There is some outstanding work here, strengthening your already very strong reviews (yeah, we read them). I think we can and will learn a few lessons here for our next testing revision
Don't forget to check out forums.blurbusters.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=7661 BTW, you need to break-in your monitors 24/7 for about one week, to get GtG to stabilize. We see GtG drift everyday until it stabilizes, and even 24 hours sometimes just isn't enough. Especially if shipping box (mispack) or weight of stand (if box shipped flat) put hidden pressure spots (like finger pressed on glass for several days), those pressure spots are GtG-distorters and takes many days to fade if pressure was applied. Even the backlight bleed spots can have different GtG numbers (due to different cutoffs, or due to backlight bleed also simultaneously being bezel pressure spots).
@@BlurBusters yeah we do this, we've also noticed pretty strong correlation between response times and room temperature so everything is also temperature controlled. Letting a monitor "warm up" is key for repeatable results
@@Hardwareunboxed Great stuff! It's so unfortunate that repeatable GtG results are tough. Can you do industry favours and also contribute to the consensus/chorus that manufacturers to use overdrive sliders (100 settings) rather than 2 or 3 or 4 Overdrive settings. - Some users prefer no overdrive at all (vision gets distracted by coronas, slowing them down) - Some users want super-excess blatant overdrive (BenQ AMA Premium) because it's like a tracer-bullet assist feature - Freezing homes (artic) will slow pixel response, requiring slightly higher overdrive - Hot homes (tropics) will speed pixel response, requiring slightly less overdrive - A monitor that ages can have slightly different GtG response in two years than when initially received - Some users have a preference to faster pixel response with slight coronas A compromise is that the existing series of Overdrive settings can have a "User Defined" setting added to them, which then unlocks the Overdrive Gain slider that directly accesses the scaler's overdrive gain register (usually a range of 0 to 128 or thereabouts). That way, it won't complicate users since only advanced users will bother to access "User Defined".
Thank you! I didn't mean to pick on any other review sites, but I used HUB's data on the VG27AQ for comparison simply because it was the most robust. And one thing I intended to put in the script (but it got lost somewhere in my notes) was that this doesn't make current GtG measurements useless; relative comparisons between monitors still hold. For instance, the PG259QN is still a much quicker LCD than the VG27AQ, no matter how you measure it.
@@ApertureGrille anything that strengthens monitor testing overall is good for everyone. The more information people have, the more informed they'll be when buying. So picking on our reviews is actually good! I'd love to work with you further on this so I've shot you an email
This is a very informative video, thank you! We're big fans of your CAD measurement, we had considered doing area under the curve for our overshoot measurement, but decided against it last minute. Using CAD seems like a more holistic solution, especially when combined with the Gamma corrected response! We're definitely taking notes for future test benches. As a side note, we also measure the monitor's full response time, which we call "Total Response Time" which is from 0% to 100% of the transition (although closer to 2% - 98% because of noise).
I should have mentioned that in the video: I love that RTINGS provides full response times, plus you have the graphs of the responses available as well. It's good to be able to see where the numbers are coming from! As for CAD, my old version was simply calculating the area difference, but I modified the new version slightly to increase the contribution from higher overshoots; I was finding that two OD settings could produce the same CAD, but the higher overdrive version looked more distracting in motion. That means I'm now modifying the measurement to suit my subjective assessment of how the responses look. I don't really like that, but I'm finding there's really no one correct way of assessing a response.
If you can't get your hands on interesting monitors, but want to do more reviews, maybe reach out to other reviewers like Steve Burke (Gamers Nexus). He said himself they don't review monitors because they're too busy, but I'm sure they're offered review samples all the time. And they have commissioned videos from other RUclipsrs, like Buildzoid about RAM or VRMs. As testing methodology is really important to them, they might be willing to work with you so you can grow your channel. (Though your reviews are so good and detailed, the manufacturers might think twice.)
How can we help make that happen? This is what a consumer oriented monitor reviewing endgame looks like. Instead of every manufacturer slapping a '1 ms' description on their product and every reviewer discussing the RGB lightning and how much their KDA has improved we will have access to actual data. This sort of methodology will push the monitor market forward. Response time, and input lag. This video covers response time part brilliantly. His other videos covers input lag in great detail. Currently we get Linus Tech Tips describing how he 'cant feel any input lag'. That has to change. We have to make it change. I want manufacturers to be providing this data with their monitors. If you produce a great monitor you should not be afraid to show it. Are your competitors too afraid to do the same? Good, that should tell consumers all they need to know and you can proudly wave the fact that yours is good and you have the data to back it up.
@@NotThat3 The good thing is most reviewers loathe all marketing claims, and people like Steve Burke have good connections and relations with the engineers behind the scenes. So these guys can get away with murdering one or two marketing claims. And them raising consumer awareness does a lot. Motherboard manufacturers have become slightly more transparent about their VRM phase designs as an example. For now, guys like a5hun need to start a patreon so he can afford more monitors.
*You just started the Copernican revolution for monitor testing* Great work, you really made a significant contribution that resonates beyond the views of this video! Could you clarify a couple of points that I'm not sure I fully grasped? As far as I understand, and correct me if I'm wrong, after calibrating the tool to measure a voltage-corresponding-value of 16383 for the full white (255,255,255) at the tested panel brightness setting, you experimentally measured the mapping from RGB values to luminous intensity of that particular monitor and use that for the conversion, the consequence is that you specifically isolate the response times for what the particular gamma of this monitor but disregard how "correctly" the monitor follows the proper gamma curve, is that right? About the mapping from RGB values to luminous intensity, again if I understood correctly, you measured with your probe the 256 values of the voltage (which should linearly correlate to the luminous intensity in cd) against the RGB values from a (0, 0, 0) to (255, 255, 255), and either: [Branching 1] Used directly this data with linear interpolation to have an experimental mapping from a 14bit voltage value to the "RGB" value and used this inverted function directly to get RGB in function of the voltage measured. or [Branching 2] Normalized both axes and set the "0" of the luminous intensity at the voltage reading from the (0, 0, 0), and then calculated gamma using ln(voltage normalized)/ln(rgb normalized) to get 255 gamma values. You then used linear interpolation for the intermediate ones, and finally you used this gamma for your RGB derivation, like this: RGB = luminous_intensity_normalized ^ (1/gamma_at_luminous_intensity_normalized) where luminous_intensity_normalized = (voltage measured - voltage_floor_at_rgb_0)/16384
Thank you! For the first part, yes. Before I do any measurements with the light-to-voltage probe, I always calibrate it so that full white, RGB 255, will be just below clipping the 14-bit measurement. I then measure the linear brightness response at RGB 0, 1, 2, ... , 24, 25, 30, ... , 250, 255. So that does capture the monitor's particular gamma behavior, whether it's an sRGB gamma curve or not. The data I show at 7:53 is real data that came from the VG27AQ. For the rest, you've got it with something like [Branch1]: With that data and Octave, I create an 8 segment spline polynomial which creates a smooth, continuous function relating brightness back to RGB values for that particular monitor [ f(brightness) = RGB ]. This function is specific to that monitor alone. Then all the linear response time data (GtG measurements) are then passed through that spline function to create the gamma-corrected RGB plots. A few people were worried I was just treating gamma as a constant, but it's important that I'm inverting the data with the correct gamma value across the brightness range. There's no trickery going on; if I were just inverting by taking the 2.2th root, none of the responses would line up on the charts properly. :)
This is mindblowing. My jaw dropped at the 25 ish minute mark. jesus fuck... If big reviewers start using this, we might get REAL MONITORS in the future. OHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH boy.... Damn good work. Hope someone reaches out soon!!!
