Asus VG248QE, VG278HE & HR, BenQ XL270T checkerboard-pattern in 3D-mode (no FullHD per Frame)
  9 / 12    
[quote="D-Man11"]How da faq did you assume he was talking about this monitor problem. The word 3DTVs should have clued you in he was asking about the 3D Format. I think you do not know what you are talking about.[/quote]I'm very well aware of the checkerboard format of 3DTV, versus the checkerboard artifact of LCD inversion (as seen on Lagom and Techmind), are two separate topics. I apologize if people are interchangeably talking about one or the other. That can get confusing, as the OP is [u]obviously[/u] talking about the monitor problem. (Note: I'm the owner of Blur Busters).
D-Man11 said:How da faq did you assume he was talking about this monitor problem. The word 3DTVs should have clued you in he was asking about the 3D Format. I think you do not know what you are talking about.
I'm very well aware of the checkerboard format of 3DTV, versus the checkerboard artifact of LCD inversion (as seen on Lagom and Techmind), are two separate topics.

I apologize if people are interchangeably talking about one or the other. That can get confusing, as the OP is obviously talking about the monitor problem.

(Note: I'm the owner of Blur Busters).

Posted 08/28/2013 07:35 PM   
It sounds to me like he knows exactly what he's talking about. This thread is all about the strange checkerboard pattern that a lot of us have been observing.
It sounds to me like he knows exactly what he's talking about. This thread is all about the strange checkerboard pattern that a lot of us have been observing.

GTX 1070 SLI, I7-6700k ~ 4.4Ghz, 3x BenQ XL2420T, BenQ TK800, LG 55EG960V (3D OLED), Samsung 850 EVO SSD, Crucial M4 SSD, 3D vision kit, Xpand x104 glasses, Corsair HX1000i, Win 10 pro 64/Win 7 64https://www.3dmark.com/fs/9529310

Posted 08/28/2013 08:57 PM   
My reference to him not knowing what he was talking about is clearly in response to his saying I had no idea what I was talking about when I replied to Flugan. When Flugan was clearly asking about Checkerboard as a format. As he clearly states above, he was easily confused.
My reference to him not knowing what he was talking about is clearly in response to his saying I had no idea what I was talking about when I replied to Flugan. When Flugan was clearly asking about Checkerboard as a format.

As he clearly states above, he was easily confused.

Posted 08/28/2013 09:22 PM   
Again, I already admitted/apologized -- I got confused on that ONE reply :-) I've already added an edit to the confused reply. "[EDIT: I see the confusion. I'm addressing the OP's original topic, when someone else legitimately asked about other 3D formats. The LCD inversion artifact (checkerboard artifact) I'm referring to, also occurs on some non-3D LCD's too as well, according to tests]" 'nuff said. And yes, I do know about various 3D formats (frame-sequential, side-by-side, checkerboard, etc). Sometimes I miss the days when I was tinkering with my NEC XG135LC CRT projector -- a >100 pound beast. I often played at 120Hz back in year 1999. I also had an ASUS V7700 Geforce2 GTS with 3D Glasses (30Hz/30Hz per eye), which worked wonderfully in those days.
Again, I already admitted/apologized -- I got confused on that ONE reply :-)
I've already added an edit to the confused reply. "[EDIT: I see the confusion. I'm addressing the OP's original topic, when someone else legitimately asked about other 3D formats. The LCD inversion artifact (checkerboard artifact) I'm referring to, also occurs on some non-3D LCD's too as well, according to tests]"

'nuff said.

And yes, I do know about various 3D formats (frame-sequential, side-by-side, checkerboard, etc). Sometimes I miss the days when I was tinkering with my NEC XG135LC CRT projector -- a >100 pound beast. I often played at 120Hz back in year 1999. I also had an ASUS V7700 Geforce2 GTS with 3D Glasses (30Hz/30Hz per eye), which worked wonderfully in those days.

