2, ASUS GTXTITAN-6GD5, 128GB Vertex 4 / 2x60GB Vertex Plus R2 / 2x2TB Barracuda 7200.14 RAID0 / ANS-9010 (4x4GB), SST-DA1000 (PSU), 2x VS229H-P, 1x VG248QE, 1x MIMO 720F, Corsair Vengeance K90+M95
auxy
Gerbil Elite
 
Posts: 781
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 4:25 pm
Location: the armpit of Texas

Re: Lightboost Trick - Zero response time LCDs

Postposted on Fri Feb 08, 2013 10:37 pm

OLED or bust people.
AbRASiON
Gerbil Team Leader
 
Posts: 274
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2003 8:06 pm

Re: Lightboost Trick - Zero response time LCDs

Postposted on Fri Feb 08, 2013 10:46 pm

AbRASiON wrote:OLED or bust people.
Do *you* have $85,000?
i5-3570K @ 4.4 (NH-C14), 4x8GB DDR3-1866, GA-Z68MA-D3H-B2, ASUS GTXTITAN-6GD5, 128GB Vertex 4 / 2x60GB Vertex Plus R2 / 2x2TB Barracuda 7200.14 RAID0 / ANS-9010 (4x4GB), SST-DA1000 (PSU), 2x VS229H-P, 1x VG248QE, 1x MIMO 720F, Corsair Vengeance K90+M95
auxy
Gerbil Elite
 
Posts: 781
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 4:25 pm
Location: the armpit of Texas

Re: Lightboost Trick - Zero response time LCDs

Postposted on Fri Feb 08, 2013 10:50 pm

AbRASiON wrote:OLED or bust people.
I agree!
OLED is a great technology.
But it's not done properly for perceived motion blur in all of them.
Even an instant 0ms response display can have lots of perceived motion blur -- due to sample-and-hold.
For example, the PS Vita OLED screen has more perceived motion blur than CRT or plasma, because it's sample and hold.

I'll reiterate:
mdrejhon wrote:I have bad news... OLED is no good for motion blur if it's sample-and-hold version (e.g. PS Vita). Notice how [perceived] motion blur PS Vita isn't any better than a good 2ms TN LCD? (The colors ARE much better; but we're strictly talking about [perceived] motion blur here).
The good news is it's possible to impulse-drive (flicker) an OLED or Crystal LED -- which is what good ones do to eliminate [perceived] motion blur.

Sony's expensive "Crystal LED" prototype intentionally flickers, for the purpose of motion-blur elimination.

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news. The only way to eliminate flickers *AND* keep sample lengths short (e.g. 1ms) is to have 1000fps@1000Hz -- something that's not going to happen unless motion interpolation is used (and motion interpolation is not game friendly). This is why people say CRT 60fps@60Hz (1ms samples) has less [perceived] motion blur than LCD 120fps@120Hz (8.33ms samples). Sample lengths dictate [perceived] motion blur. (Note: sample length is not pixel persistence. Sample length is the length of time that a refresh is visible to human eyes for. LCD refreshes are generally static for the whole refresh).

Yes, I prefer OLED over LCD, assuming equal [peceived] motion blur ability (e.g. equal strobe length). The colors on OLED is so much better.

It's a misnomer/myth that pixel persistence is 100% the cause of [perceived] motion blur on LCD.
Pixel response have been becoming shorter and shorter, and on fast gaming TN panels, is an insignificant part of a refresh. Pixel persistence is currently now the minority cause of [perceived] motion blur, and most of [perceived] motion blur you see is eye-tracking-based.

Even if pixel response was instant (0ms) on a sample-and-hold display, you still get lots of [perceived] motion blur due to the sample-and-hold effect (which leads to eye-tracking-based motion blur), because your eyes are continuously moving when tracking moving objects. Your eyes are at a different position at the beginning of the displayed refresh (sample start) and the end of the displayed refresh (sample end). That's retinal blurring -- just like moving a camera while taking a picture without its flash. The camera movement cause blurring in the photograph taken at a slow shutter speed (e.g. 1/60 sec). But if the whole scene flashes instead briefly (Xenon flash) then shaking the camera doesn't blur anymore (e.g. Xenon flash 1/1000sec). Likewise, the strobe driven nature of CRT, plasma, and LightBoost, shortens the visible sample (very quick start-to-end of a displayed refresh -- whether via higher refresh rate, or via large black period between refreshes) that prevents it from being blurred across your human vision.

