I have a Asus vg248qe
How do I go about enabling lightboost under 120hz? I wanted to game with it and see the difference between 144hz.
Anyone know?
Lightboost
posted in
Hardware
I have a Asus vg248qe
How do I go about enabling lightboost under 120hz? I wanted to game with it and see the difference between 144hz.
Anyone know?
How do I go about enabling lightboost under 120hz? I wanted to game with it and see the difference between 144hz.
Anyone know?
http://www.blurbusters.com/zero-motion-blur/lightboost/
lots of info and download on this site
http://www.blurbusters.com/zero-motion-blur/lightboost/
lots of info and download on this site
lots of info and download on this site
Lightboost is hardware limited to only work at 100Hz and above.
Standard lightboost only works between 100Hz and 120Hz but BenQ's implementation works at 144Hz.
Lightboost is hardware limited to only work at 100Hz and above.
Standard lightboost only works between 100Hz and 120Hz but BenQ's implementation works at 144Hz.
Standard lightboost only works between 100Hz and 120Hz but BenQ's implementation works at 144Hz.
rip i meant AT 120hz, I know not under 120hz. sorry about that.
So download that? I could of sworn there was a setting in the nvidia control panel about lightboost.
Eh, guess this is it then. Alrighty.
rip i meant AT 120hz, I know not under 120hz. sorry about that.
So download that? I could of sworn there was a setting in the nvidia control panel about lightboost.
Eh, guess this is it then. Alrighty.
So download that? I could of sworn there was a setting in the nvidia control panel about lightboost.
Eh, guess this is it then. Alrighty.
For my monitor, lightboost is enabled on the monitor itself. Might just be me though.
For my monitor, lightboost is enabled on the monitor itself. Might just be me though.
you'll probably find that the increased input lag associated with lightboost makes it not worth it
you'll probably find that the increased input lag associated with lightboost makes it not worth it
-protoyou'll probably find that the increased input lag associated with lightboost makes it not worth it
As soldier main I've never really had problems with BenQ's blur-reduction, however I do think it matters in CS:GO for example or sniper mains
[quote=-proto]you'll probably find that the increased input lag associated with lightboost makes it not worth it[/quote]
As soldier main I've never really had problems with BenQ's blur-reduction, however I do think it matters in CS:GO for example or sniper mains
As soldier main I've never really had problems with BenQ's blur-reduction, however I do think it matters in CS:GO for example or sniper mains
I installed lightboost for my 144Hz. and I haven't really noticed any negligible input lag.
Of course, I switched from 60Hz. 6ms to 144Hz. 1ms GTG so anything is a godsend.
I installed lightboost for my 144Hz. and I haven't really noticed any negligible input lag.
Of course, I switched from 60Hz. 6ms to 144Hz. 1ms GTG so anything is a godsend.
Of course, I switched from 60Hz. 6ms to 144Hz. 1ms GTG so anything is a godsend.
-protoyou'll probably find that the increased input lag associated with lightboost makes it not worth it
this. lightboost looks smooth and all, but the lag counters the smoothness too hard.
it also messes with your colors. which is not necessarily an issue, but it can be a hassle if you want to switch between lightboost and non-lightboost. or if you've spent some time getting your colors right, you'll probably have to start over again.
i could handle the slight lag just fine when on my desktop, but in any game it's incredibly annoying.
[quote=-proto]you'll probably find that the increased input lag associated with lightboost makes it not worth it[/quote]
this. lightboost looks smooth and all, but the lag counters the smoothness too hard.
it also messes with your colors. which is not necessarily an issue, but it can be a hassle if you want to switch between lightboost and non-lightboost. or if you've spent some time getting your colors right, you'll probably have to start over again.
i could handle the slight lag just fine when on my desktop, but in any game it's incredibly annoying.
this. lightboost looks smooth and all, but the lag counters the smoothness too hard.
it also messes with your colors. which is not necessarily an issue, but it can be a hassle if you want to switch between lightboost and non-lightboost. or if you've spent some time getting your colors right, you'll probably have to start over again.
i could handle the slight lag just fine when on my desktop, but in any game it's incredibly annoying.