Posted 08/29/2013 02:36 AM   
Dear mdrejhon, thank you very much for your explanations. They were very helpful for me. The LCD inversion totally explains the observed checkerboard. It is the synchronization between the voltage inversion and the shutter glasses that causes the visible artifacts. A possible fix would be to invert the voltage after every second frame only, if the monitor is in 120Hz 3D mode. I don't know, if this could be done by a monitor firmware update. I can confirm that this problem exists also on the Acer GD235HZ monitor, although much less pronounced than in the picture of the original post. I ordered a BenQ XL2720T before reading this forum post and was really concerned about it. I hope that the BenQ XL2720T which probably arrives today does not show this artifacts. Best regards
Dear mdrejhon,

thank you very much for your explanations. They were very helpful for me. The LCD inversion totally explains the observed checkerboard. It is the synchronization between the voltage inversion and the shutter glasses that causes the visible artifacts. A possible fix would be to invert the voltage after every second frame only, if the monitor is in 120Hz 3D mode. I don't know, if this could be done by a monitor firmware update.

I can confirm that this problem exists also on the Acer GD235HZ monitor, although much less pronounced than in the picture of the original post.

I ordered a BenQ XL2720T before reading this forum post and was really concerned about it. I hope that the BenQ XL2720T which probably arrives today does not show this artifacts.

Best regards

Posted 08/29/2013 07:18 AM   
I've noticed that some monitors such as the VG278H automatically switch voltage inversion patterns when it detects an imbalance. [b]TEST PATTERN #1[/b] For example, when viewing the Inversion Uniformity Test: [url=http://www.testufo.com/#test=inversion&pattern=uniformity]www.testufo.com/#test=inversion&pattern=uniformity[/url] - Use a 120Hz-friendly browser such as Google Chrome, Opera 15+, or FireFox Beta 24+. - View this test pattern in a small browser window on VG278H (1/5th screen width). - View this test pattern in maximized mode. Pattern behaves differently on VG278H than VG248QE/VG278HE. - Minimize/unminimize window after resizing. This sometimes causes changes on VG278H, but no change on VG248QE/VG278HE. - You may see different false-color patterns (green/purple) show up in the 100% monochrome test pattern. [b]TEST PATTERN #2[/b] Also a really interesting behaviour occurs with this: [url=http://www.testufo.com/#test=inversion&pattern=distortion]www.testufo.com/#test=inversion&pattern=distortion[/url] - Try slowly dragging around browser window for weird artifacts. - Try slowing down and speeding up - Try enabling/disabling LightBoost (turn on/off 3D Stereoscopic) But the XL2411T, VG248QE and VG278HE doesn't behave the same, sometimes the green/purple fake color is more consistent. So it seems voltage inversion behaviour is very different between different 120Hz panels.
I've noticed that some monitors such as the VG278H automatically switch voltage inversion patterns when it detects an imbalance.

TEST PATTERN #1
For example, when viewing the Inversion Uniformity Test:
www.testufo.com/#test=inversion&pattern=uniformity
- Use a 120Hz-friendly browser such as Google Chrome, Opera 15+, or FireFox Beta 24+.
- View this test pattern in a small browser window on VG278H (1/5th screen width).
- View this test pattern in maximized mode. Pattern behaves differently on VG278H than VG248QE/VG278HE.
- Minimize/unminimize window after resizing. This sometimes causes changes on VG278H, but no change on VG248QE/VG278HE.
- You may see different false-color patterns (green/purple) show up in the 100% monochrome test pattern.

TEST PATTERN #2
Also a really interesting behaviour occurs with this:
www.testufo.com/#test=inversion&pattern=distortion
- Try slowly dragging around browser window for weird artifacts.
- Try slowing down and speeding up
- Try enabling/disabling LightBoost (turn on/off 3D Stereoscopic)

But the XL2411T, VG248QE and VG278HE doesn't behave the same, sometimes the green/purple fake color is more consistent. So it seems voltage inversion behaviour is very different between different 120Hz panels.