More reading -- Science & References (skip first part, scroll halfway down)
OLED's that are sample-and-hold have the same issue. Remember, LCD 120fps@120Hz has more motion blur than CRT 60fps@60Hz -- and that is not because of pixel persistence but the sample-and-hold.

Mark my words, it is going to continue to be a problem with OLED monitors, because various solutions for eliminating motion blur are problematic:
-- Sample and hold means perceived motion blur (many hate LCD for that)
-- Impulse-driving means flicker (many hate CRT for that)
-- Motion interpolation means input lag (Not good for games or computer)
-- Higher native refresh rates (go all the way to the end of point of diminishing returns for 99.9% of population).

The only way to solve all the above simultaneously is insane native refresh rates and framerates. Well above 240fps@240Hz. A 240fps@240Hz sample-and-hold display would use ~4ms samples, which is longer than CRT impulses of 1-2ms (phosphor illuminate-and-decay cycle). So a 240fps@240Hz sample-and-hold display does not have as clear motion as CRT, which is impulse-driven at 1-2ms. To bypass all the way to the end of the diminishing returns WITHOUT flicker and WITHOUT interpolation, you need to equal CRT samples. (1ms samples = 1000fps@1000Hz, and 2ms samples = 500fps@500Hz) This is fully impractical (e.g. 1000Hz displays with GPU's capable of 1000fps won't be happening). So we have to go with compromises like impulse-driving or motion interpolation. We already know motion interpolation is not suitable for games due to lag, so that leaves impulse-driving as method to shorten samples without flicker (the CRT flicker effect).

It is worth saying you need extra (extreme) brightness for impulse-driving. CRT phosphor shine insanely brightly when they're illuminated -- so CRT's don't have a dim image. This complicates impulse-driving, since OLED's have long had brightness problems. Though Sony's expensive "Crystal LED" prototype display (not OLED) solve the problem by using over 6 million discrete LED's instead. That is, however, insanely expensive. Eventually OLED will be bright enough for CRT-quality impulse-driving, but until then, we're stuck with sample-and-hold OLED's as well as OLED's with long strobe lengths, which don't eliminate motion blur as well as CRT yet. Give it another decade, though.

The best OLED monitors should have a switch between sample-and-hold mode (solid image) and impulse-drive mode (best game motion). This would be the best of all worlds.
Thanks
Mark Rejhon
mdrejhon
Gerbil
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2013 11:50 am

Re: Lightboost Trick - Zero response time LCDs

Postposted on Sat Feb 09, 2013 12:54 am

auxy wrote:I wonder about this. I've never used 120hz LCD, but I recall faintly -- I was very young -- using 120hz 1024x768 on my brother's huge Syncmaster monitor back in the day, but those memories are quite faint and I find myself now, quite addicted to the wonderful, vibrant colors of my IPS displays, very curious if I would appreciate more the colors of an IPS panel or the fluidity of a 120hz/144hz display. I don't really have the GPU to run most games at 120hz anyway, so I haven't bothered to buy one and find out, but I think after my GPU upgrade I will look long and hard at 120hz.

I've really been holding out for 120hz IPS, PLS, or VA, if such a thing could happen, but it seems less and less likely as time goes on.


It's still that good. I can't say for certain how much of a difference 144hz over 120hz makes, but both most definitely makes a notable difference. You can see every time your graphics card hitches or throws out some micro-stuttering. It's really quite ridiculous. I've found I've become quite a bit more sensitive to motion and fluidity of scenes. There are some basic tests you can do online, but you really don't notice this stuff till you play a high motion game. Some scenarios where you couldn't keep up with the action and end up 'lost' in the action, you can see through.

