Hello, I am trying to find a new monitor to buy, and I was wondering… does anyone in here use BenQ Monitors? Thinking about picking up some for gaming, and I just wanted to hear everyone’s thoughts on the monitors. Looking at the RL series. Specifically the RL2755HM Monitor, as it seems the best for console gaming. Thank you.
I only have a Benq XL2720Z. I use it for CRT like blur reduction (which works at 60hz refresh rate, for 60 fps 60hz, single strobed, with good old fashioned 60hz CRT flicker, unlike any of the newer blur reduction monitors (incliuding the XL2730Z).
I would choose the XL2720Z over the RL series because I find the RL series (like the old T series) to have excessive overdrive at AMA high, with no “Low” point to select, between High and Off. The overdrive settings on the lowest level (High) are atrocious and there is tons of overshoot ghosting, with the next lowest option to disable overdrive completely.
The XL2720Z has the same atrocious ghosting, but a firmware bug allows you to remove all of it completely, making it look like a proper calibrated monitor.
(The XL2420Z has the same “bug” but the overdrive only gets toned down slightly, instead of a large amount).
Here is what the RL2455HM looks like (the 24" version, but the 27" version looks basically the same), although its unknown what refresh rate this was taken at.
Here is what the XL2720Z looks like at stock, 60hz.
Here is how the XL2720Z looks like after exploiting a firmware bug.
For comparison, here is the XL2720Z with AMA off (overdrive off).
Note: blur reduction is disabled in these pictures. (the “bug” is done by combining enabling blur reduction with a profile switch to disable it, it’s in my post on blur busters’ forums).
Check this out. I recently bought a PC and did the same http://www.144hzmonitors.com/other/best-gaming-monitor-under-200/
Why do people need to use a bug to make it look that good, that should be the stock settings and always on, unless it has some downsides to it?
Aka company incompetence or laziness, take your pick.
(If you really want the truth, having super aggressive AMA gives you advantage in input lag numbers over other monitors. Even if it’s 2 ms, it’s still numbers that sell hardware, even if it’s too ugly to be used by any person who cares about image quality. But, this is pure incompetence because WHY DIDN’T THEY JUST GIVE US AN AMA LOW SETTING OFFICIALLY, SO WE CAN CHOOSE WHAT WE WANT???).
Benq simply calibrated the monitors overdrive in a completely shitty way.
there’s absolutely NO drawback to using that bug either.
The Benq XL2720Z is complete garbage if you don’t use that bug. Inverse ghosting everywhere with blur reduction off.
The RL monitors look like total garbage too, except you can’t do anything about the terrible overdrive.
This is from a review (that’s why the picture is much clearer than my own camera pics, but this is what ur stuck with if you buy the RL/HM monitors.
However, use that bug (on the XL2720Z), and the Benq becomes as good as the legendary Asus VG248QE, when set to “Tracefree=60” (I still own my VG248 so I’ve checked).
The RL monitor doesn’t have this bug, so you’re stuck with shitty overdrive permanently
BTW, the bug is, using an "undocumented’ AMA LOW setting, which only applies to blur reduction=on, by setting AMA to “high” after (not before, but after; if it was on high before, you can move the slider back and forth to re-toggle it) enabling blur reduction.
Then you bypass the firmware’s default calibration by switching directly into a profile (or gamer preset) that has blur reduction already disabled. This applies “AMA low” to blur reduction off. that’s the bug.
You’re not supposed to be able to do that. Benq wanted you stuck with their shitty overly done AMA.
if you try to disable blur reduction through the OSD, it uses the default AMA instead, which is extremely bad. AMA “high” with blur reduction disabled looks as excessively bad as AMA “Premium” with blur reduction enabled.
I have all that crap explained in my blur busters thread post here: http://forums.blurbusters.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2590
This bug is done all on the monitor it self, no settings in Windows or anything?
Yes its a firmware bug. (the 2nd part is the bug. the first part is an “undocumented feature.”)
AMA low on Benq XL2720Z:
Ama low for blur reduction on:
- Enable blur reduction.
- Set AMA to “high” after. if already on high, highlight High and then instead of pressing enter to select it, press “Back”, or move slider to off/premium then back to high.
This reduces overdrive intensity of “High” by about 50%, removing all inverse ghosting but may have normal ghosting
depending on what ur looking at, faint inverse ghosting in FPS games may be less obvious than normal ghosting (dimmer copy of the same image). in 2D, inverse ghosting can be VERY annoying.
This “AMA low” was added to V3 firmware on XL2720Z, XL2420Z and XL2411Z. It’s undocumented change, as on V002 firmware, doing this (setting AMA to high after enabling MBR) would just make the overdrive worse than AMA premium, so Benq added this in V3-V4-V5, but they never give changelogs, except to fix official bugs, like the 60hz displayport issue (Fixed in V004 on XL2720Z/XL2420Z).
this is a bug because it bypasses the default AMA calibration for blur reduction off, by doing something Benq didn’t think of.
- do everything in part 1, above (Set blur reduction on then enable “AMA Low”.
- instead of disabling blur reduction through the OSD, switch directly to a picture mode preset that already has blur reduction off.
If you have the S-Switch and you previously set Standard Mode to have blur reduction off, you can hold down the top button (back button) on the S-switch for 8 seconds, to directly enter standard mode.
Otherwise, you can save a blur reduction off profile into a Gamer 1, 2, or 3 preset, then activate that on the S-switch.
This bug only affects the FIRST profile switch. If you switch 2 profiles in a row, it no longer applies.