Posted 08/29/2013 06:32 PM   
Hi, first of all @mdrejhon thank u very much for describing us includin me the problem that i have been wondering for some time since i got my VG78HR monitor. The main thing that i have been wondering is exactly that "micro-checkerboard net" that had occurred from time to time so heavily when i have been playing games in 3D mode. Sometime when some game crashes while 3D-mode is enabled i get back to the desktop and my 2D image still does show that "micro-checkerboard". So only OS restart did helped then. I took the test with "bars" while Lightboost is enabled thru ur wonderful software which is enabling Lightboost in 2D mode and results can be viewed in picture below. So if that is correct that we have defective monitors we really need some official statement from manufactures to process our RMA's further. But the main problem with this is that most likely manufactures wont give any official statement cuz they will loose a pile of money and someone will definitely get fired or some similar phenom will happen in their lines. At least ASUS VG278 series are with 3 year warranty so at least we could wait new models on a market and maybe then something could lead ppl to change those monitors with defect to something new and properly working one's. The image is taken with CANON EOS 600D ( shutter 1/50 ) [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/97UYJEp.jpg[/IMG] Once again thank u very much! Your work and information here is very much appreciated. //Thug
Hi,

first of all @mdrejhon thank u very much for describing us includin me the problem that i have been wondering for some time since i got my VG78HR monitor. The main thing that i have been wondering is exactly that "micro-checkerboard net" that had occurred from time to time so heavily when i have been playing games in 3D mode. Sometime when some game crashes while 3D-mode is enabled i get back to the desktop and my 2D image still does show that "micro-checkerboard". So only OS restart did helped then.

I took the test with "bars" while Lightboost is enabled thru ur wonderful software which is enabling Lightboost in 2D mode and results can be viewed in picture below.

So if that is correct that we have defective monitors we really need some official statement from manufactures to process our RMA's further. But the main problem with this is that most likely manufactures wont give any official statement cuz they will loose a pile of money and someone will definitely get fired or some similar phenom will happen in their lines.

At least ASUS VG278 series are with 3 year warranty so at least we could wait new models on a market and maybe then something could lead ppl to change those monitors with defect to something new and properly working one's.

The image is taken with CANON EOS 600D ( shutter 1/50 )

Image

Once again thank u very much! Your work and information here is very much appreciated.

//Thug

HW:
i7 3770K @ 4.6Hz on ASUS MAXIMUS V FORMULA together with G.Skill F3-2400C10D-8GTX
ASUS GTX 980ti DirectCU III in SLI paired with ASUS ROG Swift on DP 1.2
Rig is powered by Corsair AX850W
OS: Win8.1 Pro 64bit
Always on latest Gforce Drivers :)

Posted 08/30/2013 12:11 AM   
Some observations on the Acer GD235HZ and BenQ XL2720T. Yesterday my new BenQ XL2720T arrived and I used the opportunity to compare it with my old Acer GD235HZ. While doing this I mainly focused on the checkerboard artifacts. I used the NVidia setup tool for the comparison, especially the "Test your hardware setup" page with the green hexagons and the blue triangles. What I observed was that my old Acer GD235HZ showed the checkerboard all over the place. Even the non stereoscopic hexagons and triangles (below "2. Select which of the following you see:") showed the checkerboard pattern when viewing them through the 3D glasses. I perceived the darker parts of the checkerboard as approximately half as bright as the bright parts. The pattern was inverted when looking through either the left or the right glass. When looking at the non stereoscopic hexagons and triangles without glasses, the colors were smooth and uniform. This observation fits nicely to the effect of the synchronization between the voltage inversion and the shutter glasses. My BenQ XL2720T on the other hand did not show a checkerboard pattern on the non stereoscopic hexagons and triangles, but it shows a checkerboard pattern on the "ghosts" of the hexagons and triangles on the upper image. The checkerboard pattern is clearly connected to ghosting here. I suppose, that the response time is not equal for changes of the + and - voltages here, but that the voltage itself is well under control. Well it is much better than I expected when reading this forum. The ghosting on the BenQ XL2720T is much better and the image is very much brighter in stereo 3D than on the non light-boost Acer GD235HZ. Unfortunately there is still some ghosting left showing a checkerboard pattern, but I have to confess, that I didn't optimize my monitor settings in this respect yet. Best regards
Some observations on the Acer GD235HZ and BenQ XL2720T.