LoL has some defining scenarios for this, when you end up in team battles and everything turns into a mess, you end up losing your character because you can't keep track of your character over the distortion. There is simply too much stuff happening on the screen and the visual queues you normally take can't keep up with the visual information present. In other words the more information that is present, the more queues you need to recognize said information.

Refresh rate is just part of the equation though as other people are pointing out. Overdrive and response times play into this heavily. Of course FPS does too, but your monitor doesn't control that.

I haven't used LB yet so I can't comment on first hand experience with it. Hopefully AMD will add a similar feature to their hardware so I can try it out.

From reading up on IPS panel experiences it's not worth buying from a gamers perspective. It doesn't matter how fast the refresh rate is if the pixels are too slow to keep up. Even 120hz Catleaps or faster turn into a smeared/blurry mess. I had considered buying one before settling on the VG248QE. I have been eyeing up the 120hz monitor market for quite some time and I stayed away from first gen 120hz monitors. The 1ms response time, 144hz refresh, and DP 1.2 tipped the scales for me.

The colors have a bit to be desired, but I ended up tuning them to the point where it looks similar to my old monitor (if it wasn't for the matte screen). I would highly recommend that monitor to any gamer. It just came out this year and it's most definitely a second gen 120hz monitor. From what I read it has input lag of 1.8ms~, but that was from a forum post so don't quote me on it. From a subjective perspective it's just as responsive as my L227WTG, which had 0 measured input lag. I really don't know how you're playing twitch games on a IPS.

BTW BLR is great fun. I haven't played it in awhile though as I've been into LoL ARAM and NS2.


Loosen your belts a bit gents, I'm not going to spend hours in quote wars for a topic of discussion that is highly subjective (perception and opinion, let alone semantics). We'd be better off arguing religion and I'd rather spend my time doing something more fulfilling.
Bensam123
Gerbil Elite
 
Posts: 949
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 12:19 pm

Re: Lightboost Trick - Zero response time LCDs

Postposted on Sat Feb 09, 2013 1:58 am

auxy wrote:
AbRASiON wrote:OLED or bust people.
Do *you* have $85,000?


Actually I do but I'm not spending it on an OLED display! - but they'll come, mark my words, they''ll come and the Plasma vs LCD / IPS / TN fights will finally end.
AbRASiON
Gerbil Team Leader
 
Posts: 274
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2003 8:06 pm

Re: Lightboost Trick - Zero response time LCDs

Postposted on Sat Feb 09, 2013 3:45 am

auxy wrote:Well, I'm young; I'm only 22. I've only been gaming myself since 2003, and coming from an upper-middle-class family headed by an engineer (and thus with an emphasis on having new technology) I've always played on LCDs. I have no idea if I would prefer a CRT. However, I've recently found that in playing fast FPS games (like the aforementioned Blacklight: Retribution) I do frequently get beat on reaction time, despite having a professionally measured reaction time of less than 150ms.

Oh boy.

I'm not much older than you, yet I started gaming back in the early 90's when I still went to kindergarten. I copied my older brother's DOS commands to learn how to start my games, and I was playing games like Tyrian or Doom before even going to school. I never played on anything *but* a CRT screen, which became a habit, and after the turn of the millennium (and after seeing how ridiculously bad the first LCDs were) I never gave LCDs a try out of conviction.

More than 10 years have passed since then, LCDs are not crap anymore, but I still don't want one unless it's 120 Hz or better, and I would prefer a 120 Hz IPS panel but those don't even exist yet.

150 ms response time is bad, though. Professional competitors can easily have less than a third of that depending on the situation.
Meadows
Grand Gerbil Poohbah
Silver subscriber
 
 
Posts: 3188
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 1:10 pm
Location: Location: Location

Re: Lightboost Trick - Zero response time LCDs

Postposted on Sat Feb 09, 2013 4:08 am

Meadows wrote:I'm not much older than you, yet I started gaming back in the early 90's when I still went to kindergarten. I copied my older brother's DOS commands to learn how to start my games, and I was playing games like Tyrian or Doom before even going to school. I never played on anything *but* a CRT screen, which became a habit, and after the turn of the millennium (and after seeing how ridiculously bad the first LCDs were) I never gave LCDs a try out of conviction.

