an hour of gaming with the 144hz VG248...

[toyota]

I finally picked one of these up and have now played around with it in few games. so far I still see the same jitter and motion blur as on my old 60hz Dell screen. and yes I have it at 144hz in control panel so thats not it. anyway at least its not worse...

and one of my pet peeves is people thinking you need 144 fps to appreciate 144 hz. I knew that was nonsense and now that I have a 144 hz screen in front of me I can see how it helps with screen tearing. in the few games I have tested it there is little to no visible screen tearing where on my 60hz Dell it was pretty bad.

also running adaptive half refresh rate seems to be the perfect setup for my needs. in games I dont get 72 fps then I will get little to no visible tearing anyway. at games where I get 72 fps then of course no tearing at all. plus the mouse does not seem to have any lag with vsync on unlike with my Dell. and really I see no point in having more than 72 fps since all I play is single player games.

so bottom line with my short time using it is that a screen like this is actually just as beneficial to those with modest comps. someone only getting 40 -50 fps can now get a much better visual experience without vsync.

EDIT: I was testing the jitter in Dead Space 2 and 3 but was only at 60hz. at 120 hz there is basically no jitter at all.

 

[ramj70]

Good to know, thanks

 

[Elfear]

Give Lightboost a try and see what you think. You can grab a handy Lightboost utility called Strobelight here.

 

[bystander36]

To use Lightboost, you'll need to operate at 120hz. It is worth trying, as Lightboost can make motion blur disappear.
http://www.blurbusters.com/zero-motion-blur/lightboost/

 

[toyota]

yeah I know about lightboost but I am just wanting to fool with it right now.

 

[tviceman]

A part of me wishes I would have gotten a 1080p high refresh rate monitor instead of a korean 1440p, but after having this much more resolution I think I'd have a hard time backing down to 1080p.

I sure miss the performance of running in 1080 / 1200p, though. It's made me think about SLI'ing a time or two (or three) in the past few months.

 

[toyota]

A part of me wishes I would have gotten a 1080p high refresh rate monitor instead of a korean 1440p, but after having this much more resolution I think I'd have a hard time backing down to 1080p.

I sure miss the performance of running in 1080 / 1200p, though. It's made me think about SLI'ing a time or two (or three) in the past few months.

well pros and cons either way. once you have 144 hz you cant stand 60. at the same time once you have 2560 and better screen then a TN 1080 will suck. really its a shame that we are more than half way through 2013 and we dont have better monitor choices by now.

 

[bystander36]

yeah I know about lightboost but I am just wanting to fool with it right now.

I'd be interested in hearing your experience with 144hz vs. Lightboost at 120hz.

I sadly got my monitor just before Lightboost came out, so I have a standard 2ms 120hz monitor.

 

[toyota]

I'd be interested in hearing your experience with 144hz vs. Lightboost at 120hz.

I sadly got my monitor just before Lightboost came out, so I have a standard 2ms 120hz monitor.

I am pretty sure all you can do is 120hz with lightboost

 

[bystander36]

I am pretty sure all you can do is 120hz with lightboost

I'm pretty sure you can do 100hz, 110hz and 120hz. The 3D Vision setup allows you do play in any 3 of those refresh rates, plus it says on this site that you can: http://www.blurbusters.com/zero-motion-blur/lightboost/

You need frame rates matching (or exceeding) Hz for best benefit. LightBoost only works at 100Hz to 120Hz. Thus, you need 100fps@100Hz, or 120fps@120Hz.

 

[toyota]

I'm pretty sure you can do 100hz, 110hz and 120hz. The 3D Vision setup allows you do play in any 3 of those refresh rates, plus it says on this site that you can: http://www.blurbusters.com/zero-motion-blur/lightboost/

I was saying that max would be 120 cause you were asking about 144.

 

[bystander36]

I was saying that max would be 120 cause you were asking about 144.

Ah, you misunderstood. 144hz vs Lightboost at 120hz, was meant to be 144hz (without Lighboost) vs Lightboost @ 120hz. I assumed you knew 144hz didn't do Lightboost, and thought I wrote it as such.

 

[toyota]

Ah, you misunderstood. 144hz vs Lightboost at 120hz, was meant to be 144hz (without Lighboost) vs Lightboost @ 120hz. I assumed you knew 144hz didn't do Lightboost, and thought I wrote it as such.

oh I see what you mean now. yeah maybe next weekend I will fool with that then.

 

[saratoga172]

I purchased the exact monitor last weekend. Asus vg248q.

Current setup was two dell u3011 monitors. Used for everything. Gaming, web design, tech work etc. Never calibrated the color since they were a huge upgrade from my previous monitor.

Got the asus hooked up. Set to 144hz and applied a custom icc color file for a calibrated monitor. Something was missing...maybe a bit too red. I could definitely tell the smoothness of the monitor. Text on a web page didn't blur on the monitor while the same window text blurred on my u3011 which was still setup as a secondary monitor.