This could very well be a new standard. Everyone that watches usual monitor reviews should be redirected to this video and those charts are amazing. Great work as always and congrats on your software for which you sound really happy about and is indeed (by the results you've proven) useful. Be proud of your work and boast about it, you deserve it.
Phenomenal video, this is very likely one of the most informative and in-depth video about monitors on the internet right now. Really looking forward to your future output.
Incredibly high quality content, as always. Damn I was scared that you stopped making videos, I'm still using Frog Pursuit as my main motion clarity test for VRR sensitive applications
This is absolutely mindblowing. Been watching this with my mouth open in awe, no joke. Learning so much from these videos and can't wait to see the future reviews.
Came from hardware unboxed! This is great stuff and looks like your work will improve the reviews and peoples understanding of what modern monitors are doing. Also kind of explains why I still prefer a good CRT for gaming.
Please get some oled monitors, I really want to see your tests on these. Also, excellent breakdown of the figures and explanations, looking forward to seeing more.
If you really are using y=x.^(1/2.2) to invert the gamma, keep in mind sRGB is actually linear near black. Instead, try lin2srgb = @(lum) (255 * ((lum 0.00313066844) .* (1.055 * lum .^ (1 / 2.4) - 0.055))) where the input is normalized linear brightness (range of 0.0 to 1.0). Source is entropymine.com/imageworsener/srgbformula/
vegeta, this is an amazing comment! I love that someone would have caught me if I were just using (1/2.2) as the power! If you check 8:42 in the video, because the value of gamma changes over the response, I treat it as a function rather than a constant. Octave allows me to invert the linear data using the varying value of gamma, so every response gets inverted with its unique gamma. One way to check that this works is at 26:17. If I were just inverting with 2.2, the average values for 95 and 223 wouldn't actually line up with 95 and 223. I'm not doing any fancy trickery with the y-axis; the inversion works properly because I have pretty accurate linear data for the gamma response.
Mate, I hope you're earning 6 figures $ somewhere as an engineer. This demonstrates excellent engineering AND communication abilities! I can't imagine how many hours it took just to organize and produce the video in such a clear way, let alone the research behind it. What a tremendous contribution and reality check to the monitor review world!
Hah! I'd be thrilled to earn a third of six figures, but thank you! I'm glad people still are occasionally watching this one. It's also really cool to see that TFT Central and Hardware Unboxed have switched over to gamma corrected RT data. My work here is done. :)
I really wish this methodology becomes a new standard for monitor reviews. Not to say that your previous reviews weren't amazing compared to [probably] all other reviews, but this is a new level. And if it is fully automated, it wouldn't even be more difficult or human-time consuming than what we have now in decent monitor reviews. If only big reviewers looked into your work.
This was an extremely well-thought-out video and your presentation was top notch! I'm no expert, but it was easy for me to follow along. Instant sub from me - can't wait to watch your new and old videos!
Excellent video, I learnt so much. That part about paint cursor disappearing for a moment makes so much sense. I think there are enough people interested in this material that you shouldn't worry about the length, especially if you have this much quality material to share.
It seems this video sent some ripples in the monitor review scene - Hardware Unboxed already using a new pixel refresh time methodology and TFT Central announced today that they will follow steps. A nice example of what one enthusiast can accomplish! Applause !
Oh I only wish more people would watch your channel. Even the reviewers themselves probably could learn a thing or two here. Really makes you think who's incentive it was to measure 10..90. That's like if i work from 9 to 5, but you can find me in the office during 10-4 - not really good enough for the guy that comes at 4:05pm is it?
Great work! I really like the new methodology. Though, there is one one thing that I believe could help with clearer data representation. What do you think about providing relative RGB error percentages for OS/US, maybe something like |OS/US - Target| / Target? I'm sure this will allow to manifest more clearly that, for example, overshoot to 82 when transitioning from 0 to 63 is far worse than overshoot to 204 when transitioning from 0 to 191.
Are you implying that the current trend of making better monitors by adding RGB lights on them is not the correct way? Sorry for the dark joke, but I only now found this video after an year. Awesome work. I was feeling the same excitement as you did and heard it in your voice close to the ending. You are doing god's work. Cheers!
D*** happy you are back. Just wish you also hade some review. I'm guessing your new methodology will show big different between TN IPS and VA panels if normal response time measurements are about the same. I need and would love this data to show case a new differents between Samsung Odyssey C27G75T and HP Omen X 27 and Asus ROG Swift PG259QN. That data would be pure GOLD.
On this week's episode of "Why We Were Dead Wrong to Get Rid of CRTs"... But seriously, your video content quality is off the charts! Every gamer and monitor reviewer deserves to know that you exist. I really wish that your channel had more views and subscribers, and that OEMs were willing to provide you with review samples. If you're looking for a publication that may take interest in your work, may I suggest Anandtech. Their reviews are insanely meticulous, often not afraid to explain a ton of chemistry, physics and mathematics when describing CPUs, GPUs, SSDs, etc. The way you approach monitors and your testing methodology fit Anandtech like a glove, and your 30 minute analysis video is comparable to their often novella-length reviews that people like me love to read. They're a big enough publication that review samples should be easy to come by if they decide to enter the monitor review game. With your insane attention to detail, I'd bet you'd fit right in! Until then, I would highly recommend rebranding your channel as "Aperture Grille". Truly professional content deserves a truly professional brand presence, and it can go a long way to getting you noticed by manufactures for review samples.
It would be sweet if someone like Gamers Nexus would commission you for reviews like they do with Buildzoid. Your data intense approach seems to gel well with them. You're seriously the best display reviewer in the world - no hyperbole.
Holy cow, thank you! I'm working on seeing if something like that is a possibility. But in the meantime, Lenovo did send their Y27q-20 for review, so that's progress!
@@ApertureGrille Nice! Good luck - I'm sure you're a busy guy but it's clear you're passionate about this stuff. I'm rooting for you. And, sincerely: thank you for all your very hard and costly work. Display enthusiasts like myself really appreciate the effort. IMO you're raising the bar for what a monitor review should be.
Want to see this guy review the PG259QNR and XL2546K, which is the best high refresh rate monitors at the moment. At the future, also curios about the QHD@240Hz new stuffs, just like Acer XB323U GX and XB273U GX, and even the Dell AW2721D.
Does this mean all those high refresh rate IPS and VA displays are full of marketing bs and only TN can deliver a true high refresh rate experience or there are more nuances to that ?
In your charts I think it would be neat to also show the colour the transistion over/undershoots to rather than just the RGB value - to me at least that would make it a lot easier to judge how visible that overshoot might be.
The charts at 24:20, right? Good idea. I plot those in Excel, so I'm not quite sure how to get the background color to match the cell value, but I'll look into it. Or at the least, I can color code those on a green to red scale like with the previous GtG heat maps. That could serve to also show the overshoot percentage.
