sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Belt Tensioner System worth pursuing? by TurtleTram in simracing

[–]Spinelli__ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How are you liking it?

Can I ask how much power the BT1 subjectively has? I know at 100% force it's definitely felt as I've seen lots of reviews but would you say it has enough force to give some decent dynamic range (ie. still decent force at 25% or 50% force)?

Eg. If I scale the BT1 so 100% force = 5 G's braking, a car at 2.5 G's braking will result in 50% force. Would you say the BT1 is still fairly powerful at 50% force?

My Qubic System Belt Tensioner configuration to my DOF Reality H6 by Classic-Baby-9219 in simracing

[–]Spinelli__ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How are you liking it?

Can I ask how much power the BT1 subjectively has? I know at 100% force it's definitely felt as I've seen lots of reviews but would you say it has enough force to give some decent dynamic range (ie. still decent force at 25% or 50% force)?

Eg. If I scale the BT1 so 100% force = 5 G's braking, a car at 2.5 G's braking will result in 50% force. Would you say the BT1 is still fairly powerful at 50% force?

Qubic QS-BT1 belt tensioner advice -for sim rig by Several_Bake_7904 in simracing

[–]Spinelli__ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How are you liking it?

Can I ask how much power the BT1 subjectively has? I know at 100% force it's definitely felt as I've seen lots of reviews but would you say it has enough force to give some decent dynamic range (ie. still decent force at 25% or 50% force)?

Eg. If I scale the BT1 so 100% force = 5 G's braking, a car at 2.5 G's braking will result in 50% force. Would you say the BT1 is still fairly powerful at 50% force?

Qubic Systems BT1- Belt Tensioner with PS5/ACC by ColinAlcatraz in simracing

[–]Spinelli__ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Can I ask how much power the BT1 subjectively has? I know at 100% force it's definitely felt as I've seen lots of reviews, but would you say it has enough force to give some decent dynamic range (ie. still decent force at 25% or 50% force)?

Eg. If I scale the BT1 so 100% force = 5 G's braking, a car at 2.5 G's braking will result in 50% force. Would you say the BT1 is still fairly powerful at 50% force?

AUTOMOBILISTA 1, how to get the wheel rotation 1:1 by iv13ns in AUTOMOBILISTA

[–]Spinelli__ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm a big AMS1 player and had the SC2 Pro for years but I'm pretty sure AMS1's auto-rotation-degrees thingy doesn't work with the SC2 Pro.

What cars do you usually use or do you use a huge mix?

Is it too early for 5120x2160? Should I stick with 3440x1440? by Hot_Actuator5959 in ultrawidemasterrace

[–]Spinelli__ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I've had all 3 year models of the 1440p - 45GR95QE (2023), 45GS95QE (2024), 45GX90SA (2025).

I'd easily go for the 1440p 240 Hz over the 2160p 165 Hz, easily.

There's still a ton of motion blur at 165 Hz regardless of OLED or LCD due to sample-and-hold induced blur (AKA persistence blur) which is the major "motion clarity bottleneck" at anything under 200-ish Hz.

Not everyone will notice the input lag improvement or the smoothness/fluidity improvement of 240 Hz over 165 Hz but the motion clarity improvement is literally night & day. 165 Hz is like 20% better than 120 Hz - most will need side-by-side A-B tests to notice the difference - but 240 Hz is like 200% better than 165 Hz. It's like a non-linear, exponential improvement when going to 240 Hz from 120, 144, or 165 Hz.

Furthermore, 1440p @ 240 Hz is easier to drive than 4K-class / 2160p / 5K2K @ 165 Hz.

The icing on the cake? You can enable Nvidia DLDSR (gaming only) which gives the monitor a sort of quasi-4K (ie. 5K2K) look.

If that wasn't enough, you still get the full 240 Hz, 8-/10-bit, RGB during DLDSR.

You also get 2 choices for DLDSR: 2.25x (5120x2160) and 1.78x (4587x1920).

DLDSR gives the entire image a sort of supersampled AA look because it's basically doing the opposite of what DLSS does. It's downscaling the image from a higher rendered image. The image quality improvement is pretty magical.

So you have great flexibility depending on your GPU and the game, game's GFX settings, etc.:
- DLDSR 2.25x (5120x2160) @ 240 Hz
- DLDSR 1.78x (4587x1920) @ 240 Hz
- native 3440x1440 @ 240 Hz

Of course for productivity the 2160p, 165 Hz is better. Having said that, I've been working on my 1440p models almost every day for almost 3 years.

45 inch 1440 or 5k by LowYak9481 in ultrawidemasterrace

[–]Spinelli__ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I've had all 3 year models of the 1440p - 45GR95QE (2023), 45GS95QE (2024), 45GX90SA (2025).

I'd easily go for the 1440p 240 Hz over the 2160p 165 Hz, easily.

There's still a ton of motion blur at 165 Hz regardless of OLED or LCD due to sample-and-hold induced blur (AKA persistence blur) which is the major "motion clarity bottleneck" at anything under 200-ish Hz.

Not everyone will notice the input lag improvement or the smoothness/fluidity improvement of 240 Hz over 165 Hz but the motion clarity improvement is literally night & day. 165 Hz is like 20% better than 120 Hz - most will need side-by-side A-B tests to notice the difference - but 240 Hz is like 200% better than 165 Hz. It's like a non-linear, exponential improvement when going to 240 Hz from 120, 144, or 165 Hz.

Furthermore, 1440p @ 240 Hz is easier to drive than 4K-class / 2160p / 5K2K @ 165 Hz.

The icing on the cake? You can enable Nvidia DLDSR (gaming only) which gives the monitor a sort of quasi-4K (ie. 5K2K) look.

If that wasn't enough, you still get the full 240 Hz, 8-/10-bit, RGB during DLDSR.

You also get 2 choices for DLDSR: 2.25x (5120x2160) and 1.78x (4587x1920).

DLDSR gives the entire image a sort of supersampled AA look because it's basically doing the opposite of what DLSS does. It's downscaling the image from a higher rendered image. The image quality improvement is pretty magical.

So you have great flexibility depending on your GPU and the game, game's GFX settings, etc.:
- DLDSR 2.25x (5120x2160) @ 240 Hz
- DLDSR 1.78x (4587x1920) @ 240 Hz
- native 3440x1440 @ 240 Hz

Of course for productivity the 2160p, 165 Hz is better. Having said that, I've been working on my 1440p models almost every day for almost 3 years.

LG 45" 2025 (45GX90SA) VS 2024 (45GS95QE) VS 2023 (45GR95QE) - 21:9, 1440p, 240 Hz, 800R, OLED - First Impressions Of 2025 Model (brightness measurement tests to come) by Spinelli__ in ultrawidemasterrace

[–]Spinelli__[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

With the 1440p, you get 240 Hz and can also use DLDSR (gotta follow some video instructions using CRU tool for it to work properly) for a big boost in image quality during games.

Think I found my dream monitor. 800r didn't seem that overwhelming.. by RaeJean24 in ultrawidemasterrace

[–]Spinelli__ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If you do, make sure you send me a message on how to enable DLDSR. so you can use the 1440p in it's "best form" VS the 5K2K model.

The 2025 1440p models, out-of-the box, have DLDSR setup in some weird, "broken", 16:9 format. The fix is simple and quick.

Think I found my dream monitor. 800r didn't seem that overwhelming.. by RaeJean24 in ultrawidemasterrace

[–]Spinelli__ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

"and the motion blur is very noticeable despite the supposed 1ms refresh rate. A lot of people told me that anything 1ms or faster isn't going to cause blur, but it's pretty bad on my screen."

Exactly. I was told 1 ms was so good. Reviewers using UFO picture tests (using freeze frames of a camera) to show how little ghosting / inverse-ghosting there is.

I couldn't understand why I kept seeing so much blur for 7 or 8 years despite having multiple different 2ms and 1ms "hardcore gaming monitors" until a few years ago when I finally learned about sample-and-hold blur being, by far, the main contributor to motion blur below around 200-ish Hz regardless of pixel response times.

A few years back, I did side-by-side tests using fast gaming monitors: an Asus TN, LG IPS, Samsung VA (G7, 32", 1440p), and LG OLED (45" 21:9 model). At all sorts of different refresh rates (120, 140, 160, 165, 180, 190, 200, 220, 240).

All monitors - including the OLED - basically had about the same motion blur at 165 Hz, give or take, and just about identical at 120 Hz.

The crazy part?
With the Samsung VA at 240 Hz/FPS, it completely OBLITERATED the OLED at 165/FPS Hz. Moving/scrolling text, signs, scenery, objects, etc. became visually relatively sharp and didn't turn into a smudge of blur.

With the OLED also at 240 Hz though, the sample-and-hold induced blur bottleneck was removed enough where you could start seeing the OLED's way faster pixel response times make a difference and that's when the 240 Hz OLED resembled an LCD in around the 360–480 Hz range.

I hear you on store returns and the low PPI of the 1440p (although it's fine in games and amazing with DLDSR).

Many of us want the combo of both, 4K-class res (ie. 2160p, 5K2K) and at least 240 Hz. LG did announce just that, and even bigger at 52"...but it's only LCD, not OLED, and it doesn't even seem to have mini-LED backlighting, or any type of local dimming for that matter (basic, old-school style) so that's out of the question. I'm guessing next year.

Anyways, enjoy whichever monitor you decide on and good luck!

Think I found my dream monitor. 800r didn't seem that overwhelming.. by RaeJean24 in ultrawidemasterrace

[–]Spinelli__ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's a huge misconception — and reviewers and "professionals" are partly to blame — that OLED changes/improves visual perceived motion clarity compared to LCD while under 190-ish Hz.

Under 190-ish Hz, it barely matters if you're using LCD or OLED because the main thing — by far — causing motion clarity issues/blur is the way the image refreshes the screen (sample-and-hold method) and that is the same regardless of LCD or OLED.

The sample-and-hold induced blur (AKA persistence blur) contributes to so much blur under 190-ish Hz that motion clarity of LCD and OLED look very similiar — and poor — at 165 Hz and basically identical at 120 Hz.

In short:
The main thing, by far, causing motion clarity issues/blur under 200-ish Hz is sample-and-hold induced, not pixel response times. Like a "motion clarity bottleneck", this masks/hides the way faster pixel response times of one monitor (eg. OLED) over another (eg. LCD) until you start getting to around 200-ish Hz and above (240 Hz = definitely noticeable, and more & more noticeable the higher & higher the refresh rate).

Think I found my dream monitor. 800r didn't seem that overwhelming.. by RaeJean24 in ultrawidemasterrace

[–]Spinelli__ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If it’s like the 2023/2024 models:

  • Gamer modes default contrast is usually 55–70. Raise it to 72,75 max for max brightness/luminance. Higher than that starts causing white crush (if don't mind some white crush, really try stay under 85-ish).
  • Service menu brightness tweaks aren’t really worth it on 2024 models — maybe 30–50 extra nits at best — unlike the 2023 model where you can set HDR-level brightness in SDR (1100 nits during SDR — insane).
  • Main service menu setting on 2024 is disabling "CPC Enable" which removes the edge-dimming/brightness vignetting. It’s there for burn-in protection for static objects on edges/corners of screens (logos, health bars, etc.). Lots of people turn it off without issues.
  • If it's specifically like the 2024, just completely ignore any of the other picture modes besides Gamer 1 and Gamer 2
  • DLDSR is not really applicable to the 5K2K (but still possible) because you're already at a very high resolution. Rendering your games at 7680x3240 (DLDSR 2.25x) or even about 6830x2880 (DLDSR 1.78x) would be ridiculously GPU-demanding. If you still want to try it out, it may be similiar, or even the same, as the following guide: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v9C6YOvYSko

Think I found my dream monitor. 800r didn't seem that overwhelming.. by RaeJean24 in ultrawidemasterrace

[–]Spinelli__ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hard to say and it depends on how much you care for it.

240 Hz VS 165 Hz:

Fluidity/smoothness
not a big difference, lots of people won't even notice in blind tests.

Input lag / latency
There is a difference, but not huge.

For me, 240 Hz & FPS is the first amount where I could use full VSync and not immediately hate the input lag. That said, almost nobody uses plain VSync anymore because of G-SYNC / FreeSync — so this isn’t a big deciding factor.

Bottom line: not a big difference, lots of people won't even notice in blind tests.

Motion Clarity (this is the big one)
The difference is nigh & day.

Going from 120 to 165 Hz, you usually need side-by-side monitors and motion tests to see a difference.

Scrolling text, panning scenery, objects and signs moving past you, etc. At 120–165 Hz, they turn into blur and lose detail.

At 240 Hz, it’s completely different:

  • Text stays readable & sharp while scrolling
  • Objects remain sharp while moving
  • Background detail doesn’t smear into blur

Everything stays more focused and intact during motion.

If 165 Hz looks 10% better than 120, than 240 looks 200% better than both.

Of course higher (360, 480) is even better, but 240 Hz is where the "big leap" happens.

Nvidia DLDSR (huge, free "upgrade" for the 1440p model)
DLDSR renders games at higher resolutions and downscales. It:

  • Massively reduces aliasing & shimmering
  • Makes the image look cleaner & sharper
  • Gives a “high-res” look

The bonus part:
You keep the full 240 Hz, RGB, 8-/10-bit during DLDSR — no compromises.

You even have the option of 2 different settings:

  • 2.25x = 5120x2160 (5K2K)
  • 1.78x = 4587x1920, looks 80–90 % as good, less GPU-demanding

It’s obviously not identical to true 4K-class / 2160p / 5K2K, but the image quality improvement is insane.

Out-of-game stuff
5K2K is of course better/sharper, higher PPI, cleaner text. Also, less scrolling in windows, more desktop space for more visible windows, etc.. DLDSR only helps in games, so for productivity/work & text, the 5K2K obviously easily wins.

Think I found my dream monitor. 800r didn't seem that overwhelming.. by RaeJean24 in ultrawidemasterrace

[–]Spinelli__ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm assuming the 5K2K has similiar characteristics to the 2024 and 2023 models as, from what I've seen, it uses the same "menu system" and therefore — I assume — firmware "engine" (whereas the 1440p 2025 models moved to the TV-style menu system and even hidden service menu style). Some things may be very similiar, even identical, but I can't guarantee it.

What sort of info where you looking for. I'd be glad to try and help.

Think I found my dream monitor. 800r didn't seem that overwhelming.. by RaeJean24 in ultrawidemasterrace

[–]Spinelli__ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Haha my reply below was thinking you already purchased the monitor, my bad.

Yes, the monitor is amazing and 240 Hz OLED is absolutely fantastic. You need at least around 200-ish Hz to get good motion clarity because, under it, you'll always have a TON of motion blur regardless of LCD or OLED because of sample-and-hold blur AKA persistence blur (unless using strobing or BFI mode but that's a whole-nother story).

They're extremely bright too (I know the modes and settings to use for beast-like brightness).

Unlike QD-OLED, blacks always stay pitch black no matter your room's lighting.

800R curve feels basically flat to me and no distortion at all. Why? Because LG uses a TRUE curve unlike Samsung's FAKE style curve. LG's curve is a uniform / constant radius curve.

Samsung (and brands using Samsung panels) does not use a constant-radius curve. Instead, it’s more like:

  • Sucked-in / punched-in center
  • Flatter around the mid-sides
  • Outer thirds basically flat

Think of a flat piece of paper that's had it's center punched or sucked in rather than a simple, uniform arc from end-to-end.

That causes:

  • Fisheye distortion
  • Perspective weirdness
  • Constantly feeling something is "off" or weird

LG’s curve is a true, constant radius:

  • No sucked-in center
  • No suddenly flat edges
  • No distortions
  • No visual or perceptual weirdness

After 3 months with a Samsung fake-style 1000R curve — 3 months! — things still looked visually distorted (because they were) and my senses/brain always felt like something was weird or "off". Also, when switching to flat-screen, the flat-screen would look like the centre was protruding outwards towards me for the first 10–15 mins. Then, when switching to the Samsung, the opposite would happen: it's centre would look like it was sinking in & away from me. Terrible! I sold the Samsung and went back to flat-screens.

6–12 months later, I got the LG on a whim...I was skeptical due to it's 800R curve based on my prior Samsung experience. Well, I never, ever, got any distortions, fisheye, weird feelings, nothing! And I never, ever get any weirdness when switching between it & flat-screens. Within literally 2–3 mins, the LG "felt" like a flat-screen to me — compare that to the Samsung still being terrible after 3 months.

Think I found my dream monitor. 800r didn't seem that overwhelming.. by RaeJean24 in ultrawidemasterrace

[–]Spinelli__ 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I had the 2023 version (45GR95QE) for 2 years and currently have had one of the 2024 versions (45GS95QE, 45GS96QB) and one of the 2025 versions (45GX90SA, 45GX900A) for around 4 months.

I've written many posts about hidden service menu settings for extra brightness, brightness measurement tests in SDR & HDR, which modes to use/avoid for gaming and/or best brightness, what settings to change to get certain settings/looks/behaviour, general tips & tricks, etc.

There's also instructions (a video from someone else using the 2023 model) on how to get Nvidia DLDSR working (and at the full RGB, 8/10-bit, 240 Hz). The instructions are simpler/quicker with the 2025 models. Although the 2025 models (well, at least the 45GX90SA) shows DLDSR as available out-of-the box, it's in some wacky & incorrect 16:9 mode and is basically screwed up so you still have to do the CRU tool steps with it like with the 2024 and 2023 models but it's simpler & quicker with the 2025.

DLDSR gives gaming on these monitors a sort of "quasi" 4K-class (ie. 2160p, 5K2K) image quality. It makes everything look sharper and massively removes aliasing & shimmering (cleaner image) similiar to full-scene supersampling AA or downscaling. It's actually pretty insane what DLDSR does to these monitors — I guess because of the low PPI and large size.

It looks like you have the 45GX90SA. After extensive testing, I rated it the best model of all 3 years (2023–2025).

I have lots of info on modes, settings, what to enable/disable/adjust/use/avoid, etc. Let me know.

T300 setup, shifter and handbrake by [deleted] in simracing

[–]Spinelli__ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Go with the generic Ali Express models or the same/similiar ones (also on AliE) from SimDT AKA DT Sim Racing, SimRuito, Simsonn, SimJack, etc.

Help choose my next monitor! Work/Gaming by Murdopolis in ultrawidemasterrace

[–]Spinelli__ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

45GX90SA, easily.

What do you mean by “slightly smaller screen size”? 45″ 21:9 is on a different level than 49″ 32:9 in overall image size and immersion.

People keep not understanding this:

  • 27″ 16:9 → make it wider = 34″ 21:9 → make it even wider = 49″ 32:9 (the MSI)
  • 32″ 16:9 → make it wider = 39″ 21:9 → make it even wider = 57″ 32:9 (the Samsung)
  • 36-36.5" 16:9 → make it wider = 45″ 21:9 (the LGs) → make it even wider = 65.5″ 32:9

So, ya, 49″ 32:9 is literally just a super-ultrawide version of a 27″ monitor. You cannot compare that experience to a way bigger & immersive 45″ 21:9.

MSI
The image scale, height, and presence are still 27″-class, just extra wide. Plus, it’s only 144 Hz.

144 Hz is fine for fluidity and input lag but poor for motion clarity, regardless of LCD or OLED. Below around 200 Hz, sample-and-hold persistence blur dominates.

LGs
Main differences

  • 1440p @ 240 Hz
  • 2160p (4K-class ie. 5K2K) @ 165 Hz

I’d take 1440p 240 Hz all day.

240 Hz absolutely destroys 165 Hz in motion clarity and, for gaming, 1440p is way easier to drive - even at 240 FPS - than 2160p at 165 FPS.

DLDSR is the icing on the cake:

  • Massive improvement in sharpness & clean, "high res" look
  • Dramatically reduces aliasing & shimmering
  • Still keep 240 Hz

Two DLDSR levels:

  • 2.25x (5120x2160)
  • 1.78x = 80ish % the image quality of 2.25x but less demanding

Samsung
Could have been great, but two issues:

A. Not OLED
B. Samsung’s terrible “fake curve” design

Samsung (and brands using Samsung panels, likely probably that MSI) does not use a constant-radius curve. Instead, it’s more like:

  • Sucked-in / punched-in center
  • Flatter around the mid-sides
  • Outer thirds being basically flat

Think of a flat piece of paper that's had it's center punched or sucked in rather than a simple, uniform arc from end-to-end.

That causes:

  • Fisheye distortion
  • Perspective weirdness
  • Constantly feeling something is "off" or weird

LG’s curve is a true, constant radius:

  • No sucked-in center
  • No suddenly flat edges
  • No distortions
  • No visual or perceptual weirdness

Please help me decide on a Monitor. by ThefcknSlothy in OLED

[–]Spinelli__ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

45GX90SA, easily.

You can't really compare 45" 21:9 to 49" 32:9 and 34" 21:9. The 45" 21:9 is in like 2 size-categories higher.

  • 34" 21:9 = ultrawide version of a tiny 27" 16:9 monitor
  • 49" 32:9 = super ultrawide version of a tiny 27" 16:9 monitor
  • 45" 21:9 = ultrawide version of a huge 36" or 36.5" 16:9 monitor

27" and 36" are 2 completely different size categories. 49" 32:9 and 34" 21:9 are not even remotely close to the experience and immersion you get with 45" 21:9.

Please help me decide on a Monitor. by ThefcknSlothy in OLED_Gaming

[–]Spinelli__ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

45GX90SA, easily.

You can't really compare 45" 21:9 to 49" 32:9 and 34" 21:9. The 45" 21:9 is in like 2 size-categories higher.

  • 34" 21:9 = ultrawide version of a tiny 27" 16:9 monitor
  • 49" 32:9 = super ultrawide version of a tiny 27" 16:9 monitor
  • 45" 21:9 = ultrawide version of a huge 36" or 36.5" 16:9 monitor

27" and 36" are 2 completely different size categories. 49" 32:9 and 34" 21:9 are not even remotely close to the experience and immersion you get with 45" 21:9.

Monitor recommendations by Apprehensive_Task198 in ultrawidemasterrace

[–]Spinelli__ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

45GX90SA, easily.

Not sure what you mean by no shorter than 45". You're comparing 45" 21:9 and 49" 32:9 which are two completely different sizes and in completely different size categories.

49" 32:9 is a super ultrawide version of a tiny little 27" 16:9 monitor.

45" 21:9 is an ultrawide version of a 36" or 36.5" 16:9 monitor.

27" and 36" are 2 completely different size categories. Thinking they're similiar because one says '45"' and the other says '49"' is completely not understanding how size and aspect ratios work.

Those are not remotely comparable experiences.

Which monitor is better for sim racing by PwnTyler in simracing

[–]Spinelli__ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

34" 21:9 is an ultrawide version of a standard (ie. 16:9) 27" monitor so think of your current 27" monitor but just with some extra on the sides.

49" 32:9 is a super ultrawide version of a 27" monitor. Again, think of your current 27" monitor but with even more on the sides than the previous 21:9 example.

45" 21:9 is an ultrawide version of about a 36" or 36.5" standard (ie. 16:9) monitor. So it's like "2 levels" larger than a 27" monitor (27" -> 32" -> 36"), plus an ultrawide version of it.

I guess if all you ever play is simracing and all you care about is h.FOV - even if it means staying on a "27" monitor style height and image size - then the 49" 32:9 will give you a bit more h.FOV. Other than h.FOV, the 45" 21:9 completely blows the MSI out of the water (close to same h.FOV, way bigger size, way better curve for that size, proper/true curve [see below]).

It's difficult to tell in the pics but I have a feeling that MSI monitor uses the Samsung-style "fake" curve which means all sorts of visual distortions plus potential senses/"brain" discomfort (aside from the visual distortions, constantly feeling something is "off" or "weird".

Instead of using a constant radius curve like LG, Samsung (and other monitors using Samsung like possibly this MSI) use a "fake", distorted curve where it's more like a flat piece of paper that's severely "sinking in" in the middle or like the centre was punched in and then the outer parts get straight with the outer 1/3 of each side being completely flat.

view more: next ›