Originally Posted by Mand12
That's fine enough to want it, but are you willing to accept the change in average luminance that frame-by-frame strobe interval adjustment will cause?
Benq blur reduction and Lightboost were not affected by this.
Benq blur reduction I think actually used some of the logic from the internal lightboost hardware and modified it so you could adjust the phase. Found out since the older non blur reduction T/TE series monitors would accept a Vertical Total VT 1502, which we used on the later blur reduction monitors to lower the amount of strobe crosstalk. And VT 1502 was the highest vertical total the monitors would recognize (VT 1503 was black screen out of range), and you could even create higher custom resolutions (higher than the native 1920x1080) IF those custom resolutions would accept a vertical total between 1497-1502. 2560x1440 would accept such a VT, but only refresh rates from 61-100hz would work for it (60hz would black screen, because VT 1502 won't even work on the Z series blur reduction monitors at 60hz (The max was 1350 or 1260, I forgot) but would at 61 hz. But anyway it seemed like Lightboost mode was sending the VT 1502 signal to the monitor scaler to give it the lowest amount of crosstalk possible. But I'm getting off topic...
Lightboost mode and benq blur reduction mode both *increased* the current to the backlight LEDs from the default current, to compensate for the decrease in luminance from strobing. So you could use benq blur reduction and still have a nice bright screen, if you raised the strobe duty up to lower the amount of blur reduction.
ULMB mode does NOT increase the current to the backlight at all, so the screen is noticeably dimmer with it on. This was one of the first complaints about ULMB that people noticed on the Asus VG248QE Gsync modules. ULMB also has more strobe crosstalk than Lightboost or benq blur reduction (with VT 1500 tweak).
*Edit* Just found some old posts complaining about ULMB on the swift looking worse than lightboost or benq blur reduction looked (except the colors being better in ULMB vs Lightboost). Wow I see now why you guys don't like ULMB.
I didn't realize ULMB was a step back quality wise (from lightboost).
*Edit* found some more pics. Definitely NOT getting a ULMB monitor now. I'm sticking with benq blur reduction.
Lightboost bottom of screen
ULMB bottom. MUCH WORSE!!!!!Edited by Falkentyne - 9/22/15 at 10:31am