Yes the one at 24:20. Not an excel expert by any means and if I were you I'd generate those charts in octave since you already use that to generate all the data (well actually I'd use python these days but you get the point). I played around with excel a little and this macro appears to work: stackoverflow.com/a/33180356 Just change it to "myRGB(col)" and change the first if to "If IsEmpty(col) Then" and the else to "clr = RGB(col)" and it should change any cell to the white level from another cell, e.g cell A1 is "125" and in cell B1 you enter "=myRGB(A1)". Oh and for your sites colour scheme you'll want to change the result of the first if to "clr = vbBlack"
So what happens when you force high refresh rate times with high refresh rates? Does the monitor simply stop the transition and ask for another in the middle of said transition?
I don't have one to compare, but an OLED should be able to transition essentially instantaneously. The only thing holding OLED back right now are slow refresh rates on the older models (only 60 Hz) and typical sample-and-hold blur. I'd love to play around with one of the new CX models!
@@ApertureGrille The CX is a sight to behold. 120Hz+BFI and 60Hz+BFI at a near-perfect 1/240sec MPRT(100%) persistence in the maximum blur-reducing modes. Not as blurfree as ULMB at short pulse widths, but vastly better OLED color, at least until we've got cheaper FALD HDR MiniLED backlit high-Hz LCDs. Commoditization of MiniLED will come to sub-$1000 monitors later in the decade, probably ~2023-2025. I'd expect OLED/LCD will be continual leapfrogging to the 1000Hz goal.
I'd love to get one, but they're a bit too expensive for me. I'm working on ways to actually get review samples, but I currently have to buy everything. I haven't mentioned this yet, but I put up all the measurements for the LG 24GM79G. It's an older TN panel, but it still performs better than the VG279QM and another IPS monitor I'm reviewing right now. Here are the results: www.aperturegrille.com/reviews/LG24GM79G/index.html#New-OD-Comp So I suspect something like the 2546K would do even better.
That black cursor on white issue is just terrible. I remember using a supposedly 144hz monitor at work, and when autoscrolling, text on white just pretty much washed away, almost disappearing. I guess I'll just stick with TN until the tech improves.
This video was amazing. As an engineer it was interesting af to get all this info. Gigabyte g34wqc for the next monitor ? 😂😇 I just bought one and I’m sure it’s garbage in comparison to lg’s good stuff.
It's awesome that you advocate for using MPRT measurements instead of GtG, but also show that Blur Busters' goal of a 1000hz refresh rate is unnecessary for a (perceivably) blur-free experience
Amazing stuff! We are now discussing this in the Blur Busters Forums. forums.blurbusters.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=7661 Another thing is we need to recommend true overdrive slider adjustment for all manufacturers (100-level Overdrive).
Kind of. All the falling transitions for the TN monitor are much better than the ASUS monitors, but I picked some of the worst transitions for the IPS displays on purpose to make a point about the 10 to 90 times. The TN panel is slow-ish in the opposite way: its rise times are a bit tardy. I'll try to get up a comparison of the two soon, but my LG monitor is misbehaving a bit... the brightness keeps steadily dropping as I take my measurements, making them useless. I need to figure out what's causing that first.
@@ApertureGrille Could you explain what the difference is between rise/fall times in visual terms? How would this affect our visual perspective of the monitor? Would rise times be 'explosions', fall times be transitions into dark spaces??? I'm curious because I'm currently using a 144Hz TN, and am curious as to how a 144Hz IPS would look/feel differently.
@@albertsoliz7018 That's a good one. I'll look into comparing IPS with TN in the next video, but I suspect your TN is still a bit faster than even one of the newer "fast IPS" displays.
ASUS should sent him a 360Hz PG259QNR monitor to do a full review💪💪💪 Thanks for such nice contents, but after watch this video, seems reviewer keep ignore +-10%, that's kind of not fair to TN panel products, another words, they are destroy TN product's competitive strength. I'm pretty sure TN panel product will got more advantage of the +-10% full transition performance. Just curios why keep doing 10~90% review all the time, 0~100% could be more close to real world experience, they even could show the people what will be 10~90% and 0~100% result at the same time, then there's no dispute with the results. BTW, always sad about why you just seems kind of 'difficult' to get a samples to do the review, every company should help this guy to build his super useful database to help the consumers.
They would not... because how are they going to push higher refreshrates if they don’t “fiddle” with the motion clearity of lower refreshrates. There is not incentive for them to care about motion clearity because “1ms” ips sounds better in marketing. Therefor we need to start make these measurements mainstream so that manufacturers will start to care about motion clearity! Already seen some comments from rtings and hardware unboxed and hope that the will bring this up in their videos/websites.
I tell this to everyone who asks, every single number on a box for a tv/monitor is a lie. there was a time when display size include bezel. contrast is a lie, response time is a lie, every single number. and its far from little deceptive
Would it be possible to condense these types of results into a single indexed conclusion number? Would be great for a quick reference guide to monitors. The best monitor right now set to 100, and others based off this (hopefully improving into the future). Obviously a lot of data would be clipped by doing this, but for the none scientists among us it would be great!
I think RTINGS does a pretty good job with assigning a final score, but it's really hard to do! Monitors misbehave in different ways that are more or less distracting depending on the person. I actually do worry that presenting too much data may be detrimental to most viewers, especially if it gets misinterpreted, so I'll try to offer a clearer "good/ok/bad" summary.
This only really applies to response time testing at a specific gamma. Hardware Unboxed and TFT Central are now using the concept for their reviews, but their color calibration testing is a separate thing.
@@ApertureGrille thank you., also im an idiot does the response time affect the effectiveness of the calibration or color accuracy . that's wat i wanted to ask
@@TheLateral18 No. Colorimeters generally wait for the display to stabilize at each new color patch before taking readings, so even a slow panel won't affect color delta E. Perhaps if a panel was incredibly slow, like 300+ ms, that might present a problem, but I wouldn't worry about that! :)
@@ApertureGrille It's alright. I found the answer at the end of the day in an article on the blur buster page. I must have missed it the first time I read it. Or maybe I should stop reading only every second line (partially a joke). It's really great to see such an (potentially) improvement in testing methodology. Already saw hardware unboxing apply them. But the thing about color was kindo stupid of me. White is already made up of all the colors and black is "made" by none of it. So color doesn't really do much about it the test. BUT, I think, I read somewhere that quake players would color their enemies differently in neon/very bright colors. On unusual dark maps that would lead to higher response times that if they would be less brighter. From what I've read, that should reduce response times (theoretically). But how useful that is, is another topic.
@@DKUmaro Ahh, gotcha. It's great that TFT Central and Hardware Unboxed are doing gamma corrected measurements now! I think prad.de tests different color to color transitions, but for most screens, that shouldn't be necessary. I have tested a Samsung television with backlight LEDs that were so cool in color temperature that when calibrated back down to a more normal 6500K, the blue subpixels were significantly more closed off than the red and green subpixels, so they exhibited different overdrive responses. For competitive games, enemy contrast is probably more important than response times. I'm not crazy competitive, but I always had enemies in Quake set to full-bright skins, but I would adjust the color based on the map... sometimes green, sometimes cyan or magenta, and sometimes even pure white. Another option is to purposely crush the dynamic range of the screen by going with a "cheat" style gamma like black-equalizer. This limits the range that the liquid crystals are asked to switch between, which can be especially beneficial for VA panels that have slow dark response times. I found that useful on my BenQ VA panel that I reviewed. Hah. Made the screen look terrible, but definitely improved response times (by adjusting the content to fall into the panel's more favorable response time regime).