Even a cheap crappy off-brand LCD these days is way better than any of the early ones. I'm old enough to be your father and have used CRT monitors for most of my life. But I got rid of my last CRT a few years ago, and haven't looked back. No more focus/convergence issues... no more sensitivity to nearby magnets... more desk space (hey, I can actually put the sub for my 2.1 speakers behind the monitor!)... less heat... no analog signal artifacts... razor-sharp text. Yes, there's a bit of ghosting/blur that wasn't there with the CRTs, but even on the pretty cheap/crappy LCD I've got it is barely noticeable. Sounds like a good tradeoff to me!

The combination of faster LCDs + Lightboost should come pretty close to mimicking the desirable characteristics of a good CRT. Really no need to cling to legacy tech any more.

(Heh... as one of the resident mechanical keyboard fanboys maybe I shouldn't be so quick to diss legacy tech though... :lol:)
(this space intentionally left blank)
just brew it!
Administrator
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 37853
Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2002 10:51 pm
Location: Somewhere, having a beer

Re: Lightboost Trick - Zero response time LCDs

Postposted on Sat Feb 09, 2013 3:50 pm

Meadows wrote:I'm not much older than you, yet I started gaming back in the early 90's when I still went to kindergarten. I copied my older brother's DOS commands to learn how to start my games, and I was playing games like Tyrian or Doom before even going to school.
Yah, I would have liked to have done this, but my parents are ... old-fashioned, and girls aren't supposed to play computer games. (Also, my brother would have tanned my hide if I messed with his computer at that age.)
Meadows wrote:150 ms response time is bad, though. Professional competitors can easily have less than a third of that depending on the situation.
Have a source on that? It was 146ms, and the doctor in question stated it was "uncanny". I'm kind of a spaz, so I've always figured the two were related.
i5-3570K @ 4.4 (NH-C14), 4x8GB DDR3-1866, GA-Z68MA-D3H-B2, ASUS GTXTITAN-6GD5, 128GB Vertex 4 / 2x60GB Vertex Plus R2 / 2x2TB Barracuda 7200.14 RAID0 / ANS-9010 (4x4GB), SST-DA1000 (PSU), 2x VS229H-P, 1x VG248QE, 1x MIMO 720F, Corsair Vengeance K90+M95
auxy
Gerbil Elite
 
Posts: 781
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 4:25 pm
Location: the armpit of Texas

Re: Lightboost Trick - Zero response time LCDs

Postposted on Sat Feb 09, 2013 8:19 pm

AbRASiON wrote:
auxy wrote:
AbRASiON wrote:OLED or bust people.
Do *you* have $85,000?


Actually I do but I'm not spending it on an OLED display! - but they'll come, mark my words, they''ll come and the Plasma vs LCD / IPS / TN fights will finally end.
Correct, only if this happens:

mdrejhon wrote:The best OLED monitors should have a switch between sample-and-hold mode (solid image) and impulse-drive mode (best game motion). This would be the best of all worlds.
Remember:
- Some people hate LCD due to motion blur
- Some people hate CRT due to flicker.
Thanks
Mark Rejhon
mdrejhon
Gerbil
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2013 11:50 am

Re: Lightboost Trick - Zero response time LCDs

Postposted on Sat Feb 09, 2013 8:30 pm

auxy wrote:
Meadows wrote:150 ms response time is bad, though. Professional competitors can easily have less than a third of that depending on the situation.
Have a source on that? It was 146ms, and the doctor in question stated it was "uncanny". I'm kind of a spaz, so I've always figured the two were related.
I did some research on this, and it turns out my 146ms actually is on the lower (i.e. faster) end of normal. See these:
  • http://www.humanbenchmark.com/tests/reactiontime/stats.php
  • http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080105162831AA4tL5e
  • http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reaction_time
i5-3570K @ 4.4 (NH-C14), 4x8GB DDR3-1866, GA-Z68MA-D3H-B2, ASUS GTXTITAN-6GD5, 128GB Vertex 4 / 2x60GB Vertex Plus R2 / 2x2TB Barracuda 7200.14 RAID0 / ANS-9010 (4x4GB), SST-DA1000 (PSU), 2x VS229H-P, 1x VG248QE, 1x MIMO 720F, Corsair Vengeance K90+M95
auxy
Gerbil Elite
 