The bug : Disabling blur reduction through the OSD is supposed to use the default AMA high setting for blur reduction disabled (Benq’s default behavior).
Changing profiles from a blur reduction “on” profile to a blur reduction “off” profile, uses the last AMA setting set for blur reduction on, instead of using the blur reduction off setting.
blur reduction on’s AMA high already has a 25% lower overdrive than blur reduction off’s AMA high, so you can already get a 25% benefit, with no work, just by swapping profiles from a MBR on profile, to a MBR off profile.
Disabling blur reduction through the OSD (or powering on the monitor with blur reduction off) gives default results, which are the worst results.
Thanks, thinking of picking up one to try out, always hated most monitors blur and response compared to CRT.
I got the evo standard rl2460ht why did i make a bad choice?
You don’t like your monitor? why do you think it’s a bad choice?
I love it actually but guy above said to avoid the rl models was just curiois
Well if you read it all he explains why.
I got a Ben Q RL2455HM and I have no problems with it.
I game on that monitor with FPS games all the time and notice no issues.
FPS games don’t tend to show overdrive artifacts very well, due to the common color tones.
it’s 2d side scrollers that really start giving your eye cancer over inverse artifacts.
In most cases I rarely notice overdrive artifacts in FPS games.
But occasionally there are some objects which just REALLY stick out and having me groaning. Usually stuff like big letters on signs behind grey backgrounds or some stuff like that.
This test is very good for showing some color transitions which can show common overdrive artifacts.
Best done in Chrome with Aero enabled and hardware acceleration enabled.
My RL2755HM with AMA on high is decent but in fighting games and shmups where you really have to focus on movement it’s still quite blurry but that because I’m use to and still play on CRT.
Going to try out the XL2720Z with the bug and see how it compares to CRT and return it if it’s not worth it. =)
For the XL2720Z, you need to use custom resolutions to get the most of the blur reduction, otherwise strobe crosstalk will cause extreme blurriness around a small section of the screen.
Gsync ULMB mode monitors have this same issue but it occurs around the bottom of the screen, and can’t be repositioned. Lightboost (the predecessor to Benq blur reduction, designed for 3D vision 2 1080p monitors) didn’t have this problem because it used something called accelerated scanout, done through a LC panel timing, which increased the vertical blanking period (done internally; the vertical total used for activating Lightboost was just a “signal” VT to put the monitor in 3D mode) to push most of the crosstalk completely off of the screen.
Benq with a Vertical Total tweak change, does the exact same thing that Lightboost does; in fact the same VT that is used “Internally” by lightboost, but hidden from the user on those monitors, is Vertical Total 1497-1502. Usually VT 1500 is best to use but at some custom refresh rates, another number in this range must be used to avoid backlight stuttering/pulsating issues. (all of the numbers have the exact same effect; there’s no difference between VT 1497 to VT 1502, except if the scalar accepts the value gracefully or not).
So Benq Z series monitors (NOT the XL2730Z which DOES NOT WORK WITH VT TWEAKS and can NOT do 100hz or 60hz strobing!) with VT 1497-VT 1502 has the exact same strobe crosstalk as Lightboost.
Drawbacks to using VT tweaks–same as Lightboost mode drawbacks–a faint scanlines effect can be seen on grey backgrounds due to the panel running out of normal specification.
All of the VT values are mentioned in my blur busters thread that I recommend for best strobe performance with lowest crosstalk. Assuming you are using a displayport connection (displayport does not require the ToastyX pixel clock patcher), here are some vertical totals I recommend at different refresh rates.
60hz : VT 1354 (for some reason, VT 1497-VT 1502 all show out of range at 60hz, yet they work at 61hz, go figure. There’s virtually no crosstalk with VT 1354 anyway).
(DVI port users will need the pixel clock patcher and completely different timings at 60hz, to avoid a “Cable error”, which is a conflict with single link DVI limits at 60hz and the clock patcher).
85hz : VT 1501 (good for vsync on if you can maintain 85fps at all times but can NOT maintain 100 fps @ 100hz! Picky refresh rate: only VT 1501 is lag/stutter free)
91hz : VT 1498 (good for 91 FPS capped call of duty games, with vsync on).
100hz: VT 1500 or VT 1502.
120hz: VT 1500 (over DVI port; note: VT 1502 will sometimes stutter/pulsate the backlight 10% of the time on a monitor mode change).
120hz: VT 1499 + Horizontal total 2001 (displayport: to keep 8 bit color and avoid 360mhz pixel clock limit that reverts to 6 bit color).
125hz: VT 1497 (warning: over Displayport, color depth reverts to 6 bit color due to 360mhz 8 bit pixel clock limit exceeded).
Enable Single Strobe=ON in the monitor service menu for 60hz, 85hz, 91hz strobing, and all refresh rates under 100hz.
This setting is ignored and always considered on at 100hz and higher.
Anyway, all this crapola is explained here:
So for 1080 60hz I want to do the bug, single strobe on and VT 1501 for best results?
60hz, VT 1354. 1501 will go out of range at 60hz. This is over displayport.
DVI will cause a cable error with a VT tweak at 60hz, due to the DVI pixel clock patcher. I don’t have the special DVI timings right now.
At 85hz (This is not a predefined refresh rate, although the monitor will recognize it if a VT tweak is NOT used), the only VT that works without stuttering is VT 1501.
I can say exactly the same, I have no complaints at all from using the exact same monitor FWIW
I dont see why he said the rl2460ht is bad its standard at the biggest gaming tourny