In the video you mentioned always running at the maximum refresh rate, but I've seen some people say you should cap in-game fps to 1 below your maximum freesync range. Have you heard this? I hope I didn't miss it in the video if you discussed it. EDIT: Your video on input lag answered this question so please ignore lmao: ruclips.net/video/8ZRuFaFZh5M/видео.html
Haha! I'm glad you found it! For best results for a VRR monitor, use the highest refresh rate possible, even if the LCD isn't really fast enough to keep up, and cap your game's framerate a few FPS below that max. But even if your game's framerate drops down to around 60 FPS, the VRR lag isn't noticeable. For the VG279QM, only when I limited the screen to 60 Hz in the control panel did the lag jump way up.
Excellent question! The micro-controller has a limited time window to capture a transition, and since LCDs refresh their panels from top to bottom, the further from the top I place the sensor, the more time is wasted capturing data where nothing is happening. This matters more for 60 Hz panels: at 60 Hz, the bottom of the panel is delayed 16.7 ms more than the top.
@@ApertureGrille Doesn't this create a problem (especially with IPS) due to panel inconsistency? The white/black levels in the centre could be significantly different. This video had some amazing data, and I hope companies get some monitors headed your way.
@@alexz1232 At 2:01, there's a shot of data coming in from the probe that shows both the average light value and the maximum. I use that program on the Arduino to check that I haven't clipped the response, but then all measurements are taken at that same location. There definitely are brightness variations across the panel surface, but wherever I place the probe on the monitor, I calibrate white, RGB 255, to stay just under 16383. And once octave finds the gamma corrected responses, that 16000 value, whatever brightness it came from (180 nits vs 170 nits etc), will be resolved back to RGB 255.
Great video and research, but you do know that the 10% - 90% measurements are a standard since the dawn of the transistor (and I'm not exaggerating)? I really liked the video, the research is really good, but you were biased and presented it like the manufactures do this on purpose. No, they don't, they use the same method as anybody else because any of those transitions can't happen instantly.
photodiode (fastest response apparently, like 1ns on the best versions) thorlabs. and then i need to buy an oscilloscope which I can easily get from amazon ranging from 100 bucks to several hundred (looking at the ones in the 300 range). this way i can test my own monitor and ignore most monitor reviews. might even start posting reviews online. I would end up using full 0-100 readings. none of that 10/90 bs. this is also why i want an oled gaming monitor....
You probably don't need to spend that much! You can spends loads of money chasing down more and more precise measurement equipment, but panel variance, room temperature, etc, make a reporting response times to four decimals places a bit pointless. But when you do get data, it really makes sense to gamma correct it into RGB data. Hardware Unboxed and TFT Central have now switched over to this technique, and I think it really benefits us all.
@@ApertureGrille yeah but they still aren't hitting 0-100. i think HWUB is doing 3-90? or something like that? its still not "correct" ya know? however, this makes me itch more for an OLED gaming display. can't wait for samsung to hit the market running either later this year or early next year.... their own company pre-released that monitors are going full oled. no more lcd. and supposedly the new "g9 refresh" isn't using a samsung lcd, its using another brand. which in my mind is pushing the point that their lcd department is done. and OLED is the future.... burn in really isn't an issue. my brother uses his oled tv for gaming and plays world of warcraft and other mmo's for hours a day and hasn't had any burn in at all. his tv is still as fresh as it was day one.... my dream display, OLED, 4k, 60-144hz, including black frame insertion (just like TV's do) and I would be bat shit happy. curve it like samsung monitors do and ill be happier than a pig in shit. lol
@@bp6927 You'll find it strange if you look at HUB's measurements of the ACER monitor. Gamma calibration involves calibration of the monitor, changing the response time of the monitor that has been tailored to the existing Gamma. LG's marketing team already warned famous RUclipsrs about this, but they used public opinion to cover up LG's warning. Rather than these gamma-corrections, it is correct to use the new VESA's ClearMR standard based on the BET (Blur Edge Time) or PQ-based measurement using CIE XYZ, and GtG standard if you can't even do that.
I was hoping that either Hardware Unboxed or TFT Central would re-test the G7 now that they're using gamma corrected RT data, but no luck so far. I'm really interested in how that monitor would test now.
Most kids watching this - "So ............ don't buy Asus ? LOL :) And yet another guy who made a brilliant research like this one ruclips.net/video/8Ko3TdPy0TU/видео.html
There is some outstanding work here, strengthening your already very strong reviews (yeah, we read them). I think we can and will learn a few lessons here for our next testing revision
Don't forget to check out forums.blurbusters.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=7661
BTW, you need to break-in your monitors 24/7 for about one week, to get GtG to stabilize. We see GtG drift everyday until it stabilizes, and even 24 hours sometimes just isn't enough. Especially if shipping box (mispack) or weight of stand (if box shipped flat) put hidden pressure spots (like finger pressed on glass for several days), those pressure spots are GtG-distorters and takes many days to fade if pressure was applied.
Even the backlight bleed spots can have different GtG numbers (due to different cutoffs, or due to backlight bleed also simultaneously being bezel pressure spots).
@@BlurBusters yeah we do this, we've also noticed pretty strong correlation between response times and room temperature so everything is also temperature controlled. Letting a monitor "warm up" is key for repeatable results
@@Hardwareunboxed Great stuff! It's so unfortunate that repeatable GtG results are tough. Can you do industry favours and also contribute to the consensus/chorus that manufacturers to use overdrive sliders (100 settings) rather than 2 or 3 or 4 Overdrive settings.
- Some users prefer no overdrive at all (vision gets distracted by coronas, slowing them down)
- Some users want super-excess blatant overdrive (BenQ AMA Premium) because it's like a tracer-bullet assist feature
- Freezing homes (artic) will slow pixel response, requiring slightly higher overdrive
- Hot homes (tropics) will speed pixel response, requiring slightly less overdrive
- A monitor that ages can have slightly different GtG response in two years than when initially received
- Some users have a preference to faster pixel response with slight coronas
A compromise is that the existing series of Overdrive settings can have a "User Defined" setting added to them, which then unlocks the Overdrive Gain slider that directly accesses the scaler's overdrive gain register (usually a range of 0 to 128 or thereabouts). That way, it won't complicate users since only advanced users will bother to access "User Defined".
Thank you! I didn't mean to pick on any other review sites, but I used HUB's data on the VG27AQ for comparison simply because it was the most robust. And one thing I intended to put in the script (but it got lost somewhere in my notes) was that this doesn't make current GtG measurements useless; relative comparisons between monitors still hold. For instance, the PG259QN is still a much quicker LCD than the VG27AQ, no matter how you measure it.
@@ApertureGrille anything that strengthens monitor testing overall is good for everyone. The more information people have, the more informed they'll be when buying. So picking on our reviews is actually good! I'd love to work with you further on this so I've shot you an email
This is a very informative video, thank you! We're big fans of your CAD measurement, we had considered doing area under the curve for our overshoot measurement, but decided against it last minute. Using CAD seems like a more holistic solution, especially when combined with the Gamma corrected response! We're definitely taking notes for future test benches. As a side note, we also measure the monitor's full response time, which we call "Total Response Time" which is from 0% to 100% of the transition (although closer to 2% - 98% because of noise).