Yesterday my new BenQ XL2720T arrived and I used the opportunity to compare it with my old Acer GD235HZ. While doing this I mainly focused on the checkerboard artifacts. I used the NVidia setup tool for the comparison, especially the "Test your hardware setup" page with the green hexagons and the blue triangles.

What I observed was that my old Acer GD235HZ showed the checkerboard all over the place. Even the non stereoscopic hexagons and triangles (below "2. Select which of the following you see:") showed the checkerboard pattern when viewing them through the 3D glasses. I perceived the darker parts of the checkerboard as approximately half as bright as the bright parts. The pattern was inverted when looking through either the left or the right glass. When looking at the non stereoscopic hexagons and triangles without glasses, the colors were smooth and uniform.

This observation fits nicely to the effect of the synchronization between the voltage inversion and the shutter glasses.

My BenQ XL2720T on the other hand did not show a checkerboard pattern on the non stereoscopic hexagons and triangles, but it shows a checkerboard pattern on the "ghosts" of the hexagons and triangles on the upper image. The checkerboard pattern is clearly connected to ghosting here. I suppose, that the response time is not equal for changes of the + and - voltages here, but that the voltage itself is well under control.

Well it is much better than I expected when reading this forum. The ghosting on the BenQ XL2720T is much better and the image is very much brighter in stereo 3D than on the non light-boost Acer GD235HZ. Unfortunately there is still some ghosting left showing a checkerboard pattern, but I have to confess, that I didn't optimize my monitor settings in this respect yet.

Best regards

Posted 08/30/2013 10:23 AM   
[quote="Thug"]Sometime when some game crashes while 3D-mode is enabled i get back to the desktop and my 2D image still does show that "micro-checkerboard". So only OS restart did helped then.[/quote]Two possible reasons of this: (A) It's possible that's just because LightBoost is still enabled at the desktop. Your configuration may have normally turned off LightBoost when exiting games (e.g. non-stereoscopic Windows Desktop) but when the game crashed, LightBoost remained enabled (and its corresponding amplified appearance of LCD voltage inversion artifacts). Simply disabling LightBoost may cause it to all go back to normal. You can enable-disable the 3D stereoscopic checkbox to do this, without rebooting. (B) If you like to run stereoscopic / Lightboost (they're equivalent in 3D Vision 2 monitors) all the time, and the checkerboard artifact sometimes shows up and sometimes not, that may be because your display decided to switch inversion patterns (the VG278H has that behavior when viewing the Inversion Uniformity Test). It switches from a tall-pixel positive-negative checkerboard to a wide-pixel positive-negative checkerboard. [quote="Thug"]I took the test with "bars" while Lightboost is enabled thru ur wonderful software which is enabling Lightboost in 2D mode and results can be viewed in picture below.[/quote]Just to be clear, ToastyX gets the credit for the easy LightBoost utility, ToastyX Strobelight on your ASUS monitor. I'm the one who made Strobelight possible on BENQ monitors, however. But thanks for the compliment! [quote="Thug"]At least ASUS VG278 series are with 3 year warranty so at least we could wait new models on a market and maybe then something could lead ppl to change those monitors with defect to something new and properly working one's. [/quote]Voltage inversion is a necessity in LCD panels, according to the Techmind.org page. However, if the artifact is particularly intense (e.g. your friend's VG278HE doesn't have the artifact under the same circumstances), then it is a legitimate warranty claim. On the other hand, this artifact cannot be completely eliminated. It can be more than 10x fainter (I've seen such dramatic differences between different LightBoost monitors). Just be mindful that voltage inversion is normal in LCD's and artifacts are unavoidable. However, the legitimate question arises when the artifact is worse-than-normal. The problem arises: How does one determine if it's worse than normal, and how does one determine if it's within acceptable tolerances? Perhaps my TestUFO Moving Inversion should be run on a better VG278HE's and on a worse VG278HE's. I think it's the world's first moving inversion test pattern, to measure this obscure artifact. In the future, a new LCD voltage inversion pattern should ideally be invented, that's more friendly (on a temporal basis) with 3D shutter glasses. For 3D shutter glasses, monitor engineers could gradually shift away from the traditional tall-checkerboard 2-frame pixel inversion pattern, to either a 3-frame or 4-frame voltage inversion pattern to keep the DC electricity balanced in an LCD panel. [quote="Thug"]The image is taken with CANON EOS 600D ( shutter 1/50 )[/quote]Can you use a shutter of 1/120 or faster, because that more properly captures the problem. For capturing this type of artifact, you need to capture a single refresh, not multiple refreshes. Side note: For someone who wants to capture multiple refreshes (longer exposures) in moving test patterns, it's better to scroll the camera along the moving pattern precisely ("pursuit camera" approach). This is an advanced endeavour used by scientists and display manufacturers (e.g. MotionMaster MPRT), or a new low-budget pursuit camera approch I've developed for [url=http://www.testufo.com/#test=ghosting]www.testufo.com/#test=ghosting[/url] .... However, it's just easier to just snap a quick single-refresh 1/120sec exposure, to capture the inversion artifact.
Thug said:Sometime when some game crashes while 3D-mode is enabled i get back to the desktop and my 2D image still does show that "micro-checkerboard". So only OS restart did helped then.
Two possible reasons of this:
(A) It's possible that's just because LightBoost is still enabled at the desktop. Your configuration may have normally turned off LightBoost when exiting games (e.g. non-stereoscopic Windows Desktop) but when the game crashed, LightBoost remained enabled (and its corresponding amplified appearance of LCD voltage inversion artifacts). Simply disabling LightBoost may cause it to all go back to normal. You can enable-disable the 3D stereoscopic checkbox to do this, without rebooting.
(B) If you like to run stereoscopic / Lightboost (they're equivalent in 3D Vision 2 monitors) all the time, and the checkerboard artifact sometimes shows up and sometimes not, that may be because your display decided to switch inversion patterns (the VG278H has that behavior when viewing the Inversion Uniformity Test). It switches from a tall-pixel positive-negative checkerboard to a wide-pixel positive-negative checkerboard.