Launched black ops to test the 144hz before loading lightboost. Tried with unlimited frames which yielded about 160-170 using the ingame monitor and all settings maxed. Game had an odd feel to it. Maybe smoother since I wasn't used to it. Took a bit to get used to.

Then I used strobe light to enable lightboost and used the 120hz setting. Another noticeable jump on the desktop and ingame slightly odd feeling again. Seemed smooth but then again gaming never seemed terrible or bad on the dells. Usually played windowed 1080p on them. Biggest thing I didn't like about the lightboost setting was a terrible red tint. Not so bad while gaming but couldn't stand it on the desktop.

End of the night I had a terrible headache. Could have been coincidence or the change in refresh. Don't want to blame the monitor since I've had those on occasion but it seemed odd. Ultimately ended up returning it. Couldn't stand the colors compared to my dell's. Never thought I'd say that but they are simply outstanding. Also thought the res was crazy and size too big but having gone back to 1080 then back again to dual 1600p monitors I feel at home.

Pros:
Smoother
Desktop text didn't blur
Gaming smooth

Cons:
Red tint - terrible
Doesn't calibrate well
Poor colors
Headache after more than an hour of use (could have been coincidence)

Ultimately had I been coming from another tn panel or the monitor I had before getting the ultra sharp 30's I'd be using it right now. After having used the u3011's for over a year I've gotten used to the colors and large screen resolution. They are simply stunning.

The vg248q is a nice monitor but for my needs didn't meet what I wanted. I don't game as much as I used to and when I do I don't really notice any issues with my current monitors.

 

[toughtrasher]

Would you say it's a worthy upgrade of the VS247H-P?

Don't know whether or not I'd shell out the extra $300 or so

 

[blackened23]

Ultimately had I been coming from another tn panel or the monitor I had before getting the ultra sharp 30's I'd be using it right now. After having used the u3011's for over a year I've gotten used to the colors and large screen resolution. They are simply stunning.

The vg248q is a nice monitor but for my needs didn't meet what I wanted. I don't game as much as I used to and when I do I don't really notice any issues with my current monitors.

Echos my thoughts precisely. Lightboost screens are good for gaming and gaming only - once you do anything on the desktop or outside of gaming, the poor colors and bad viewing angles are a complete eyesore and way too distracting. The difference compared to high end IPS panels is pretty dramatic.

Plus it should be noted that high resolution in games are a big added bonus as well; the higher pixel density definitely adds to immersion. I guess it's definitely a give or take situation - I love gaming, but I do more than that on my PC. So that makes lightboost panels a no go for me, personally.

 

[BFG10K]

Echos my thoughts precisely. Lightboost screens are good for gaming and gaming only - once you do anything on the desktop or outside of gaming, the poor colors and bad viewing angles are a complete eyesore and way too distracting. The difference compared to high end IPS panels is pretty dramatic.

++ for me too.

The extra refresh rate is definitely beneficial, but it doesn't outweigh the benefits of 30", 2560x1600 and IPS. The bigger a TN screen gets, the more obvious the colour shifting is.

 

[hans030390]

OP, you won't see much of a reduction in motion blur until you use LightBoost if you are sensitive to motion blur inherently.

Now, as for any jitter or stutter, this is what I have to do to mostly eliminate it:

1. Force full/regular v-sync (not adaptive) and triple buffering (even if it's only for OpenGL) in your GPU drivers.

2. Use D3DOverrider to force v-sync and TB in all games. Disable it for any games it is incompatible with (there are a couple...).

3. Use v-sync and TB options in games as well.

4. Make sure the game is actually running above 60Hz. Many games are limited to a 60fps cap by default that can't be changed unless you edit, say, an ini file. This is almost always true for a UE3 game, which by default almost always have on frame smoothing with a cap of 60-62fps. With UE3, you can actually leave frame smoothing on and set the max fps at 120-144 depending on your refresh rate.

5. Some games simply have stutter. Some games are fixable. Some aren't. For example, Oblivion and Fallout 3 have really bad inherent stuttering. It can be mostly fixed with a mod.

6. And, obviously, make sure you're getting solid framerates and frametimes. I used fraps as a basic tool to check games I was unsure about or thought had stuttering using both the FPS and frame time tools to check for inconsistencies. When/If you use LightBoost, please make sure your framerate matches your refresh rate, because you'll get bad judder otherwise! Without LightBoost, I still recommend what I said even if you aren't getting 100-144fps. It helped me even well under the refresh rate.

I know some will disagree with my method of having 3 sources of v-sync and triple buffering enabled, but it's literally the best method I've found for smooth motion in nearly all games over the past few years. Aside from some tweaks to remove framerate caps or occasional incompatibilities with D3DOverrider, this almost always ensures I get the smoothest motion possible in games without having to fiddle with anything or worry about it. Nothing else I've tried has worked so well or so comprehensively. I'm quite sensitive to smooth motion and not sensitive to any minor input lag my methods might add (lack of smooth motion is much more detrimental in the end for me).