I should have mentioned that in the video: I love that RTINGS provides full response times, plus you have the graphs of the responses available as well. It's good to be able to see where the numbers are coming from! As for CAD, my old version was simply calculating the area difference, but I modified the new version slightly to increase the contribution from higher overshoots; I was finding that two OD settings could produce the same CAD, but the higher overdrive version looked more distracting in motion. That means I'm now modifying the measurement to suit my subjective assessment of how the responses look. I don't really like that, but I'm finding there's really no one correct way of assessing a response.
One of the most underrated RUclips channels it almost feels like a crime.
True
WHY THIS CHANNEL HAS SO LOW SUB NUMBER !!!! THIS GUY IS AMAZING !!!!
this is the best monitor measurement video i ever seen. i want to learn more.
I'm so excited for your achievements with these upgrades. I wish you had access to more monitors to review. You're truly doing a great job.
If you can't get your hands on interesting monitors, but want to do more reviews, maybe reach out to other reviewers like Steve Burke (Gamers Nexus).
He said himself they don't review monitors because they're too busy, but I'm sure they're offered review samples all the time. And they have commissioned videos from other RUclipsrs, like Buildzoid about RAM or VRMs. As testing methodology is really important to them, they might be willing to work with you so you can grow your channel. (Though your reviews are so good and detailed, the manufacturers might think twice.)
How can we help make that happen?
This is what a consumer oriented monitor reviewing endgame looks like. Instead of every manufacturer slapping a '1 ms' description on their product and every reviewer discussing the RGB lightning and how much their KDA has improved we will have access to actual data. This sort of methodology will push the monitor market forward. Response time, and input lag. This video covers response time part brilliantly. His other videos covers input lag in great detail. Currently we get Linus Tech Tips describing how he 'cant feel any input lag'. That has to change. We have to make it change.
I want manufacturers to be providing this data with their monitors. If you produce a great monitor you should not be afraid to show it. Are your competitors too afraid to do the same? Good, that should tell consumers all they need to know and you can proudly wave the fact that yours is good and you have the data to back it up.
Steve Burke, buildzoid and
a5hun sound like match made in heaven. Greatest idea ever
@@NotThat3 The good thing is most reviewers loathe all marketing claims, and people like Steve Burke have good connections and relations with the engineers behind the scenes. So these guys can get away with murdering one or two marketing claims. And them raising consumer awareness does a lot. Motherboard manufacturers have become slightly more transparent about their VRM phase designs as an example.
For now, guys like a5hun need to start a patreon so he can afford more monitors.
Let's do it! I'm stoked! If he opens a Patreon I'd support it! Maybe I'll join Gamer Nexus's Discord by becoming a Patreon and ask the question?
@@Peter-gb4ey I'm on the Patreon discord imo let's get not get overhyped I'm sure Burke and a5hun are busy people
Came from Hardware Unboxed... this is very impressive work.
*You just started the Copernican revolution for monitor testing*
Great work, you really made a significant contribution that resonates beyond the views of this video!
Could you clarify a couple of points that I'm not sure I fully grasped?
As far as I understand, and correct me if I'm wrong, after calibrating the tool to measure a voltage-corresponding-value of 16383 for the full white (255,255,255) at the tested panel brightness setting, you experimentally measured the mapping from RGB values to luminous intensity of that particular monitor and use that for the conversion, the consequence is that you specifically isolate the response times for what the particular gamma of this monitor but disregard how "correctly" the monitor follows the proper gamma curve, is that right?
About the mapping from RGB values to luminous intensity, again if I understood correctly, you measured with your probe the 256 values of the voltage (which should linearly correlate to the luminous intensity in cd) against the RGB values from a (0, 0, 0) to (255, 255, 255), and either:
[Branching 1] Used directly this data with linear interpolation to have an experimental mapping from a 14bit voltage value to the "RGB" value and used this inverted function directly to get RGB in function of the voltage measured.
or
[Branching 2] Normalized both axes and set the "0" of the luminous intensity at the voltage reading from the (0, 0, 0), and then calculated gamma using ln(voltage normalized)/ln(rgb normalized) to get 255 gamma values. You then used linear interpolation for the intermediate ones, and finally you used this gamma for your RGB derivation, like this:
RGB = luminous_intensity_normalized ^ (1/gamma_at_luminous_intensity_normalized)
where luminous_intensity_normalized = (voltage measured - voltage_floor_at_rgb_0)/16384
Thank you!
For the first part, yes. Before I do any measurements with the light-to-voltage probe, I always calibrate it so that full white, RGB 255, will be just below clipping the 14-bit measurement. I then measure the linear brightness response at RGB 0, 1, 2, ... , 24, 25, 30, ... , 250, 255. So that does capture the monitor's particular gamma behavior, whether it's an sRGB gamma curve or not. The data I show at 7:53 is real data that came from the VG27AQ.
For the rest, you've got it with something like [Branch1]:
With that data and Octave, I create an 8 segment spline polynomial which creates a smooth, continuous function relating brightness back to RGB values for that particular monitor [ f(brightness) = RGB ]. This function is specific to that monitor alone. Then all the linear response time data (GtG measurements) are then passed through that spline function to create the gamma-corrected RGB plots.
A few people were worried I was just treating gamma as a constant, but it's important that I'm inverting the data with the correct gamma value across the brightness range. There's no trickery going on; if I were just inverting by taking the 2.2th root, none of the responses would line up on the charts properly. :)
@@ApertureGrille Thank you for the clarification! Again great analysis!
This is mindblowing.
My jaw dropped at the 25 ish minute mark.
jesus fuck...
If big reviewers start using this, we might get REAL MONITORS in the future.
OHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH boy....
Damn good work.
Hope someone reaches out soon!!!
This could very well be a new standard. Everyone that watches usual monitor reviews should be redirected to this video and those charts are amazing. Great work as always and congrats on your software for which you sound really happy about and is indeed (by the results you've proven) useful. Be proud of your work and boast about it, you deserve it.
Phenomenal video, this is very likely one of the most informative and in-depth video about monitors on the internet right now. Really looking forward to your future output.
Incredibly high quality content, as always.
Damn I was scared that you stopped making videos, I'm still using Frog Pursuit as my main motion clarity test for VRR sensitive applications
This is ridiculously informative. Thanks for the level of research that you have done here which has led to a better metrics to judge monitors
Watching this has answered me a lot of questions I have had for years now. Truely thank you so much for this video.
Insane video dude. Raw data and charts are just so nice :D
👀
Agreed!
This is absolutely mindblowing. Been watching this with my mouth open in awe, no joke. Learning so much from these videos and can't wait to see the future reviews.
Thank you! I've got another review coming soon. Data is recorded, and I'm working on the script now.
Love this video, the time gone to do this must be insane, keep up the awesome work!
This is a great video, you deserve much more subscribers
Came from hardware unboxed! This is great stuff and looks like your work will improve the reviews and peoples understanding of what modern monitors are doing. Also kind of explains why I still prefer a good CRT for gaming.
Please get some oled monitors, I really want to see your tests on these. Also, excellent breakdown of the figures and explanations, looking forward to seeing more.