Bonafide-protoyou'll probably find that the increased input lag associated with lightboost makes it not worth itAs soldier main I've never really had problems with BenQ's blur-reduction, however I do think it matters in CS:GO for example or sniper mains
i've read that lightboosting works better on benq monitors, as opposed to asus ones. maybe that's why?
because on my asus vg248qe, it's definitely noticable. 144 (or even 120) easily beats 120-lightboosting when gaming.
edit: sorry for double post, i meant to edit
[quote=Bonafide][quote=-proto]you'll probably find that the increased input lag associated with lightboost makes it not worth it[/quote]
As soldier main I've never really had problems with BenQ's blur-reduction, however I do think it matters in CS:GO for example or sniper mains[/quote]
i've read that lightboosting works better on benq monitors, as opposed to asus ones. maybe that's why?
because on my asus vg248qe, it's definitely noticable. 144 (or even 120) easily beats 120-lightboosting when gaming.
edit: sorry for double post, i meant to edit
As soldier main I've never really had problems with BenQ's blur-reduction, however I do think it matters in CS:GO for example or sniper mains[/quote]
i've read that lightboosting works better on benq monitors, as opposed to asus ones. maybe that's why?
because on my asus vg248qe, it's definitely noticable. 144 (or even 120) easily beats 120-lightboosting when gaming.
edit: sorry for double post, i meant to edit
Maybe I am using blur reduction for so long that I don't even notice the input lag anymore, I will switch it off when I am back from my holiday to see if it's better
Maybe I am using blur reduction for so long that I don't even notice the input lag anymore, I will switch it off when I am back from my holiday to see if it's better
Bucakei've read that lightboosting works better on benq monitors, as opposed to asus ones. maybe that's why?
because on my asus vg248qe, it's definitely noticable. 144 (or even 120) easily beats 120-lightboosting when gaming.
I have the same monitor and it hands down sucks with lightboost. You either have to go with lots of input lag or a really dim screen. Regardless of what you set it to in terms of brightness/response time, you will feel bigger side effects with it than just playing without lightboost at 144hz.
On the bright side the monitor is still really nice, bright and responsive at regular 144hz.
[quote=Bucake]i've read that lightboosting works better on benq monitors, as opposed to asus ones. maybe that's why?
because on my asus vg248qe, it's definitely noticable. 144 (or even 120) easily beats 120-lightboosting when gaming.[/quote]
I have the same monitor and it hands down sucks with lightboost. You either have to go with lots of input lag or a really dim screen. Regardless of what you set it to in terms of brightness/response time, you will feel bigger side effects with it than just playing without lightboost at 144hz.
On the bright side the monitor is still really nice, bright and responsive at regular 144hz.
because on my asus vg248qe, it's definitely noticable. 144 (or even 120) easily beats 120-lightboosting when gaming.[/quote]
I have the same monitor and it hands down sucks with lightboost. You either have to go with lots of input lag or a really dim screen. Regardless of what you set it to in terms of brightness/response time, you will feel bigger side effects with it than just playing without lightboost at 144hz.
On the bright side the monitor is still really nice, bright and responsive at regular 144hz.
I was experimenting with the BenQ blur-reduction I didn't necessarily notice the input lag but did notice I played a lot better with it off in MGE/pickups in that I was a lot faster reacting to stuff, take that with a grain of salt you can test it out but it probably isn't worth it.
I was experimenting with the BenQ blur-reduction I didn't necessarily notice the input lag but did notice I played a lot better with it off in MGE/pickups in that I was a lot faster reacting to stuff, take that with a grain of salt you can test it out but it probably isn't worth it.
When I first got my xl2411z I messed around with lightboost for a looong time looking on blurbuster and messing with all the settings but no matter what, 120hz plus ULMB (BenQs version of lightboost) always looked like garbage. Maybe my model is defective but it even looked worse than 60hz.