Thug said:I took the test with "bars" while Lightboost is enabled thru ur wonderful software which is enabling Lightboost in 2D mode and results can be viewed in picture below.
Just to be clear, ToastyX gets the credit for the easy LightBoost utility, ToastyX Strobelight on your ASUS monitor. I'm the one who made Strobelight possible on BENQ monitors, however. But thanks for the compliment!

Thug said:At least ASUS VG278 series are with 3 year warranty so at least we could wait new models on a market and maybe then something could lead ppl to change those monitors with defect to something new and properly working one's.
Voltage inversion is a necessity in LCD panels, according to the Techmind.org page. However, if the artifact is particularly intense (e.g. your friend's VG278HE doesn't have the artifact under the same circumstances), then it is a legitimate warranty claim. On the other hand, this artifact cannot be completely eliminated. It can be more than 10x fainter (I've seen such dramatic differences between different LightBoost monitors). Just be mindful that voltage inversion is normal in LCD's and artifacts are unavoidable.

However, the legitimate question arises when the artifact is worse-than-normal. The problem arises: How does one determine if it's worse than normal, and how does one determine if it's within acceptable tolerances? Perhaps my TestUFO Moving Inversion should be run on a better VG278HE's and on a worse VG278HE's. I think it's the world's first moving inversion test pattern, to measure this obscure artifact.

In the future, a new LCD voltage inversion pattern should ideally be invented, that's more friendly (on a temporal basis) with 3D shutter glasses. For 3D shutter glasses, monitor engineers could gradually shift away from the traditional tall-checkerboard 2-frame pixel inversion pattern, to either a 3-frame or 4-frame voltage inversion pattern to keep the DC electricity balanced in an LCD panel.

Thug said:The image is taken with CANON EOS 600D ( shutter 1/50 )
Can you use a shutter of 1/120 or faster, because that more properly captures the problem. For capturing this type of artifact, you need to capture a single refresh, not multiple refreshes.