If you really are using y=x.^(1/2.2) to invert the gamma, keep in mind sRGB is actually linear near black. Instead, try
lin2srgb = @(lum) (255 * ((lum 0.00313066844) .* (1.055 * lum .^ (1 / 2.4) - 0.055)))
where the input is normalized linear brightness (range of 0.0 to 1.0).
Source is entropymine.com/imageworsener/srgbformula/
vegeta, this is an amazing comment! I love that someone would have caught me if I were just using (1/2.2) as the power! If you check 8:42 in the video, because the value of gamma changes over the response, I treat it as a function rather than a constant. Octave allows me to invert the linear data using the varying value of gamma, so every response gets inverted with its unique gamma. One way to check that this works is at 26:17. If I were just inverting with 2.2, the average values for 95 and 223 wouldn't actually line up with 95 and 223. I'm not doing any fancy trickery with the y-axis; the inversion works properly because I have pretty accurate linear data for the gamma response.
This is extremely high quality content, thank you for putting it out there. Hope your channel grows!
Mate, I hope you're earning 6 figures $ somewhere as an engineer. This demonstrates excellent engineering AND communication abilities! I can't imagine how many hours it took just to organize and produce the video in such a clear way, let alone the research behind it.
What a tremendous contribution and reality check to the monitor review world!
Hah! I'd be thrilled to earn a third of six figures, but thank you! I'm glad people still are occasionally watching this one. It's also really cool to see that TFT Central and Hardware Unboxed have switched over to gamma corrected RT data.
My work here is done. :)
I really wish this methodology becomes a new standard for monitor reviews.
Not to say that your previous reviews weren't amazing compared to [probably] all other reviews, but this is a new level. And if it is fully automated, it wouldn't even be more difficult or human-time consuming than what we have now in decent monitor reviews.
If only big reviewers looked into your work.
Holy shit what a great video, so excited for future reviews! Also, how do you move your cursor so smoothly over the curves? I'm amazed tbh
This was an extremely well-thought-out video and your presentation was top notch! I'm no expert, but it was easy for me to follow along.
Instant sub from me - can't wait to watch your new and old videos!
Came from Hardware Unboxed. Thanks, really interesting.
Nice i was wondering where you went this explains it pretty well
6 month wait?!?!?! WORTH IT! Great video. most monitor reviews are sorely lacking in depth. Your videos are a breath of fresh air.
Excellent video, I learnt so much. That part about paint cursor disappearing for a moment makes so much sense.
I think there are enough people interested in this material that you shouldn't worry about the length, especially if you have this much quality material to share.
WE NEED TO get this guy some new monitors like asus 360hz, xl2566k, oled 240hz
Thanks for documenting this. Will have to note this for how to measure this properly in the LQCG's standards and whatnot.
Wow, this was absolutely incredible. Very interesting stuff. Keep up the fantastic work.
It seems this video sent some ripples in the monitor review scene - Hardware Unboxed already using a new pixel refresh time methodology and TFT Central announced today that they will follow steps. A nice example of what one enthusiast can accomplish! Applause !
Thank you! I'm super excited that both are using gamma corrected RT data now.
Oh I only wish more people would watch your channel. Even the reviewers themselves probably could learn a thing or two here. Really makes you think who's incentive it was to measure 10..90. That's like if i work from 9 to 5, but you can find me in the office during 10-4 - not really good enough for the guy that comes at 4:05pm is it?
Holy shit. Liked and subscribed. Respect.
Superb video! some monitors to test:
LG OLED48CX
Dell S2721DGF
LG 27GL83A
LG 27GL850
Wonderful, very detailed video. Great information, thanks!
Great work! I really like the new methodology. Though, there is one one thing that I believe could help with clearer data representation. What do you think about providing relative RGB error percentages for OS/US, maybe something like |OS/US - Target| / Target? I'm sure this will allow to manifest more clearly that, for example, overshoot to 82 when transitioning from 0 to 63 is far worse than overshoot to 204 when transitioning from 0 to 191.
Are you implying that the current trend of making better monitors by adding RGB lights on them is not the correct way?
Sorry for the dark joke, but I only now found this video after an year. Awesome work. I was feeling the same excitement as you did and heard it in your voice close to the ending.
You are doing god's work. Cheers!
Thank you! Also... my thorough testing shows RGB improves response times by at least 20 percent!
Shout out from HW Unboxed liked and subscribed.
D*** happy you are back. Just wish you also hade some review. I'm guessing your new methodology will show big different between TN IPS and VA panels if normal response time measurements are about the same. I need and would love this data to show case a new differents between Samsung Odyssey C27G75T
and HP Omen X 27 and Asus ROG Swift PG259QN. That data would be pure GOLD.
Been thinking all pandemic... "I wonder where a5hun is? What is he up to? New video today?"!!
Glad to see a new a5hun video! AAA content, per usual!
On this week's episode of "Why We Were Dead Wrong to Get Rid of CRTs"...
But seriously, your video content quality is off the charts! Every gamer and monitor reviewer deserves to know that you exist. I really wish that your channel had more views and subscribers, and that OEMs were willing to provide you with review samples.
If you're looking for a publication that may take interest in your work, may I suggest Anandtech. Their reviews are insanely meticulous, often not afraid to explain a ton of chemistry, physics and mathematics when describing CPUs, GPUs, SSDs, etc. The way you approach monitors and your testing methodology fit Anandtech like a glove, and your 30 minute analysis video is comparable to their often novella-length reviews that people like me love to read. They're a big enough publication that review samples should be easy to come by if they decide to enter the monitor review game. With your insane attention to detail, I'd bet you'd fit right in!
Until then, I would highly recommend rebranding your channel as "Aperture Grille". Truly professional content deserves a truly professional brand presence, and it can go a long way to getting you noticed by manufactures for review samples.
I will still gladly give up the advantages of CRT to not have to deal with CRT scream.
It would be sweet if someone like Gamers Nexus would commission you for reviews like they do with Buildzoid. Your data intense approach seems to gel well with them. You're seriously the best display reviewer in the world - no hyperbole.
Holy cow, thank you! I'm working on seeing if something like that is a possibility. But in the meantime, Lenovo did send their Y27q-20 for review, so that's progress!
@@ApertureGrille Nice! Good luck - I'm sure you're a busy guy but it's clear you're passionate about this stuff. I'm rooting for you. And, sincerely: thank you for all your very hard and costly work. Display enthusiasts like myself really appreciate the effort. IMO you're raising the bar for what a monitor review should be.
What an informative and well made video, thanks!
Respect!
Nice - new video! Good to see you at it again!
Didn't want to pollute your comments - But - this is such a fantastic video that I couldn't resist. Can't wait to see more. Amazing work.
@@professordumbdumb1269 Don't worry about polluting! Thank you!
wow, great job, and other reviewers gathered here, i hope this ips high refresh nonsense will stop deceiving consumers
Awesome work. Do you think you can compare the fastest TN monitor with the new IPS Acer 390 Hz monitor?
Want to see this guy review the PG259QNR and XL2546K,
which is the best high refresh rate monitors at the moment.
At the future, also curios about the QHD@240Hz new stuffs,
just like Acer XB323U GX and XB273U GX, and even the Dell AW2721D.
Does this mean all those high refresh rate IPS and VA displays are full of marketing bs and only TN can deliver a true high refresh rate experience or there are more nuances to that ?
What a wonderful video! Very informative! Keep it up man! Amazing job!