Posts: 781
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 4:25 pm
Location: the armpit of Texas

Re: Lightboost Trick - Zero response time LCDs

Postposted on Sat Feb 09, 2013 8:36 pm

auxy wrote:
Meadows wrote:150 ms response time is bad, though. Professional competitors can easily have less than a third of that depending on the situation.
Have a source on that? It was 146ms, and the doctor in question stated it was "uncanny". I'm kind of a spaz, so I've always figured the two were related.


His time frame is inaccurate or he misspoke and meant something else.

Atheltics (track and field)]

Wikipedia/IAAF Rule Book wrote:In track and field sprints, the sport's governing body, the IAAF, has a rule that if the athlete moves within 0.10 seconds after the gun has fired the athlete has false started.[2] This figure is based on tests that show the human brain cannot hear and process the information from the start sound in under 0.10 seconds.[3]


How Usain Bolt Could Break his World Record Without Running Faster in the Olympics

John D. Barrow wrote:In the Beijing Olympic final, where Bolt’s reaction time was 0.165 s for his 9.69 run, the other seven finalists reacted in 0.133, 0.134, 0.142, 0.145, 0.147, 0.165 and 0.169 s.


A Literature Review on Reaction Time - Clemson University

Robert J. Kosinski wrote:Many researchers have confirmed that reaction to sound is faster than reaction to light, with mean auditory reaction times being 140-160 msec and visual reaction times being 180-200 msec (Galton, 1899; Woodworth and Schlosberg, 1954; Fieandt et al., 1956; Welford, 1980; Brebner and Welford, 1980). Perhaps this is because an auditory stimulus only takes 8-10 msec to reach the brain (Kemp et al., 1973), but a visual stimulus takes 20-40 msec (Marshall et al., 1943). Reaction time to touch is intermediate, at 155 msec (Robinson, 1934). Differences in reaction time between these types of stimuli persist whether the subject is asked to make a simple response or a complex response (Sanders, 1998, p. 114). Saville et al. (2012) found that people who had variable reaction times to a visual stimulus also had variable reaction times to an auditory stimulus.
"Welcome back my friends to the show that never ends. We're so glad you could attend. Come inside! Come inside!"
Ryu Connor
Global Moderator
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 3563
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2001 7:00 pm
Location: Marietta, GA

Re: Lightboost Trick - Zero response time LCDs

Postposted on Sat Feb 09, 2013 9:33 pm

mdrejhon wrote:Remember:
- Some people hate LCD due to motion blur
- Some people hate CRT due to flicker.


You looked up the refresh rates of OLED? It's mind boggling. :D
AbRASiON
Gerbil Team Leader
 
Posts: 274
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2003 8:06 pm

Re: Lightboost Trick - Zero response time LCDs

Postposted on Sat Feb 09, 2013 9:59 pm

AbRASiON wrote:
mdrejhon wrote:Remember:
- Some people hate LCD due to motion blur
- Some people hate CRT due to flicker.

You looked up the refresh rates of OLED? It's mind boggling. :D
Yes I know. OLED pixels can switch virtually instantaneously (less than a microsecond).
However, some facts:

Refresh rate is NOT necessarily proportional perceived motion blur.
Instead, the sample length is -- the length the refresh is displayed. This is why impulse-driven 60fps@60Hz (e.g. CRT) has sharper motion than sample-and-hold 120fps@120Hz. (e.g. traditional LCD)

Impulse-driving the OLED is necessary for elimination of motion blur on OLED
It's definitely possible. OLED can do it easily because the OLED pixels can switch rapidly. That said, for maximum motion clarity at lower refresh rates (without interpolation) you need a bright OLED for good impulse-driving without a dim picture. Not everyone can afford a GPU that can do 240fps@240Hz, for example.