Side note: For someone who wants to capture multiple refreshes (longer exposures) in moving test patterns, it's better to scroll the camera along the moving pattern precisely ("pursuit camera" approach). This is an advanced endeavour used by scientists and display manufacturers (e.g. MotionMaster MPRT), or a new low-budget pursuit camera approch I've developed for www.testufo.com/#test=ghosting .... However, it's just easier to just snap a quick single-refresh 1/120sec exposure, to capture the inversion artifact.

Posted 08/30/2013 09:50 PM   
[quote="3D-Visionar"]My BenQ XL2720T on the other hand did not show a checkerboard pattern on the non stereoscopic hexagons and triangles, but it shows a checkerboard pattern on the "ghosts" of the hexagons and triangles on the upper image. The checkerboard pattern is clearly connected to ghosting here. I suppose, that the response time is not equal for changes of the + and - voltages here, but that the voltage itself is well under control.[/quote]A properly adjusted voltage inversion should be very faint. Not completely eliminated as it is unavoidable due to LCD limitations, but it should be so faint that it's not frequently noticeable from a full arm's length away from the monitor's screen. [quote="3D-Visionar"]Well it is much better than I expected when reading this forum. The ghosting on the BenQ XL2720T is much better and the image is very much brighter in stereo 3D than on the non light-boost Acer GD235HZ. Unfortunately there is still some ghosting left showing a checkerboard pattern, but I have to confess, that I didn't optimize my monitor settings in this respect yet.[/quote]Yes -- Brightening the 3D image, reducing 3D crosstalk, and reducing motion blur, are the three reasons nVidia invented LightBoost (All bundled together of course, long before people unbundled the motion blur elimination for 2D usage with hacks or with easy utilities such as ToastyX Strobelight). And yes, you're right, the strobe backlight interaction with LCD voltage inversion, is an issue that eventually needs to be gradually improved. The VG248QE does a much, much better job (far less inversion pattern, nearly invisible checkerboard artifact) but its color quality is worse than the XL2720T and VG278H's. People have been able to achieve LightBoost contrast ratios of >900:1 on those monitors (XL2720T and the VG278H/HE/HR), while the VG248QE is limited to around 500:1 contrast ratio in LightBoost mode.
3D-Visionar said:My BenQ XL2720T on the other hand did not show a checkerboard pattern on the non stereoscopic hexagons and triangles, but it shows a checkerboard pattern on the "ghosts" of the hexagons and triangles on the upper image. The checkerboard pattern is clearly connected to ghosting here. I suppose, that the response time is not equal for changes of the + and - voltages here, but that the voltage itself is well under control.
A properly adjusted voltage inversion should be very faint. Not completely eliminated as it is unavoidable due to LCD limitations, but it should be so faint that it's not frequently noticeable from a full arm's length away from the monitor's screen.

3D-Visionar said:Well it is much better than I expected when reading this forum. The ghosting on the BenQ XL2720T is much better and the image is very much brighter in stereo 3D than on the non light-boost Acer GD235HZ. Unfortunately there is still some ghosting left showing a checkerboard pattern, but I have to confess, that I didn't optimize my monitor settings in this respect yet.
Yes -- Brightening the 3D image, reducing 3D crosstalk, and reducing motion blur, are the three reasons nVidia invented LightBoost (All bundled together of course, long before people unbundled the motion blur elimination for 2D usage with hacks or with easy utilities such as ToastyX Strobelight).

And yes, you're right, the strobe backlight interaction with LCD voltage inversion, is an issue that eventually needs to be gradually improved. The VG248QE does a much, much better job (far less inversion pattern, nearly invisible checkerboard artifact) but its color quality is worse than the XL2720T and VG278H's. People have been able to achieve LightBoost contrast ratios of >900:1 on those monitors (XL2720T and the VG278H/HE/HR), while the VG248QE is limited to around 500:1 contrast ratio in LightBoost mode.

Posted 08/30/2013 10:00 PM   
[quote="rustyk"]Just wanted to chime in and say, that all three of my Benq XL2420's exhibit these symptoms too.[/quote] Hm... My Benq XL2420T has no checkerboard symptoms, its all fine. [img]http://abload.de/img/benq_xl2420t_no_check10a4t.jpg[/img] [img]http://abload.de/img/benq_xl2420t_no_checkkqb1r.jpg[/img] [img]http://abload.de/img/benq_xl2420t_no_checkocz6e.jpg[/img] [url=http://abload.de/image.php?img=benq_xl2420t_no_checkphbdx.jpg][img]http://abload.de/thumb/benq_xl2420t_no_checkphbdx.jpg[/img][/url]
rustyk said:Just wanted to chime in and say, that all three of my Benq XL2420's exhibit these symptoms too.