When I first got my xl2411z I messed around with lightboost for a looong time looking on blurbuster and messing with all the settings but no matter what, 120hz plus ULMB (BenQs version of lightboost) always looked like garbage. Maybe my model is defective but it even looked worse than 60hz.
I use lightboost on my Asus VG248QE. I've heard people say that lightboost increases input lag, however I've not noticed any difference, and one could argue that the slight increase in possible input latency is made up by the reduction in motion blur. What I have noticed is a significant reduction of screen tearing.
If you'd like to experience the difference in a tangible benchmark situation, I would highly recommend downloading a program called PixPerAn, which is a benchmark for screen tearing and refresh rates. Basically text fly's by on the screen gradually increasing in speed till you can no longer read it. With lightboost off I could only get to about level 7. With it on I could get to about 18. The difference in clarity was insane!
Watching this video on youtube, then download the software in the description and run it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzYZWbov8v4
The biggest downside though for lightboost, especially on the VG248QE are the colors that result. Poor contrast ratio and not as bright. I've heard that the LG 24GM77-B 144Hz, has a very good built in lightboost implementation and contrast ratio is only ~10% worse with lightboost on.
I use lightboost on my Asus VG248QE. I've heard people say that lightboost increases input lag, however I've not noticed any difference, and one could argue that the slight increase in possible input latency is made up by the reduction in motion blur. What I have noticed is a significant reduction of screen tearing.
If you'd like to experience the difference in a tangible benchmark situation, I would highly recommend downloading a program called PixPerAn, which is a benchmark for screen tearing and refresh rates. Basically text fly's by on the screen gradually increasing in speed till you can no longer read it. With lightboost off I could only get to about level 7. With it on I could get to about 18. The difference in clarity was insane!
Watching this video on youtube, then download the software in the description and run it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzYZWbov8v4
The biggest downside though for lightboost, especially on the VG248QE are the colors that result. Poor contrast ratio and not as bright. I've heard that the LG 24GM77-B 144Hz, has a very good built in lightboost implementation and contrast ratio is only ~10% worse with lightboost on.
If you'd like to experience the difference in a tangible benchmark situation, I would highly recommend downloading a program called PixPerAn, which is a benchmark for screen tearing and refresh rates. Basically text fly's by on the screen gradually increasing in speed till you can no longer read it. With lightboost off I could only get to about level 7. With it on I could get to about 18. The difference in clarity was insane!
Watching this video on youtube, then download the software in the description and run it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzYZWbov8v4
The biggest downside though for lightboost, especially on the VG248QE are the colors that result. Poor contrast ratio and not as bright. I've heard that the LG 24GM77-B 144Hz, has a very good built in lightboost implementation and contrast ratio is only ~10% worse with lightboost on.
I'll keep posting this until everyone gets it.
http://www.blurbusters.com/zero-motion-blur/lightboost-faq/
LightBoost does increase input lag by half a frame.
Since input lag for top edge of screen can vary from bottom edge, and strobe backlights give interesting behaviors — For the average ASUS/BENQ 120Hz LightBoost screen, non-LightBoost TOP/CENTER/BOTTOM is 3ms/7ms/11ms while LightBoost TOP/CENTER/BOTTOM is 11ms/11ms/11ms. This averages out to half a frame added input lag (3ms -> 7ms) with LightBoost.
HOWEVER… The elimination of motion blur actually can improve human reaction times in situations where you are tracking eyes on moving objects all over the screen. The lack of motion blur reduces human reaction time significantly enough to more than outweigh the extra input latency, especially for FPS gaming and many others. Check out the improved BattleField 3 scores with LightBoost as an example as how increased input lag doesn’t necessarily mean worse scores. Unless you play in a very bright room at daytime, the loss of brightness will hurt your game more.
Players that stare stationary only at crosshairs at all times even during strafing/turning (no eye movements away from crosshairs), will not benefit much (if any) from LightBoost. But if you track your eyes (e.g. http://www.testufo.com/eyetracking when turning ON/OFF LightBoost), eye tracking creates display motion blur that makes it harder to track moving objects, slowing down your reaction time for these situations.