So you need short samples such as 1 millisecond to match CRT quality motion -- whether it's high fps (e.g. 1000fps@1000Hz flicker free to use up all 1ms samples without flickering) or impulse-driving at short samples similar to CRT (1ms flashes (with black periods in between) of a refresh at the native refresh, e.g. 60 Hz or 120 Hz). Both are equivalent in perceived motion blur. (Confirmed by many scientific papers).
Thanks
Mark Rejhon
mdrejhon
Gerbil
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2013 11:50 am

Re: Lightboost Trick - Zero response time LCDs

Postposted on Sat Feb 09, 2013 10:48 pm

auxy wrote:
auxy wrote:
Meadows wrote:150 ms response time is bad, though. Professional competitors can easily have less than a third of that depending on the situation.
Have a source on that? It was 146ms, and the doctor in question stated it was "uncanny". I'm kind of a spaz, so I've always figured the two were related.
I did some research on this, and it turns out my 146ms actually is on the lower (i.e. faster) end of normal. See these:
I concur. 146ms is impressive for human reaction time. This is unrelated to input lag. The Olympics disqualify you with a false start for 100 meter sprint, if you react less than 100 milliseconds of the starting pistol.
Thanks
Mark Rejhon
mdrejhon
Gerbil
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2013 11:50 am

Re: Lightboost Trick - Zero response time LCDs

Postposted on Sun Feb 10, 2013 12:58 am

Ryu Connor wrote:His time frame is inaccurate or he misspoke and meant something else.
Or he doesn't know what he's talking about and is just vociferating from his posterior orifice. ┐(´∀`)┌ヤレヤレ
i5-3570K @ 4.4 (NH-C14), 4x8GB DDR3-1866, GA-Z68MA-D3H-B2, ASUS GTXTITAN-6GD5, 128GB Vertex 4 / 2x60GB Vertex Plus R2 / 2x2TB Barracuda 7200.14 RAID0 / ANS-9010 (4x4GB), SST-DA1000 (PSU), 2x VS229H-P, 1x VG248QE, 1x MIMO 720F, Corsair Vengeance K90+M95
auxy
Gerbil Elite
 
Posts: 781
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 4:25 pm
Location: the armpit of Texas

Re: Lightboost Trick - Zero response time LCDs

Postposted on Sun Feb 10, 2013 1:23 am

I don't think when someone talks about wanting something like 240hz it isn't necessarily because you have technology fully capable of exploiting it, but because it's a stepping stone on a better road forward. Too many people use the 'good enough' excuse when it comes to improving things that we've been stuck on 60hz displays for the last, what decade, even though we've had video cards capable of producing high frame rates in whatever game you play. One specific scenario does not translate to the entire user experience for a display. You don't need a framerate of 240fps to experience benefits from a monitor with a 240hz refresh rate, just like you don't need a insanely fast pixel response time to reap the benefits from having a high framerate or high refresh rate.

Sure the moon and stars may not align properly, but they all still offer a benefit.

Mdre you're trying awfully hard to control the direction and content of this thread... and cite yourself when someone decides they wish to pursue a different look at things. The subject of fluidity and perception is changing constantly so I don't believe anything noted is representative of hard final evidence. Even TR is still working on figuring this out as Scott has been talking about over the last few months.


There is more then one way to measure reaction time. It's possible that he's thinking of something else.
Bensam123
Gerbil Elite
 
Posts: 949
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 12:19 pm

Re: Lightboost Trick - Zero response time LCDs

Postposted on Sun Feb 10, 2013 2:52 am

Ryu Connor wrote:His time frame is inaccurate or he misspoke and meant something else.

None of those.

