does lightboost require any processing in the monitor?

[Anarchist420]

is it technically possible to have an monitor with lightboost, gsync, and direct drive? could lightboost be used to speed up IPS pixel response?

i was thinking that if lightboost doesnt add lag and if it could speed up IPS response times, then there is no point going to OLEDs. LCDs could use GB-r LED (or RGB LED) arrays rather than edge lighting so that discounts any advantage OLEDs have in the color dept. then there are already IPS panels that do 1200:1 contrast ratio which isnt that much of a tangible difference from what OLEDs can do especially if source devices had display logic that could make blacks and whites better.

LCDs are nowhere near as good as they could be in my opinion and i would hate to see OLEDs replace them.

 

[bystander36]

Lightboost does not speed up pixel response. It still takes just as long to change color. What it does is give pixels time to change color before it shows them brightly. Lightboost also prevents persistence of colors in our eyes, so that our eyes can notice color changes more rapidly. The time when the backlighting is off, gives our eyes a chance to lose the image shown when the backlighting was bright.

Lightboost will not help IPS's ghosting issue much, due to IPS's have such large response times (6ms is GtG, but BtW is more like 18+ms). If the monitor can change color faster than a frame, Lightboost can remove motion blur, but it can't if the response times are much higher than your refresh rate, which is the case with IPS displays.

 

[BrightCandle]

IPS would need to exceed not only the refresh rate (less than 16ms change) but it also needs to maintain a decent colour for long enough for the backlight to flash it brightly for people to see a solid image. IPS monitors are a long way away from being able to do that.

 

[Anarchist420]

thanks BrightCandle and bystander36. i personally dont see the pixel response times as an issue with IPS, it is more so the fact that there arent any monitors that are both direct drive and gsync (or direct drive and like 288 hz signal so that vsync lag would be negligible). unfortunately, many people do think that the pixel response times of IPS panels are too slow and that could result in them being replaced with OLEDs.

one thing i miss is clear panels. i am not sure why those were not popular although i admit that i keep my computer room very dark during the day. and extra long life GB-r LED arrays should be used rather than side/edge lit or WLEDs. and of course power circuitry for monitors should be better than it is (some monitors even hum and i am sure that external power supplies get really hot and degrade over time), so that the vreg and ripple will be better. not using pwm is a good idea and i am happy to see that fewer monitors are using it.

my monitor is good and is close to as good as they come, but it could be a lot better (mainly if it were clear, if the average response time was about 2-3 ms faster, used display port, was a DDM, and had about 2x as much bandwidth or used gsync) just as nvidia's drivers could be a lot better and just as i wish the xbox360 controller was 6 ms faster.

 

[BrightCandle]

Have you used a modern 144hz lightboost 2 monitor, especially have you used a strobed screen? Its amazing in comparison to an IPS screen. I had a Dell 2410, which is a really nice IPS screen and I can't go back. Its not really the frequency its the motion blur, I can shoot while moving with the TN screen in a way that was impossible on IPS. You don't realise how much it is hampering you in games until you try the other type. Previously I was comparing the IPS to some much older TN screens, and there the only difference was the colour quality and they had similar blur. But TN has come on enormously in persistence and blur and these are truly exceptional properties.

While gsync is intending to come to IPS I don't think it will really do such a good job there, it will be underwhelming. The main reason being the blur and switching time of IPS pixels. IPS is designed for pro uses, like photo editing. Gamers ought to care mostly about motion blur and latency, not least because most games compensate for TN based screens anyway!

 

[sxr7171]

IMHO lcd tech has always been a kludge. There's been so much development with electronics to mask lcd problems. All kinds of marketing tech. 960hz, overdrive, local lighting, dynamic contrast (as opposed to real contrast), triluminos etc. etc.

Personally I use plasma for TV. IMHO there's nothing better than a display that uses a emissive technology as opposed to a transmissive technology. It's just inherently more efficient and controllable. OLED will finally let PC monitors perform better natively without all the extra processing that LCDs require to keep up. Just my opinion. No doubt they have issues to solve with OLEDs. I was looking forward to seeing SED which would have been like a thin CRT. Maybe I'm the backwards thinking one for seeing CRT-like technology as the ultimate.

 

[Lonyo]

is it technically possible to have an monitor with lightboost, gsync, and direct drive? could lightboost be used to speed up IPS pixel response?

i was thinking that if lightboost doesnt add lag and if it could speed up IPS response times, then there is no point going to OLEDs. LCDs could use GB-r LED (or RGB LED) arrays rather than edge lighting so that discounts any advantage OLEDs have in the color dept. then there are already IPS panels that do 1200:1 contrast ratio which isnt that much of a tangible difference from what OLEDs can do especially if source devices had display logic that could make blacks and whites better.

