Originally Posted by brightbus
It is real 120. Not native, but its not the stuff tvs use to get 120.
I meant it isn't the same as 120Hz on the TN's I've tried. For me, that cast some doubt as to whether it was real 120Hz or not (a member from another forum frequently explains how pixels using IPS technology can't physically switch fast enough to support 120Hz, now that I've tried an OC 120Hz Korean, I'm actually inclined to agree with him - could be wrong though)
Originally Posted by Spartan F8
I would not say it is very blurry compared to others. Maybe "very" blurry compared to other 120hz panels WITH lightboost. I have used this side by side with TN 120hz panels and the difference to me is marginal but when lightboost is turned on it does make a big difference. I think everyone needs to expect what they are getting even if they reach 120hz it will only be as good as 120hz and due to the type of panel it may be a slight bit lower quality in terms of motion blur(definitely not a huge difference though). And yes without a scaler you hardly seeing any input lag or ghosting.
EDIT: Also a 670 with 2GB should be plenty to get good framerate with 1440p@120hz with most games
The difference without lightboost is indeed not as significant as when using lightboost (like with both the QNIX and a non-lb TN, you can't focus on moving objects very well - whereas with lb you obviously can); but still I personally can see the difference in terms of how fast you can move before you see blur. Also the blur on the QNIX is quite unique (see below). I tested this mainly on the mouse cursor, moving it about and seeing how it blurred depending on the speed of motion, because the cursor stands out massively and is easy to focus on.
Originally Posted by MenacingTuba The Qnix's pixel response times are essentially the Same as the 970D's "Normal" setting
. I know since I own both. The Qnix/X-Star do not have a 17ms signal delay, it's more like 5-7ms like the other signal input 1440p models PRAD reviewed (HP ZR27440W & Hazro HW27C..the Achieva Shimian is a re-branded Hazro),vs. Asus VG248QE @60hz Trace Free 60
PRAD only measured the Trace Free 100 setting for some reason @120-144hz even though it is useless on the VG248QE due to extreme overshoot ghosting. The pixel response times @144hz may be 1-2ms faster at maximum vs. the 60hz Trace Free 60.
Has anyone tested the pixel response of the QNIX overclocked at 120Hz?
Anyway, what I know for certain is that at 120Hz when comparing the BenQ XL2411T (aka akin to a VG248QE) to the QNIX directly, there are some interesting effects: when moving the cursor around on the QNIX, above a certain speed (that is actually not very fast) the cursor pixels blended into each other in a very particular example of blur - not just standard motion blur like you would get on the XL2411T when moving really fast, but nearby pixels actually fused and streaked colours. This happened even at a pretty low motion speed on the QNIX. With the TN's, the motion blur only occurs at speeds a step higher, and as far as I can see you definitely don't get such strange streaking - it's more "normal" uniform blur which manifests as fuzzy edges.
This led me to conclude that 120Hz on the QNIX is far from the same smoothness as on TN panels. The effect is harder to realise in full screen games and such because you are looking at the scene as a whole. When concentrating on a mouse cursor on a uniform background however, the contrast is pretty clear-cut and I could easily see the horrible streaking blur.
Is there a difference between the blur of TN's and the blur on the QNIX? I am certain there is. Does this make a difference in use? Well I think so. Didn't do extensive testing in games though, fired up a shooter and played for a while, confirmed that I couldn't focus on anything when panning the camera, and that was basically it.