Hm... My Benq XL2420T has no checkerboard symptoms, its all fine.

Image

Image

Image

Image

Posted 09/03/2013 09:33 PM   
[quote="rustyk"][url=http://abload.de/image.php?img=benq_xl2420t_no_checkphbdx.jpg][img]http://abload.de/thumb/benq_xl2420t_no_checkphbdx.jpg[/img][/url] [/quote]Your monitor seems normal for a LightBoost-disabled BENQ XL2420T. The checkerboard pixel pattern is still there but only shows up on the dark grays bars (on black) in the top half in that photo, and extremely, extremely faintly. This is a normal amount of LCD inversion artifact -- very faint; as to be almost unnoticeable -- and only in the middle dark grey vertical bar in the top half. That said, if you enable LightBoost (3D stereoscopic mode), the checkerboard artifact will be significantly amplified. Unless you are already running LightBoost? If so, then you got a great XL2420T specimen.
rustyk said:Image
Your monitor seems normal for a LightBoost-disabled BENQ XL2420T. The checkerboard pixel pattern is still there but only shows up on the dark grays bars (on black) in the top half in that photo, and extremely, extremely faintly. This is a normal amount of LCD inversion artifact -- very faint; as to be almost unnoticeable -- and only in the middle dark grey vertical bar in the top half.

That said, if you enable LightBoost (3D stereoscopic mode), the checkerboard artifact will be significantly amplified. Unless you are already running LightBoost? If so, then you got a great XL2420T specimen.

Posted 09/05/2013 12:27 AM   
[quote="mdrejhon"]Your monitor seems normal for a LightBoost-disabled BENQ XL2420T. The checkerboard pixel pattern is still there but only shows up on the dark grays bars (on black) in the top half in that photo, and extremely, extremely faintly. This is a normal amount of LCD inversion artifact -- very faint; as to be almost unnoticeable -- and only in the middle dark grey vertical bar in the top half.[/quote] Oh yes, you are right, I see it. But i think thats not the checkerboard problem, it's dithering and comes from the 6-bit panel. [quote="mdrejhon"]That said, if you enable LightBoost (3D stereoscopic mode), the checkerboard artifact will be significantly amplified. Unless you are already running LightBoost? If so, then you got a great XL2420T specimen.[/quote] Right, LightBoost is already running in this picture:) PS.:You quote the wrong name;)
mdrejhon said:Your monitor seems normal for a LightBoost-disabled BENQ XL2420T. The checkerboard pixel pattern is still there but only shows up on the dark grays bars (on black) in the top half in that photo, and extremely, extremely faintly. This is a normal amount of LCD inversion artifact -- very faint; as to be almost unnoticeable -- and only in the middle dark grey vertical bar in the top half.


Oh yes, you are right, I see it. But i think thats not the checkerboard problem, it's dithering and comes from the 6-bit panel.

mdrejhon said:That said, if you enable LightBoost (3D stereoscopic mode), the checkerboard artifact will be significantly amplified. Unless you are already running LightBoost? If so, then you got a great XL2420T specimen.


Right, LightBoost is already running in this picture:)

PS.:You quote the wrong name;)