I remembered some old discussion or article from a few years ago but I couldn't find it now and I'm not sure if it even had any sources. It said that in videogames, and in competitive videogames specifically, it is easily possible to have an "apparent" reaction time noticeably under 100 ms as long as the player is expecting a situation. (Kind of the "false start" thing with runners, except it's not ruled out here.) Thinking about it now though, I doubt you can measure that with any sort of precision in any twitch shooter you may think of, and so it can easily be exaggerated.
Meadows
Grand Gerbil Poohbah
Silver subscriber
 
 
Posts: 3188
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 1:10 pm
Location: Location: Location

Re: Lightboost Trick - Zero response time LCDs

Postposted on Sun Feb 10, 2013 2:59 am

Bensam123 wrote:(rant about 240hz that seems apropos of nothing)
While I agree with you that moving forward is always good, I don't think we've been "stuck" at 60hz because it's "good enough" -- I think it's simply a question of whether it was economically and functionally viable to bother spending valuable R&D money on such a thing. Welcome to capitalism.
Bensam123 wrote:Mdre you're trying awfully hard to control the direction and content of this thread... and cite yourself when someone decides they wish to pursue a different look at things.
Control freak much? He's been on-topic (that is, talking about Lightboost); what's the problem? Starting the thread doesn't mean you get to dictate the flow of conversation. He's citing himself because people keep saying stupid things that are already countered by things he's already said.
Bensam123 wrote:The subject of fluidity and perception is changing constantly so I don't believe anything noted is representative of hard final evidence. Even TR is still working on figuring this out as Scott has been talking about over the last few months.
This is all new research, and I think it's a lot closer to 'final' than anything we've seen before. Since you aren't doing new research on the topic yourself, why don't you discuss the findings that have been found rather than being dismissive of them?
Bensam123 wrote:There is more then one way to measure reaction time. It's possible that he's thinking of something else.
There ... isn't ... really ... more than one way to measure reaction time - you simply provide a stimulus and measure the time until response. You can provide different stimulus, but the goal is the same and the results aren't all that different for a given individual, unless there is some kind of medical problem (which is why they test this sort of thing when you get a physical.) Clearly he was thinking of "something else", as he just posted while I was typing this response.
i5-3570K @ 4.4 (NH-C14), 4x8GB DDR3-1866, GA-Z68MA-D3H-B2, ASUS GTXTITAN-6GD5, 128GB Vertex 4 / 2x60GB Vertex Plus R2 / 2x2TB Barracuda 7200.14 RAID0 / ANS-9010 (4x4GB), SST-DA1000 (PSU), 2x VS229H-P, 1x VG248QE, 1x MIMO 720F, Corsair Vengeance K90+M95
auxy
Gerbil Elite
 
Posts: 781
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 4:25 pm
Location: the armpit of Texas

Re: Lightboost Trick - Zero response time LCDs

Postposted on Sun Feb 10, 2013 3:51 am

Bensam123 wrote:Mdre you're trying awfully hard to control the direction and content of this thread... and cite yourself when someone decides they wish to pursue a different look at things.


¬_¬

This thread is perilously close to falling off a cliff.

With cliff being a metaphor for getting locked for numerous types of bad behaviors ranging from snark to "science!".
"Welcome back my friends to the show that never ends. We're so glad you could attend. Come inside! Come inside!"
Ryu Connor
Global Moderator
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 3563
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2001 7:00 pm
Location: Marietta, GA

Re: Lightboost Trick - Zero response time LCDs

Postposted on Sun Feb 10, 2013 4:49 am

It depends on what you're measure the response with... a finger for instance, in response to a screen test.

http://www.humanbenchmark.com/tests/reactiontime/

Measuring a different part of the body for responses can yield different results. For instance, using a EEG... or measuring a different body part or finger.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electroencephalography

I wasn't dismissing any of the findings, I was just trying to make sure people keep a open mind, as we all should. As I stated as well, I also recently purchased a 144hz monitor and can speak from personal experience on my findings while using it. Mdre isn't the only one with access to new hardware. If you're referring to being controlling look at his responses and sometimes double responses (let alone registering for the forums specifically for this thread and the threads he's listed on the website he linked).