The question is very person specific: Deciding if LightBoost benefits outweigh the very tiny input lag it adds (half a frame – 4ms). It definitely does for many people, but not necessarily for everyone and every game. For example, it will benefit fast FPS far more than, say, World of Warcraft.
And obviously, your game needs to run at triple-digit frame rates in order to really benefit from strobe backlights (because you want framerate matching stroberate for maximum motion quality). If you are running at slow frame rates such as 30fps or 60fps, you won’t really see the benefits of LightBoost, and will prefer to disable the strobing. You won’t get the similar TestUFO benefits in your game in that case. However, when the game run at consistent 120fps, and you’re using a really good and smooth gaming mouse (mouse movement becomes as smooth as keyboard strafing movements), the clarity improvement become massive (similar to TestUFO).
tl;dr
If you only stare at the crosshair (e.g. CS) it does add input lag.
If you believe in peripheral vision it does add input lag but decreases reaction time. This is why you'd want to use lightboost. Also if you don't believe in peripheral vision you should set the fov as low as possible to make aiming easier, you're not looking at anything except your crosshair anyway, right? So I don't really see it as a tradeoff between motion blur and input lag, more as a tradeoff between motion blur and colours/contrast/etc.
120/144Hz panels have worse colours than 60Hz panels.
Lightboost capable panels have worse colours than "normal" 120/144Hz panels.
Enabling lightboost will make the colours/contrast/etc. even worse. It will also reduce brightness but I'm not sure why you'd need >120cd/m² anyway.
If you care about colours buying a lightboost capable panel and then complaining that lightboost makes it worse makes no sense. You've entered the shit colours territory when you bought a lightboost panel, not using LB won't save you. Not buying a monitor with an LB panel in the first place would've been the right course of action.
I'll keep posting this until everyone gets it.
http://www.blurbusters.com/zero-motion-blur/lightboost-faq/
[quote]LightBoost does increase input lag by half a frame.
Since input lag for top edge of screen can vary from bottom edge, and strobe backlights give interesting behaviors — For the average ASUS/BENQ 120Hz LightBoost screen, non-LightBoost TOP/CENTER/BOTTOM is 3ms/7ms/11ms while LightBoost TOP/CENTER/BOTTOM is 11ms/11ms/11ms. This averages out to half a frame added input lag (3ms -> 7ms) with LightBoost.
HOWEVER… The elimination of motion blur actually can improve human reaction times in situations where you are tracking eyes on moving objects all over the screen. The lack of motion blur reduces human reaction time significantly enough to more than outweigh the extra input latency, especially for FPS gaming and many others. Check out the improved BattleField 3 scores with LightBoost as an example as how increased input lag doesn’t necessarily mean worse scores. Unless you play in a very bright room at daytime, the loss of brightness will hurt your game more.
Players that stare stationary only at crosshairs at all times even during strafing/turning (no eye movements away from crosshairs), will not benefit much (if any) from LightBoost. But if you track your eyes (e.g. http://www.testufo.com/eyetracking when turning ON/OFF LightBoost), eye tracking creates display motion blur that makes it harder to track moving objects, slowing down your reaction time for these situations.
The question is very person specific: Deciding if LightBoost benefits outweigh the very tiny input lag it adds (half a frame – 4ms). It definitely does for many people, but not necessarily for everyone and every game. For example, it will benefit fast FPS far more than, say, World of Warcraft.
And obviously, your game needs to run at triple-digit frame rates in order to really benefit from strobe backlights (because you want framerate matching stroberate for maximum motion quality). If you are running at slow frame rates such as 30fps or 60fps, you won’t really see the benefits of LightBoost, and will prefer to disable the strobing. You won’t get the similar TestUFO benefits in your game in that case. However, when the game run at consistent 120fps, and you’re using a really good and smooth gaming mouse (mouse movement becomes as smooth as keyboard strafing movements), the clarity improvement become massive (similar to TestUFO).
[/quote]
[b]tl;dr[/b]
If you only stare at the crosshair (e.g. CS) it does add input lag.