Posted 09/05/2013 09:35 AM   
[quote="Waffelroellchen"][quote="mdrejhon"]Oh yes, you are right, I see it. But i think thats not the checkerboard problem, it's dithering and comes from the 6-bit panel.[/quote]That's not dithering -- it is definitely a checkerboard shape, if you look very closely at your dim grey bar. Notice that the dither artifact is nonexistent in the stationary gray, as well. Techmind's LCD inversion page explains it. http://www.lagom.nl/lcd-test/inversion.php BENQ/ASUS panels doesn't use that dither pattern -- go to Lagom Black Levels page and you'll see a different dither pattern if you look very closely on dim shades such as RGB(1,1,1) or RGB(2,2,2). Turn off all room lights, let your eyes adjust a bit to the dark, and look at the dim greys with a magnifying glass -- you'll faintly see the 6-bit dither, and it definitely looks different from the common inversion pattern (the tall checkerboard positive-negative voltage pattern used on the majority of computer monitors). [quote="Waffelroellchen"]PS.:You quote the wrong name;)[/quote]Whoops, I was editing the nested quotes, and deleted the wrong nested quote tag.
Waffelroellchen said:
mdrejhon said:Oh yes, you are right, I see it. But i think thats not the checkerboard problem, it's dithering and comes from the 6-bit panel.
That's not dithering -- it is definitely a checkerboard shape, if you look very closely at your dim grey bar. Notice that the dither artifact is nonexistent in the stationary gray, as well. Techmind's LCD inversion page explains it. http://www.lagom.nl/lcd-test/inversion.php

BENQ/ASUS panels doesn't use that dither pattern -- go to Lagom Black Levels page and you'll see a different dither pattern if you look very closely on dim shades such as RGB(1,1,1) or RGB(2,2,2). Turn off all room lights, let your eyes adjust a bit to the dark, and look at the dim greys with a magnifying glass -- you'll faintly see the 6-bit dither, and it definitely looks different from the common inversion pattern (the tall checkerboard positive-negative voltage pattern used on the majority of computer monitors).

Waffelroellchen said:PS.:You quote the wrong name;)
Whoops, I was editing the nested quotes, and deleted the wrong nested quote tag.

Posted 09/06/2013 05:14 AM   
Well, I've been battling against this issue but it seems a losing fight. I've gone through a couple different monitors and here are my findings. [b]ASUS VG278H[/b]- Shows as HR in control panel, good color accuracy, has checkerboard (It isn't that I always see it but If feel it softens the edges of a many objects on screen), acceptable amount of crosstalk. [b]Samsung S27a750d[/b]- No Checkerboard effect, great color accuracy, more crosstalk than VG278H by a decent amount but playable, Displayport cause some issues now and again. Best 120hz 2D monitor I've used. [b]ASUS VG248QE[/b]- Less checkerboard than VG278H but still noticeable at times, Very low crosstalk level (lowest I've seen on an active display), colors accuracy is noticeably worse than VG278H and black are a bit washed out, of the 3 this is the best 3D experience I have had. I've sent back the VG278H and am in the process of selling the Samsung on Craig's. Just ordered the Benq XL2420TE in hopes that it will combine the color of the VG278H and the crosstalk/checkerboard level of the VG248QE. I will report back if it is any better with checkerboard than VG248QE.
Well, I've been battling against this issue but it seems a losing fight. I've gone through a couple different monitors and here are my findings.

ASUS VG278H- Shows as HR in control panel, good color accuracy, has checkerboard (It isn't that I always see it but If feel it softens the edges of a many objects on screen), acceptable amount of crosstalk.

Samsung S27a750d- No Checkerboard effect, great color accuracy, more crosstalk than VG278H by a decent amount but playable, Displayport cause some issues now and again. Best 120hz 2D monitor I've used.

ASUS VG248QE- Less checkerboard than VG278H but still noticeable at times, Very low crosstalk level (lowest I've seen on an active display), colors accuracy is noticeably worse than VG278H and black are a bit washed out, of the 3 this is the best 3D experience I have had.

I've sent back the VG278H and am in the process of selling the Samsung on Craig's. Just ordered the Benq XL2420TE in hopes that it will combine the color of the VG278H and the crosstalk/checkerboard level of the VG248QE. I will report back if it is any better with checkerboard than VG248QE.

Gigabyte Gaming 5 Z170X, i7-6700K @ 4.4ghz, Asus GTX 2080 ti Strix OC , 16gb DDR4 Corsair Vengence 2666, LG 60uh8500 and 49ub8500 passive 4K 3D EDID, Dell S2716DG.

Posted 10/04/2013 05:03 PM   
  9 / 12    
Scroll To Top