LCDs are nowhere near as good as they could be in my opinion and i would hate to see OLEDs replace them.

Have you used an OLED display? The blacks can't be matched by an LCD...

 

[sxr7171]

Have you used an OLED display? The blacks can't be matched by an LCD...

Exactly. Lcd black is shuttered out bright backlight. No shutter is 100% effective. Especially one that is required to dynamically open as fast as our response time expectations require.

 

[Anarchist420]

Have you used a modern 144hz lightboost 2 monitor, especially have you used a strobed screen? Its amazing in comparison to an IPS screen. I had a Dell 2410, which is a really nice IPS screen and I can't go back. Its not really the frequency its the motion blur, I can shoot while moving with the TN screen in a way that was impossible on IPS. You don't realise how much it is hampering you in games until you try the other type. Previously I was comparing the IPS to some much older TN screens, and there the only difference was the colour quality and they had similar blur. But TN has come on enormously in persistence and blur and these are truly exceptional properties. While gsync is intending to come to IPS I don't think it will really do such a good job there, it will be underwhelming. The main reason being the blur and switching time of IPS pixels. IPS is designed for pro uses, like photo editing. Gamers ought to care mostly about motion blur and latency, not least because most games compensate for TN based screens anyway!

i have used a TN panel before and i cant really notice any difference between a good IPS panel and a TN in terms of ghosting at least not the TN i used. 6ms typical response time is good enough for me. i can, however, notice a huge difference between IPS and TN in term of color and viewing angles.

Have you used an OLED display? The blacks can't be matched by an LCD...

no, but i am not too big on blacks as long as they dont look brownish or white.

OLED will finally let PC monitors perform better natively without all the extra processing that LCDs require to keep up.

they will find some unnecessary processing to add, it is not like many if any of them will be direct drive. and the fact that the blue dots fade earlier is not good; i dont think anyone has come up with any way around that without sacrificing something else.

 

[sxr7171]

i have used a TN panel before and i cant really notice any difference between a good IPS panel and a TN in terms of ghosting at least not the TN i used. 6ms typical response time is good enough for me. i can, however, notice a huge difference between IPS and TN in term of color and viewing angles.

no, but i am not too big on blacks as long as they dont look brownish or white.
they will find some unnecessary processing to add, it is not like many if any of them will be direct drive. and the fact that the blue dots fade earlier is not good; i dont think anyone has come up with any way around that without sacrificing something else.

I don't think anything adds more processing than LCD. LCD requires so many "solutions" to work as required.

As for blue fading that is a real issue that will be overcome. It has to be for mainstream deployment.

Just read this: http://www.displaymate.com/LG_OLED_TV_ShootOut_1.htm

No motion blur on OLED. LCD is a horrendous technology, I've always seen it as a stop gap to better display technology.

I'm no big OLED fan either but it's better than LCD. Pretty much anything is. Having said that I must admit modern LCDs are pretty good, but it would take an entire volume to detail all the workarounds and digital processing they have to do to get that result. Local dimming, dynamic contrast - which is pretty much a lie, 960hz. Just dozens upon dozens of implementations and marketing terms for each LCD out there.

Heck even lightboost is yet another kludge solution to mask the inherent issues with LCD. How many band-aids can they apply to this tech before it can match CRTs of 20 years ago in many important parameters?

 

[bystander36]

Part of what makes Lightboost great will not be solved by OLED. Persistence will remain as long as monitors display color with light. OLED may end up being the next stepping stone, but don't kid yourself into thinking it will be perfect and not have continued improvements to the tech over time. And a big part of what tech is used is how plentiful the materials to implement it are.

 

[Anarchist420]

Heck even lightboost is yet another kludge solution to mask the inherent issues with LCD. How many band-aids can they apply to this tech before it can match CRTs of 20 years ago in many important parameters?

CRTs sucked because of burn in and those that didnt have really good power supplies would get burn in in a heart beat.

 

[Gryz]

About combining LightBoost (strobing) and G-Sync. Right now there are no monitors that can do it. Because it requires the backlight to do strobing at variable frequencies. I don't believe the hardware exists to do that now.

But in theory, this should be possible too, right ? Any reason why it would be impossible ? Once we get G-Sync monitors with strobing, we will have reached a new milestone, imho.