Pretty good video. I enjoyed it.
great video, very informative and educational.
In your charts I think it would be neat to also show the colour the transistion over/undershoots to rather than just the RGB value - to me at least that would make it a lot easier to judge how visible that overshoot might be.
The charts at 24:20, right? Good idea. I plot those in Excel, so I'm not quite sure how to get the background color to match the cell value, but I'll look into it. Or at the least, I can color code those on a green to red scale like with the previous GtG heat maps. That could serve to also show the overshoot percentage.
Yes the one at 24:20. Not an excel expert by any means and if I were you I'd generate those charts in octave since you already use that to generate all the data (well actually I'd use python these days but you get the point).
I played around with excel a little and this macro appears to work:
stackoverflow.com/a/33180356
Just change it to "myRGB(col)" and change the first if to "If IsEmpty(col) Then" and the else to "clr = RGB(col)" and it should change any cell to the white level from another cell, e.g cell A1 is "125" and in cell B1 you enter "=myRGB(A1)". Oh and for your sites colour scheme you'll want to change the result of the first if to "clr = vbBlack"
So what happens when you force high refresh rate times with high refresh rates? Does the monitor simply stop the transition and ask for another in the middle of said transition?
Impressive work my friend. Sadly, manufacturer like reviewers that echo their numbers so it is no wonder nobody wants to send you any for reviews.
please review XG240R i like your reviews!
How would OLED compare against LCD?
I don't have one to compare, but an OLED should be able to transition essentially instantaneously. The only thing holding OLED back right now are slow refresh rates on the older models (only 60 Hz) and typical sample-and-hold blur. I'd love to play around with one of the new CX models!
@@ApertureGrille The CX is a sight to behold. 120Hz+BFI and 60Hz+BFI at a near-perfect 1/240sec MPRT(100%) persistence in the maximum blur-reducing modes. Not as blurfree as ULMB at short pulse widths, but vastly better OLED color, at least until we've got cheaper FALD HDR MiniLED backlit high-Hz LCDs. Commoditization of MiniLED will come to sub-$1000 monitors later in the decade, probably ~2023-2025. I'd expect OLED/LCD will be continual leapfrogging to the 1000Hz goal.
TFT Central have posted a LG CX OLED review recently.
@@BlurBusters Did you ever get LG to respond to that multi-channel rolling scan idea?
Really enjoy your content, would love to see a review of one of the zowie 240hz monitors to see the performance of modern TN panels
I'd love to get one, but they're a bit too expensive for me. I'm working on ways to actually get review samples, but I currently have to buy everything.
I haven't mentioned this yet, but I put up all the measurements for the LG 24GM79G. It's an older TN panel, but it still performs better than the VG279QM and another IPS monitor I'm reviewing right now. Here are the results:
www.aperturegrille.com/reviews/LG24GM79G/index.html#New-OD-Comp
So I suspect something like the 2546K would do even better.
That black cursor on white issue is just terrible. I remember using a supposedly 144hz monitor at work, and when autoscrolling, text on white just pretty much washed away, almost disappearing. I guess I'll just stick with TN until the tech improves.
Yesss mannn!!! Taking all the comments onboard and busting this video out is highly respectable
Ps. Still waiting for a way to sponsor your endeavour
This video was amazing. As an engineer it was interesting af to get all this info. Gigabyte g34wqc for the next monitor ? 😂😇 I just bought one and I’m sure it’s garbage in comparison to lg’s good stuff.
It's awesome that you advocate for using MPRT measurements instead of GtG, but also show that Blur Busters' goal of a 1000hz refresh rate is unnecessary for a (perceivably) blur-free experience
Amazing stuff! We are now discussing this in the Blur Busters Forums.
forums.blurbusters.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=7661
Another thing is we need to recommend true overdrive slider adjustment for all manufacturers (100-level Overdrive).
so TN is better for fast displays then ips? Please explain what to gather from 20:08 .. im dumb
Kind of. All the falling transitions for the TN monitor are much better than the ASUS monitors, but I picked some of the worst transitions for the IPS displays on purpose to make a point about the 10 to 90 times. The TN panel is slow-ish in the opposite way: its rise times are a bit tardy. I'll try to get up a comparison of the two soon, but my LG monitor is misbehaving a bit... the brightness keeps steadily dropping as I take my measurements, making them useless. I need to figure out what's causing that first.
@@ApertureGrille Could you explain what the difference is between rise/fall times in visual terms? How would this affect our visual perspective of the monitor? Would rise times be 'explosions', fall times be transitions into dark spaces???
I'm curious because I'm currently using a 144Hz TN, and am curious as to how a 144Hz IPS would look/feel differently.
@@albertsoliz7018 That's a good one. I'll look into comparing IPS with TN in the next video, but I suspect your TN is still a bit faster than even one of the newer "fast IPS" displays.
ASUS should sent him a 360Hz PG259QNR monitor to do a full review💪💪💪
Thanks for such nice contents, but after watch this video, seems reviewer keep ignore +-10%,
that's kind of not fair to TN panel products, another words, they are destroy TN product's competitive strength.
I'm pretty sure TN panel product will got more advantage of the +-10% full transition performance.
Just curios why keep doing 10~90% review all the time, 0~100% could be more close to real world experience,
they even could show the people what will be 10~90% and 0~100% result at the same time, then there's no dispute with the results.
BTW, always sad about why you just seems kind of 'difficult' to get a samples to do the review,
every company should help this guy to build his super useful database to help the consumers.
They would not... because how are they going to push higher refreshrates if they don’t “fiddle” with the motion clearity of lower refreshrates. There is not incentive for them to care about motion clearity because “1ms” ips sounds better in marketing.
Therefor we need to start make these measurements mainstream so that manufacturers will start to care about motion clearity! Already seen some comments from rtings and hardware unboxed and hope that the will bring this up in their videos/websites.
ooh do one for the Odyssey G7 please 😋
A video with 2041 views, 306 likes and 0 dislikes? The monitor nerds community is something indeed :)
Hey, I'm just glad that anyone watched the whole thing!
Absolute mad man
Awesome video.
I tell this to everyone who asks, every single number on a box for a tv/monitor is a lie. there was a time when display size include bezel. contrast is a lie, response time is a lie, every single number. and its far from little deceptive
Would it be possible to condense these types of results into a single indexed conclusion number? Would be great for a quick reference guide to monitors. The best monitor right now set to 100, and others based off this (hopefully improving into the future). Obviously a lot of data would be clipped by doing this, but for the none scientists among us it would be great!
I think RTINGS does a pretty good job with assigning a final score, but it's really hard to do! Monitors misbehave in different ways that are more or less distracting depending on the person. I actually do worry that presenting too much data may be detrimental to most viewers, especially if it gets misinterpreted, so I'll try to offer a clearer "good/ok/bad" summary.
is it possible to calibrate a monitor better with all this useful data?
This only really applies to response time testing at a specific gamma. Hardware Unboxed and TFT Central are now using the concept for their reviews, but their color calibration testing is a separate thing.
@@ApertureGrille thank you., also
im an idiot
does the response time affect the effectiveness of the calibration or color accuracy . that's wat i wanted to ask
@@TheLateral18 No. Colorimeters generally wait for the display to stabilize at each new color patch before taking readings, so even a slow panel won't affect color delta E. Perhaps if a panel was incredibly slow, like 300+ ms, that might present a problem, but I wouldn't worry about that! :)
@@ApertureGrille thank you, this been so helpful
Subbed
👏👏👏👏👏
NVM.
