1) Mark Rehjon himself regularly acknowledges that there is MORE tearing with LB enabled
Clarification: More accurately "Tearing is MORE noticeable". Physically and scientifically, the number of tearlines is
exactly the same. What happens is traditionally, motion blur on traditional LCD's makes minor tearing harder to see. The motion clarity on a CRT, plasma, or LightBoost, simply makes tearing easier to see by the human eye. It is not specific to LightBoost, but a behavior of all flicker-type displays.
not to mention a downgrade of the monitor's color reproduction capabilities
Correct, especially on VG248QE's. The degradation is less on several other models such as VG278H, and can be calibrated to the point where it is not a problem, as long as you aren't expecting extremely bright screens.
quote2) Although LB wins in the motion smoothness department due to no motion blur, you NEED your fps to match the refresh rate at all times. As soon as the framerate dips the benefits disappear.
Clarification:: The benefits don't completely disappear until your framerate is low. However, the clarity improvements is the most drastic/dramatic when framerates matches Hz (perfectly zero microstutters).
-- For example, LightBoost at 80fps may only be a few percent smoother looking than non-LightBoost. Just a smaller number of people see benefits, but several do and still prefer it.
-- Motion clarity of strobed displays (CRT, LightBoost, plasma) makes it easier for the human eye to see microstutters at higher refresh rates. If you've viewed
www.testufo.com on a CRT and then again on LCD, then you already understand what I mean.
-- That said, LightBoost at framerates matching Hz (locked framerate, ala VSYNC ON, or Adaptive VSYNC) can look several times clearer looking to the point where 120Hz-vs-LightBoost is far more dramatic than 60Hz-vs-120Hz for several LightBoost users like me. The dramatic LightBoost motion clarity dividends occurs during framerate locked motion (though VSYNC OFF at "insane framerates", such as 300fps, helps to reduce the amplified visibility of microstutters -- much like during ultra-high-framerate CRT gaming, if that's been your thing historically)
By contrast, a normal 120hz screen (including an overclocked IPS) delivers improved smoothness even in cases where the frame rate is lagging behind the refresh rate
Correct. Unlike CRT's (and LightBoost), the motion blur of regular LCD's masks the microstutters of fluctuating framerates (framerate/Hz mismatches), so it can look smoother if you prefer to let the framerate fluctuate quite a lot. On the other hand, it's also a personal preference whether LightBoost is enabled or disabled, as there are still benefits even at framerates lower than Hz, just not as dramatic as during 120fps@120Hz.
3) Finally, LB is of most benefit to those who are very sensitive to motion blur, or who remember the best days on CRT gaming all too well. Like tearing, motion blur seems to bother different people to different extents
Correct. LightBoost behaves like a 120Hz CRT, in terms of motion clarity/stutters/tearing. So you get exactly the same kind of amplified tearing visibility / microstutter visibility, as you do on CRT's. And if you still liked 80fps@120Hz on CRT's, then you will still probably like 80fps@120Hz on LightBoost. The stutter/tearing visibility is similar.
The chief "CRT experience" differentiator is that LightBoost color quality and more input lag than CRT's, though LightBoost (especially on calibrated 27" panels) can reportedly have better color quality than an old worn CRT. Several Sony W900 CRT users have
switched to LightBoost to get a similiar experience, once their W900's were defective, and most switchers seemed generally pleased with LightBoost (except for the pristine-calibrated-CRT and black-level diehards, etc)