If you believe in peripheral vision it does add input lag but [b]decreases[/b] reaction time. This is why you'd want to use lightboost. Also if you don't believe in peripheral vision you should set the fov as low as possible to make aiming easier, you're not looking at anything except your crosshair anyway, right? So I don't really see it as a tradeoff between motion blur and input lag, more as a tradeoff between motion blur and colours/contrast/etc.
120/144Hz panels have worse colours than 60Hz panels.
Lightboost capable panels have worse colours than "normal" 120/144Hz panels.
Enabling lightboost will make the colours/contrast/etc. even worse. It will also reduce brightness but I'm not sure why you'd need >120cd/m² anyway.
If you care about colours buying a lightboost capable panel and then complaining that lightboost makes it worse makes no sense. You've entered the shit colours territory when you bought a lightboost panel, not using LB won't save you. Not buying a monitor with an LB panel in the first place would've been the right course of action.
http://www.blurbusters.com/zero-motion-blur/lightboost-faq/
[quote]LightBoost does increase input lag by half a frame.
Since input lag for top edge of screen can vary from bottom edge, and strobe backlights give interesting behaviors — For the average ASUS/BENQ 120Hz LightBoost screen, non-LightBoost TOP/CENTER/BOTTOM is 3ms/7ms/11ms while LightBoost TOP/CENTER/BOTTOM is 11ms/11ms/11ms. This averages out to half a frame added input lag (3ms -> 7ms) with LightBoost.
HOWEVER… The elimination of motion blur actually can improve human reaction times in situations where you are tracking eyes on moving objects all over the screen. The lack of motion blur reduces human reaction time significantly enough to more than outweigh the extra input latency, especially for FPS gaming and many others. Check out the improved BattleField 3 scores with LightBoost as an example as how increased input lag doesn’t necessarily mean worse scores. Unless you play in a very bright room at daytime, the loss of brightness will hurt your game more.
Players that stare stationary only at crosshairs at all times even during strafing/turning (no eye movements away from crosshairs), will not benefit much (if any) from LightBoost. But if you track your eyes (e.g. http://www.testufo.com/eyetracking when turning ON/OFF LightBoost), eye tracking creates display motion blur that makes it harder to track moving objects, slowing down your reaction time for these situations.
The question is very person specific: Deciding if LightBoost benefits outweigh the very tiny input lag it adds (half a frame – 4ms). It definitely does for many people, but not necessarily for everyone and every game. For example, it will benefit fast FPS far more than, say, World of Warcraft.
And obviously, your game needs to run at triple-digit frame rates in order to really benefit from strobe backlights (because you want framerate matching stroberate for maximum motion quality). If you are running at slow frame rates such as 30fps or 60fps, you won’t really see the benefits of LightBoost, and will prefer to disable the strobing. You won’t get the similar TestUFO benefits in your game in that case. However, when the game run at consistent 120fps, and you’re using a really good and smooth gaming mouse (mouse movement becomes as smooth as keyboard strafing movements), the clarity improvement become massive (similar to TestUFO).
[/quote]
[b]tl;dr[/b]
If you only stare at the crosshair (e.g. CS) it does add input lag.
If you believe in peripheral vision it does add input lag but [b]decreases[/b] reaction time. This is why you'd want to use lightboost. Also if you don't believe in peripheral vision you should set the fov as low as possible to make aiming easier, you're not looking at anything except your crosshair anyway, right? So I don't really see it as a tradeoff between motion blur and input lag, more as a tradeoff between motion blur and colours/contrast/etc.
120/144Hz panels have worse colours than 60Hz panels.
Lightboost capable panels have worse colours than "normal" 120/144Hz panels.
Enabling lightboost will make the colours/contrast/etc. even worse. It will also reduce brightness but I'm not sure why you'd need >120cd/m² anyway.
If you care about colours buying a lightboost capable panel and then complaining that lightboost makes it worse makes no sense. You've entered the shit colours territory when you bought a lightboost panel, not using LB won't save you. Not buying a monitor with an LB panel in the first place would've been the right course of action.
Please
sign in through STEAM
to post a comment.