Zero motion blur, amazing!!!

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Spinelli, Feb 18, 2013.

  1. DrR1pper

    DrR1pper Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2012
    Messages:
    3,294
    Likes Received:
    35
    The ToastyX (somehow) makes it possible to enable lightboost permanently without having to select "Enable stereoscopic 3D" in the nvidia control panel. This makes a selection of 100hz, 110hz and 120hz refresh rate resolutions that when used on your desktop or in-game will auto-enable lightboost mode and most importantly, completely bypass the need to have the 3D vision drivers working in the background (which would otherwise still be running even when your hide the stereoscopic with Ctrl+T in-game) causing at least a 10% fps/performance loss.

    It was my understanding that any refresh rate between 100-120hz would switch on lightboost but turns out you can have non-lightboost at 119hz using the ToastyX and setting a "smaller Vertical Total such as 1125 instead of 1149" as described by mdrejhon (don't ask me why that works lol). The reason for adding this non-lightboost 119hz option is so that lightboost will auto-disabled when i leave a game and return to the desktop. Alternatively without ToastyX i could have chosen the next non-lightboost refresh rate for my desktop use, but that would be 60hz. The difference between 60 and 120 can even be noticed in desktop use.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 30, 2013
  2. Spinelli

    Spinelli Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    5,290
    Likes Received:
    31
    Ohhhhhh so you don't even have to have the computer thinking it's running in 3D mode anymore, that's great, definitely improves frames, and probably input lag too!

    I always thought that 3D mode killed frames by about 50%, regardless of how low or high those frames might be. Glad to hear it's not that high.
     
  3. DrR1pper

    DrR1pper Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2012
    Messages:
    3,294
    Likes Received:
    35
    Yes, displaying in stereoscopic 3D causes a 50% fps decrease but when you then Ctrl+T it only hides the stereoscopic effect with some 3D processes still running in the background (in case you want to instantly revert back to 3D i guess). Just hiding it takes the fps decrease down to only 10%...but depending on what your playing, that 10% can mean the difference betweem playable and non-playable.
     
  4. mdrejhon

    mdrejhon Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2013
    Messages:
    31
    Likes Received:
    0
    That's correct. Methods similiar to this also made possible 3-monitor portrait LightBoost setups, like This 3-monitor Quad Titan SLI LightBoost Setup (By Vega on HardForum / CallSignVega on OCN). This was formerly impossible, because nVidia does not support 3D Vision in portrait mode, but LightBoost zero motion blur works fine regardless of monitor orientiation.

    He got Crysis 3 running at 120fps@120Hz on THREE SURROUND monitors :D

     
  5. mdrejhon

    mdrejhon Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2013
    Messages:
    31
    Likes Received:
    0
  6. DrR1pper

    DrR1pper Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2012
    Messages:
    3,294
    Likes Received:
    35
  7. Spinelli

    Spinelli Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    5,290
    Likes Received:
    31
    I will too
     
  8. KeiKei

    KeiKei Registered

    Joined:
    May 24, 2012
    Messages:
    806
    Likes Received:
    44
    Thanks guys. Yes it seems to be working but unfortunately not on dev mode (which is the only mode I'm currently using because don't have time to play more). However I'm still on old build so maybe it works on new dev mode.
     
  9. DrR1pper

    DrR1pper Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2012
    Messages:
    3,294
    Likes Received:
    35
    That's a shame, so did you revert to default then? Btw, it doesn't work in some games for me immediately, i have to go into settings and change the refresh rate from 120hz to 119hz and then back to 120hz and then lightboost kicks in. rFactor2 seems to be perfectly fine though. Although it can be a little more inconvinience at times, i'd take it over the 10% performance loss i was getting before using this method. Perhaps you didn't have the same issue i had before (of being previously unable to engage lightboost without going through 3d?).
     
  10. KeiKei

    KeiKei Registered

    Joined:
    May 24, 2012
    Messages:
    806
    Likes Received:
    44
    2D LightBoost was working fine but then I believe nVidia drivers got auto-updated and LB stopped working. Now it works again with this new method except on dev mode (game crashes). However now that I think of it it's probably because dev mode was set to 144 Hz and didn't remember to set that mode to ToastyX so there is no information for dev mode about that resolution/refresh rate. :) Have to check it some day...
     