I haven't responded personally to any of the giant snippets, like Glorious for instance, because that's a easy way to drive things way off topic. That could easily rack up 2-3 pages worth of replies just between him and myself which he doesn't even care about. Sorta curious how Ryu doesn't give out warnings to him, but the moment I mention someone elses behavior it's time to lock the thread.
Bensam123
Gerbil Elite
 
Posts: 949
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 12:19 pm

Re: Lightboost Trick - Zero response time LCDs

Postposted on Sun Feb 10, 2013 5:05 am

mdrejhon wrote:
AbRASiON wrote:
mdrejhon wrote:Remember:
- Some people hate LCD due to motion blur
- Some people hate CRT due to flicker.

You looked up the refresh rates of OLED? It's mind boggling. :D
Yes I know. OLED pixels can switch virtually instantaneously (less than a microsecond).
However, some facts:

Refresh rate is NOT necessarily proportional perceived motion blur.
Instead, the sample length is -- the length the refresh is displayed. This is why impulse-driven 60fps@60Hz (e.g. CRT) has sharper motion than sample-and-hold 120fps@120Hz. (e.g. traditional LCD)

Impulse-driving the OLED is necessary for elimination of motion blur on OLED
It's definitely possible. OLED can do it easily because the OLED pixels can switch rapidly. That said, for maximum motion clarity at lower refresh rates (without interpolation) you need a bright OLED for good impulse-driving without a dim picture. Not everyone can afford a GPU that can do 240fps@240Hz, for example.

So you need short samples such as 1 millisecond to match CRT quality motion -- whether it's high fps (e.g. 1000fps@1000Hz flicker free to use up all 1ms samples without flickering) or impulse-driving at short samples similar to CRT (1ms flashes (with black periods in between) of a refresh at the native refresh, e.g. 60 Hz or 120 Hz). Both are equivalent in perceived motion blur. (Confirmed by many scientific papers).



Sorry I kinda switched off because you threw lots of jargon at me and I don't want to read
I did skip to the bit where you said such as 1 millisecond - and that's all good then - because from what I've read, OLED is in the thousands of times a second area.
Imagine something better than CRT and Plasma, I'm so giddy.
AbRASiON
Gerbil Team Leader
 
Posts: 274
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2003 8:06 pm

Re: Lightboost Trick - Zero response time LCDs

Postposted on Sun Feb 10, 2013 5:41 am

AbRASiON wrote:Sorry I kinda switched off because you threw lots of jargon at me and I don't want to read
I did skip to the bit where you said such as 1 millisecond - and that's all good then - because from what I've read, OLED is in the thousands of times a second area.

This website is not the best place for being dim and illiterate, Abrasion.

The "1 ms" figure was about pixel persistence. I'm sure that's also jargon for you that's hard to understand, but I'll leave it to mdrejhon to explain it to you, he seems to like overcompensating anyway. Nobody was talking about actual 1000 Hz screens or 1000 FPS of any kind. Just 1 ms of pixel persistence in regular-spec screens.
Meadows
Grand Gerbil Poohbah
Silver subscriber
 
 
Posts: 3188
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 1:10 pm
Location: Location: Location

Re: Lightboost Trick - Zero response time LCDs

Postposted on Sun Feb 10, 2013 6:20 am

I don't understand
AbRASiON
Gerbil Team Leader
 
Posts: 274
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2003 8:06 pm

Re: Lightboost Trick - Zero response time LCDs

Postposted on Sun Feb 10, 2013 7:36 am

Ryu Connor wrote:
Bensam123 wrote:Mdre you're trying awfully hard to control the direction and content of this thread... and cite yourself when someone decides they wish to pursue a different look at things.


¬_¬

This thread is perilously close to falling off a cliff.

With cliff being a metaphor for getting locked for numerous types of bad behaviors ranging from snark to "science!".

Looking at few last posts I'd say it already fell off off that metaphoric cliff :wink:
My subscription allows you people to exist on this site and makes me a better human being than you'll ever be
JohnC
Gerbil Jedi
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 1888
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 2:08 pm
Location: NY/NJ/FL

PreviousNext

Return to Visual Haven

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests