Ok but learn how to capitalise and punctuated before calling other names, then you may be taken seriously.
Who? Since my last post was used on a mobile phone which I am awful at using.
With such a high failure rate on Swift...
- Thread starter Techen
- Start date
Who? Since my last post was used on a mobile phone which I am awful at using.
Ok but learn how to capitalise and punctuated before calling other names, then you may be taken seriously.
Punctuated? Other? Ok?
Yeah, no.
Going by my experience with the swift 120Hz seems to give better results overall - in BF4 at 144Hz with gsync I'm starting to see the screendoor effect quite a bit (not sure why its suddenly become apparent) whereas 120Hz with or without gsync it doesn't happen at all even with close inspection. (I'll be quite happy personally if it continues to work as a 120Hz panel fine even if 144 has issues - none the least I can't tell the difference between 120 and 144 in blind testing).
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 11,523
It could be related to how far they are over driving the monitor though, remember all the delays because they said they were having issues getting them working properly at 144hz, this could be a symptom of that, particularly if it goes away at when set back down to 120hz
Likewise i can live with 120hz if mine even goes the same way
In certain situations on the Swift you get a stippling (or screen door) kind of effect over parts of the scene - it only seems so far to happen for me when using 144Hz but I don't think its directly due to 144Hz causing the effect but more that the cause of the effect happens when 144Hz is used and the conditions that trigger the cause of the effect don't occur (so far) at lower Hz.
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Feb 2012
- Posts
- 6,586
I only use mine as 120hz, ULMB.
Never use G-Sync (tried it, not my thing) so if the faults on these monitors are down to 144hz and Gsync i'm really not bothered
Never use G-Sync (tried it, not my thing) so if the faults on these monitors are down to 144hz and Gsync i'm really not bothered
Like cross hatching?
He is describing inversion artifacts, which are extremely common on 144Hz monitors. So yeah, a sort of interlacing pattern that is restricted to certain parts of the screen and most visible on certain lighter shades.
On my sample there weren't actually any noticeable static inversion artifacts specific to 144Hz, but during motion there were. They would appear (at 144Hz but to a lesser extent at 120Hz) during rapid motion of certain lighter colours. You could see it most clearly on games with bright spell effects. In 3D the monitor had obvious inversion artifacts at 120Hz or 100Hz as well.
Ahh yes, I've just looked up inversion artifacts, and they look like crosshatching/dithering. Do you reckon this is a result of the highly overclocked panel that is being used?
Yes I do. Most other 144Hz suffer from something similar (usually the static inversion artifacts) and they're technically overclocked as well. I found it a bit odd to see some motion-specific artifacts on the SWIFT though.
did not know this! i had two swifts and sent both back due to this problem, never had a problem with any of my 120hz monitors (well it's noticable in 3D with the glasses off) does this affect 120hz monitors too? think i'm gonna jump on the acer 4k gsync tomorrow
Hmmm. This is all interesting but a tad worrying (swift owner here). I too have noticed this cross hatching in motion, in certain games at certain times (light coloured areas mostly), but not often to be honest. I currently game at mostly 120hz with gsync always on.
I personally think 144hz is pointless as I can't tell a difference between that and 120 so I run at 120 all the time mainly to keep the idle clocks low on the desktop too. Might do some tests to see if 144 is noticeably worse for this 'motion cross hatching' or whatever we should call it.
I wonder if running at 100hz in games all the time will completely get rid of the cross hatching motion artefacts? For me 100hz with gsync is more than enough after gaming at 60hz for years. To me even 75 and 85hz is a huge improvement over 60 and it becomes progressively less 'wow' above 85hz IMO.
I personally think 144hz is pointless as I can't tell a difference between that and 120 so I run at 120 all the time mainly to keep the idle clocks low on the desktop too. Might do some tests to see if 144 is noticeably worse for this 'motion cross hatching' or whatever we should call it.
I wonder if running at 100hz in games all the time will completely get rid of the cross hatching motion artefacts? For me 100hz with gsync is more than enough after gaming at 60hz for years. To me even 75 and 85hz is a huge improvement over 60 and it becomes progressively less 'wow' above 85hz IMO.
I only use mine as 120hz, ULMB.
Never use G-Sync (tried it, not my thing) so if the faults on these monitors are down to 144hz and Gsync i'm really not bothered
Same here. Love ULMB.
Fingers crossed it's perfect in game, I got green weirdness in the Lagon test but as I don't spend all day using that I'm not too concerned. It's a real shame a (very) few people are having to RMA but I think it's over exaggerating to think it's some kind of epidemic. OCUK have sold hundreds of these and we've got less than 10 people with issues, some of those weren't even "issues" really, they're inherent characteristics of the panel technology that weren't to their taste, (washed out colours etc).
Associate
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2005
- Posts
- 661
Interesting, I see the artifact too, but not tried going down to 120z, I will try this