  11. mdrejhon

    mdrejhon Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2013
    Messages:
    31
    Likes Received:
    0
    Adding 144Hz back is quite easy with ToastyX -- just change to "Reduced" from "Auto", and adding back 144Hz is easy.

    It also makes it easy to turn on/off LightBoost (switch to 120Hz to turn on LightBoost, switch to 144Hz to turn off LightBoost).
     
  12. Spinelli

    Spinelli Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    5,290
    Likes Received:
    31
    Ok guys its time for me to finally purchase 3 low input lag, Lightboost capable, minimum 120hz Monitors. So far it seems the 3 best are the following 3, and I am having a real hard time deciding which one to get. They are as follows:

    1) BenQ XL2411T
    2) Asus VG248QE
    3) Asus VG278H

    BenQ XL2411T
    Positives
    - Probably, but not for sure, has the lowest input lag of all (I usually hear 2 - 3.5 ms)
    - Supposedly has better colour reproduction and black levels than the Asus VG248QE (they are both supposedly pretty washed out though, compared to many other monitors, this is part of what is allowing for such low input lag + 1ms response times, which is wayyyyyy more important to me than colour, however the BenQ is supposedly a bit better than the Asus 24 in terms of colours/blacks)
    Negatives
    - Many reports indicating the BenQ has an overly aggressive amount of overdrive (even on its less aggressive "high mode") which contributes to inverse/reverse ghosting :(

    Asus VG248QE
    Positives

    - Doesnt seem to suffer the inverse/reverse ghosting problems that some report noticing on the BenQ.
    - If it doesnt have as low input lag as the BenQ, then its at least very close to it.
    Negatives
    - Like I stated above, both the BenQ 24 and Asus 24 are supposedly washed out in colour reproduction and black levels compared to many other LCDs, albeit much slower, less gaming oriented LCDs. However, the Asus is apparently even slightly more washed out than the BenQ. The Benq also apparently pulls away another little bit ahead after both have been properly calibrated.
    - This isnt exactly a negative, as im not sure, but I always read that the BenQ is the #1 for low input lag + lightboost, only sometimes do they mention both the Asus and BenQ being tied, but I never see people only mentioning the Asus. So maybe the Asus does perform just slightly worse????

    Asus VG278H
    Positives

    - Much bigger, allowing me to use a higher in-game FOV getting more side and vertical visibility, while keeping the actual size of everything in the game, relative to me, the same size due to the increased screen size.
    Negatives
    - 2ms rated response time instead of the 1ms of the other 2 24 inchers. This can, and most likely will lead to crosstalk in Lightboost mode.
    - Most input lag of the 3, however, I still consider it between "low" and "pretty low" as I have seen figures between 5.5 and 7.5 ms floating around the web.

    If it wasnt for the larger screen size of the Asus 27, id obviously just be considering the Asus and BenQ 24s, but the larger screen is just tempting me, even though I know the combination of 2ms instead of 1ms, and 5.5-7.5 ms input lag, instead of 2-4ish will make a difference, even more so when lightboost is enabled.

    Final thoughts
    - I am leaning towards the 2 24s due to pure performance. I currently have a 23 inch, sure I wont be going too much larger (its always nice going larger when you invest in a new screen), but I actually will still be gaining 1 inch. So I would still be going a little larger, and you can notice the 1 inch difference.
    - Out of the 2 24s I was leaning heavily towards the BenQ because despite the inverse ghosting, it seems to be ALWAYS mentioned as the very, very best in terms of input lag and lightboost. However, on paper, the Asus is also 1ms, also very, very low input lag, plus doesnt suffer the inverse ghosting. So isnt the Asus just as amazing as the BenQ, but even better, because of the no inverse ghosting??? I just find it suspicious how people in low input lag + lightboost forum discussions always mention the BenQ, but they only sometimes also mention the Asus along with it. Maybe the BenQ does perform slightly better in low inout lag + lightboost situations, even though the Asus is identical #s wise (plus no inverse ghosting, unlike the BenQ)???