Regardless, awesome info and great work/video there.
Sorry I couldn't response before the edit! There was some good stuff in there.
@@ApertureGrille It's alright. I found the answer at the end of the day in an article on the blur buster page. I must have missed it the first time I read it. Or maybe I should stop reading only every second line (partially a joke). It's really great to see such an (potentially) improvement in testing methodology. Already saw hardware unboxing apply them.
But the thing about color was kindo stupid of me. White is already made up of all the colors and black is "made" by none of it. So color doesn't really do much about it the test.
BUT, I think, I read somewhere that quake players would color their enemies differently in neon/very bright colors. On unusual dark maps that would lead to higher response times that if they would be less brighter. From what I've read, that should reduce response times (theoretically). But how useful that is, is another topic.
@@DKUmaro Ahh, gotcha. It's great that TFT Central and Hardware Unboxed are doing gamma corrected measurements now!
I think prad.de tests different color to color transitions, but for most screens, that shouldn't be necessary. I have tested a Samsung television with backlight LEDs that were so cool in color temperature that when calibrated back down to a more normal 6500K, the blue subpixels were significantly more closed off than the red and green subpixels, so they exhibited different overdrive responses.
For competitive games, enemy contrast is probably more important than response times. I'm not crazy competitive, but I always had enemies in Quake set to full-bright skins, but I would adjust the color based on the map... sometimes green, sometimes cyan or magenta, and sometimes even pure white.
Another option is to purposely crush the dynamic range of the screen by going with a "cheat" style gamma like black-equalizer. This limits the range that the liquid crystals are asked to switch between, which can be especially beneficial for VA panels that have slow dark response times. I found that useful on my BenQ VA panel that I reviewed. Hah. Made the screen look terrible, but definitely improved response times (by adjusting the content to fall into the panel's more favorable response time regime).
In the video you mentioned always running at the maximum refresh rate, but I've seen some people say you should cap in-game fps to 1 below your maximum freesync range. Have you heard this? I hope I didn't miss it in the video if you discussed it.
EDIT: Your video on input lag answered this question so please ignore lmao:
ruclips.net/video/8ZRuFaFZh5M/видео.html
Haha! I'm glad you found it! For best results for a VRR monitor, use the highest refresh rate possible, even if the LCD isn't really fast enough to keep up, and cap your game's framerate a few FPS below that max.
But even if your game's framerate drops down to around 60 FPS, the VRR lag isn't noticeable. For the VG279QM, only when I limited the screen to 60 Hz in the control panel did the lag jump way up.
At 7:00 you’re measuring the corner of the display. Why not the center?
Excellent question! The micro-controller has a limited time window to capture a transition, and since LCDs refresh their panels from top to bottom, the further from the top I place the sensor, the more time is wasted capturing data where nothing is happening. This matters more for 60 Hz panels: at 60 Hz, the bottom of the panel is delayed 16.7 ms more than the top.
@@ApertureGrille Doesn't this create a problem (especially with IPS) due to panel inconsistency? The white/black levels in the centre could be significantly different.
This video had some amazing data, and I hope companies get some monitors headed your way.
@@alexz1232 At 2:01, there's a shot of data coming in from the probe that shows both the average light value and the maximum. I use that program on the Arduino to check that I haven't clipped the response, but then all measurements are taken at that same location. There definitely are brightness variations across the panel surface, but wherever I place the probe on the monitor, I calibrate white, RGB 255, to stay just under 16383. And once octave finds the gamma corrected responses, that 16000 value, whatever brightness it came from (180 nits vs 170 nits etc), will be resolved back to RGB 255.
@@ApertureGrille There is also a difference in refresh from left or right. Do you control for each panel from where the refresh starts?
Great video and research, but you do know that the 10% - 90% measurements are a standard since the dawn of the transistor (and I'm not exaggerating)?
I really liked the video, the research is really good, but you were biased and presented it like the manufactures do this on purpose. No, they don't, they use the same method as anybody else because any of those transitions can't happen instantly.
10..90% of a non-linear scale. Haha “moderately deceptive”. I willl look at the log graphs on your website. Thanks alot!
This is Excelent content
Interesting topic
hat's off
going from CRTs and Plasmas to LCDs really was a downgrade haha.
Fantastic video, the monitor industry needs to be burnt to the fucking ground honestly
photodiode (fastest response apparently, like 1ns on the best versions) thorlabs. and then i need to buy an oscilloscope which I can easily get from amazon ranging from 100 bucks to several hundred (looking at the ones in the 300 range). this way i can test my own monitor and ignore most monitor reviews. might even start posting reviews online. I would end up using full 0-100 readings. none of that 10/90 bs. this is also why i want an oled gaming monitor....
You probably don't need to spend that much! You can spends loads of money chasing down more and more precise measurement equipment, but panel variance, room temperature, etc, make a reporting response times to four decimals places a bit pointless.
But when you do get data, it really makes sense to gamma correct it into RGB data. Hardware Unboxed and TFT Central have now switched over to this technique, and I think it really benefits us all.
@@ApertureGrille yeah but they still aren't hitting 0-100. i think HWUB is doing 3-90? or something like that? its still not "correct" ya know?
however, this makes me itch more for an OLED gaming display. can't wait for samsung to hit the market running either later this year or early next year.... their own company pre-released that monitors are going full oled. no more lcd. and supposedly the new "g9 refresh" isn't using a samsung lcd, its using another brand. which in my mind is pushing the point that their lcd department is done. and OLED is the future.... burn in really isn't an issue. my brother uses his oled tv for gaming and plays world of warcraft and other mmo's for hours a day and hasn't had any burn in at all. his tv is still as fresh as it was day one....
my dream display, OLED, 4k, 60-144hz, including black frame insertion (just like TV's do) and I would be bat shit happy. curve it like samsung monitors do and ill be happier than a pig in shit. lol
@@goblinphreak2132 OLED burn in actually still IS an issue and also low brightness.
All relative and depending on the model of course.
Cool
This content is more deceptive than the existing standard.
How so?
@@bp6927 You'll find it strange if you look at HUB's measurements of the ACER monitor. Gamma calibration involves calibration of the monitor, changing the response time of the monitor that has been tailored to the existing Gamma. LG's marketing team already warned famous RUclipsrs about this, but they used public opinion to cover up LG's warning.
Rather than these gamma-corrections, it is correct to use the new VESA's ClearMR standard based on the BET (Blur Edge Time) or PQ-based measurement using CIE XYZ, and GtG standard if you can't even do that.
Time to watch why i shouldnt buy a VA screen Samsung Oddesy G7 2560x1440p..
I was hoping that either Hardware Unboxed or TFT Central would re-test the G7 now that they're using gamma corrected RT data, but no luck so far.
I'm really interested in how that monitor would test now.
cheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeers
First ((: New video finally
Most kids watching this - "So ............ don't buy Asus ? LOL :) And yet another guy who made a brilliant research like this one ruclips.net/video/8Ko3TdPy0TU/видео.html
LCD Response times suck? *laughs in OLED*
Do a video about FPS next.
Its shocking how many people out there still think you cant see a difference in FPS anymore above 100 FPS.