Best of luck...I know how annoying it can be to resolve issues like this. Feel free to PM me if you have any particular questions.

I purchased the exact monitor last weekend. Asus vg248q. snip...

Are you sure you used the right color profiles? I had to use different ones for with and without LightBoost, and I had to go through a couple profiles online to find one that I wanted. I did a little bit of personal tweaking after that. I will get major issues if I forget to switch to the proper ICC profile (based on whether or not I'm using LightBoost at the moment), but I didn't have any of the same particular color quality issues you mentioned afterward.

I know you already returned it, but I am just curious. The VG248QE certainly does NOT have great color accuracy, though I found it acceptable after the ICC profile and giving my times to adjust to it. I swear the contrast ratio seems to improve once the monitor warms up a bit, and contrast ratio is really the only main issue with the picture quality now.

I mean, sure, it'll never match my calibrated plasma, but the color accuracy in its current state is good enough for probably anything except professional photo/video editing. I just have to live with a low contrast ratio, but my eyes adjust quickly. It might sound silly, but I find smooth motion even on the Windows desktop to be more beneficial to my eyes than more pixels or better color accuracy. I must be weird.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

I wonder what the OP would think about 144hz on p67 vs 60hz on a z board with virtual vsync.

 

[KingFatty]

... someone only getting 40 -50 fps can now get a much better visual experience without vsync.

would you mind elaborating? does your new display do a better job with those kind of fps, compared to say a 60 Hz screen? I'm just wondering, as 40-50 fps is below 60 Hz but I guess the 144 Hz display can have more possible combinations of perfect ratios of fps or something?

 

[bystander36]

would you mind elaborating? does your new display do a better job with those kind of fps, compared to say a 60 Hz screen? I'm just wondering, as 40-50 fps is below 60 Hz but I guess the 144 Hz display can have more possible combinations of perfect ratios of fps or something?

There are a few advantages at 40-50 FPS:
1) Without v-sync, the screen updates its images twice as fast, resulting in half as many tears, or rather, a lot more images without tears (2 or 3 frames in a row would have no tears).
2) With v-sync, you are limited to drop from 16ms frame times, to 33ms when the frame isn't ready in time. You now have a 25ms frame time gap, making it feel like less stuttering.
3) If he uses Lightboost, he gets near 0 motion blur.
4) If he uses 144hz, he gets evenly divided frame rates at 36, 48 and 72, vs 30 and 60 for a 60hz monitor. Or with 120hz, it's 30, 40 and 60. Similar to what I mention on #2 for 120hz.

 

[saratoga172]

Are you sure you used the right color profiles? snip...

Honestly, no I'm not sure. I did a bit of research before and after on the color thing. I didn't think it would be that big of a deal before I bought it. I was still using one of my 30's as a secondary monitor and even after applying the color profile then manually tweaking it to what I thought was good, it still didn't even compare to the U3011.

Had I only been using the monitor by itself or never looking at the U3011 I would have probably adjusted. But I was using them in tandem and going from the Dell to the Asus I could see a massive red hue. I did try applying different color profiles for lightboost vs non LB. Non LB definitely had less red but the colors still bothered me.

I did like the smoothness of the desktop os but couldn't get used to the colors.

Good monitor though for gaming.

 

[3DVagabond]

There are a few advantages at 40-50 FPS:
1) Without v-sync, the screen updates its images twice as fast, resulting in half as many tears, or rather, a lot more images without tears (2 or 3 frames in a row would have no tears).
2) With v-sync, you are limited to drop from 16ms frame times, to 33ms when the frame isn't ready in time. You now have a 25ms frame time gap, making it feel like less stuttering.
3) If he uses Lightboost, he gets near 0 motion blur.
4) If he uses 144hz, he gets evenly divided frame rates at 36, 48 and 72, vs 30 and 60 for a 60hz monitor. Or with 120hz, it's 30, 40 and 60. Similar to what I mention on #2 for 120hz.

It would seem to me that #1 would be exactly the opposite. Running "un-sync'd" there would be twice as much tearing as instead of 60 "un-sync'd" frames you'd have 120 "un-sync'd" frames. The frames are still "un-sync'd" regardless of how fast they are updating.

 

[bystander36]

It would seem to me that #1 would be exactly the opposite. Running "un-sync'd" there would be twice as much tearing as instead of 60 "un-sync'd" frames you'd have 120 "un-sync'd" frames. The frames are still "un-sync'd" regardless of how fast they are updating.

The reason tearing occurs, is the video card is updating the screen during the refresh. If creating images at 25ms frame times (for 40 FPS), and the monitor is updating its image at 8ms, there will be 3 or 4 frames in a row that will not have a tear. You'll also find that the image that has a tear will be there half as long, as the monitor will update it with the new complete frame, 8ms later, rather than 16ms later.

The reality is, it is the half as much time with a visible tear that will probably matter the most.

 

[toyota]

monitor has stopped doing 144hz for some reason. its only 60hz now even though I have it set to 144hz and I have not changed anything since it was last working.