![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
) to approach testing vs. the FW900 differently, but thus far I must say I'm impressed. Unfortunately, though, my initial tests (with caveats listed above) have shown input lag falling anywhere between 1 and 3 frames vs. the FW900. Pixel persistence is beautiful and unmatched by any LCD I've ever seen, right along with what Mark and everyone else has been saying. Could anyone else help me with a not-for-commercial use license?The BENQ seems to have less input lag than the ASUS, but I'm pretty curious how much advantage the zero motion blur effect gives you. I have heard from people that they have a better advantage (faster reaction time) with LightBoost even with the input lag. Also remember to test with LightBoost=100% and LightBoost=10%, too.I just ordered a Casio 1000fps camera (EX-ZR100, this ought to be fun
If you're talking about LightBoost, I should note that pixel persistence is still there -- it's just hidden by turning off the backlight between refreshes. A more generic terminology is "pixel response".
I am developing a freely-constructable Arduino input lag meter. It will have 0.1ms precision when comparing between displays. I'm focussed on other projects at the moment, but keep an eye out.Has anyone talked to Thomas Thiemann? (SMTT author) I'd like to give him some $$ for his latency testing program but he isn't taking it right now.
well that is going to be impossible in any modern game unless running low settings. heck there are many games that I cant even stay above 60 fps with many settings reduced. all the gpu power in the world will not fix all of those games either because there are many spots that are cpu limited.
You don't need LightBoost if you don't want it, but, some clarifications:
Coming from a FW900, I'm a pessimist on this given that it's impossible to have less motion blur or less input lag. The only thing this has going for it is the display is brighter and the pixels look a bit grainy-er due to the nature of the LCD. That is counterbalanced by my desire to move on, however; I'm tired of the bulkiness and power usage of the FW900. Understood, and being fair to subjective testing.
Yes, perceived motion blur -- different from "source-based" motion blur (e.g. GPU effects) or "recorded" motion blur (e.g. camera). The eye can't tell the difference, but all of them can co-exist and be accumulative (e.g. watcing a movie with motion blur, on a display with motion blur).
I've now taken photographs of how to build the Arduino input lag tester, my main problem is finishing off the software. Do you have programming skills?
You posted your question in two threads, so I'm replying here too.
Turn off LightBoost temporarily (An easy way to do this is to switch to 144 Hz refresh which automatically turns off LightBoost -- this is easy to do if you are using the newer INF files)
and I dont understand how people can use glossy screens. heck I cant stand even the bezals being glossy as that reflects everything in the room not to mention the screen gets reflected into the bezal edges.
My monitor's backlight uniformity @ 10% lightboost:
It's better than the AW2310 this is replacing. The edges are almost all uniform so nothing stands out when letterboxed.