    Hmmmmmmm...........
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 12, 2013
  13. smithaz

    smithaz Registered

    Joined:
    May 3, 2012
    Messages:
    272
    Likes Received:
    1
    I am pretty much in the same boat as you Spinelli. At first I was looking at the VG278HE but have ruled that out due to the ghosting, the VG278H looks like a good alternative but the price difference is excessive and I don't think I can justify spending that much more just to achieve acceptable standards, If the H was at the price point of the HE then it would be a no brainer. And now just to confuse things an ASUS VG278HR has appeared on some websites, whats the deal with that!? It seems like the main difference is that the HR does 144hz but perhaps that is because it uses the same panel as the HE which would be no good. Will need to wait for some proper benchmarks and reviews for that.
    I don't know if it would be possible for me to go as low as 24" being used using a 32" TV as I do at the moment. It seems though that the 24" 3d monitors market is more mature than 27" as the prices are much more reasonable.
    I think I am going to have to wait and see what happens to prices for 27" models, hopefully the price comes down sometime soon, or 2nd gen versions are superior enough to be worth the spend.
     
  14. smithaz

    smithaz Registered

    Joined:
    May 3, 2012
    Messages:
    272
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ive gone and ordered an XL2411T on a whim. It should be here tomorrow, il let you know what its like.
     
  15. Bart S

    Bart S Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    850
    Likes Received:
    99
    U won't be dissapointed with the Benq you can find very good colour settings for rf2 and blacks r good to tune. I get crosstalk in 3d but it is very negligible you really have too look for it. The panel really has a stupid amount of setting enough to find your perfected setting. Be warned sit at the slightest off angle from centre and colours are the worst I seen. Love this monitor tho especially since nvidia new driver and 3d mode works flawless before it had a problem with light boost switching mode. It is the same hardware as the Asus so only processing different which ever you can find cheaper buy that.
     
  16. Bart S

    Bart S Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    850
    Likes Received:
    99
    Spinelli your over analysing it just buy the Benq if its cheaper for you. you would need a very fast camera in identical situation to compare any difference u find.
    Smithaz just put your small ass 24incher closer to your eyes = 32inches
     
  17. Spinelli

    Spinelli Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    5,290
    Likes Received:
    31
    Ur right Bart, they use the same panel, both have pretty much the same massively low input lag.

    Cheapest I seen the benq is 200 pounds which is about $315 U.S. (plus maybe shipping??). Cheapest I seen the asus is $265 U.S. with free shipping (amazon.com). So they both have the same panel, same/extremely close performance, however the asus is quite a bit cheaper here in North America, plus I don't hear about the inverse ghosting like I do with the benq, So ir seems like a no brainer to me. The Asus. Oh and I wad wrong before; the asus is very popular.
     
  18. Bart S

    Bart S Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    850
    Likes Received:
    99
    well over here in the uk the cost difference is ASUS = £281 BENQ = £225 that is both VAT inc, niether panel is perfect but nothing else comes close to the performance of these even at this price they are really a no brainer if it comes to FPS or even 3D. IMHO these are the cheapest major hardware upgrade for gaming and should be first on the list of second time round pc upgrades.
    Now I just gotta get 2 more for 3D triple screen ouch the cost £675 and then my GTX680 will not cope, I hope nVidia bring out a GTX880 next year that was revolutionary like the 8800GTX was.

    Oh an BTW if your on nVidia, but I dont think you are, I still highly recommend 3D rF2 is truely awesome in 3D.

    Next decision T500rs or CSW hhhmmmmm.
     
  19. Jos

    Jos Registered

    Joined:
    May 9, 2012
    Messages:
    198
    Likes Received:
    4
    Hell no, even a 27 inch feels small compared to a 32".
     
  20. DrR1pper

    DrR1pper Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2012
    Messages:
    3,294
    Likes Received:
    35
    I agree (though from when i went from 24 to 27).

    Yes, bringing closer makes it bigger to you but if your like me and can never get it close enough, bigger is the only next solution.
     

Share This Page