You forgot to add 5% gaussian blur.
Looks like you have a taller field of view with 120fps 🤓
I barely noticed the difference from 30 to 60. The screen might be sharper, but my old eyes are not.
I can’t tell if this is a joke or not… The frame rate does not impact the sharpness. It just makes things like panning more clear.
The alternate slower frame rate is going to blur a lot more during the same action. Going from a high frame rate to a low one feels like reality versus a dream you’re having where everything is a little harder to see, but you can’t pinpoint how immediately.
Try playing first person games with a mouse. I get headaches when turning the camera too fast at too low frame rates.
Pffft, your eyes can only see in 33fps…
Ok… But why they didn’t like put asphalt or similar, they have modern stuff… Why the damn mud…
rule of cool
120 fps is for scrubs
I have a racing sim and a few 240hz monitors. I don’t know if it’s my eyesight but I can’t see any difference between 240 and 120. Definitely a difference from 60 and 120 though.
Flex lol
Something about the framing, it looks like your sim rig is mounted on the ceiling.
Different angle
Not everyone notices a difference ofcourse. But it doesn’t even have to be in perceived “smoothness” since higher refresh monitor should also have better motion clarity which can be just as important.
Yeah that’s why I got the 240s for the rig. Important for racing. It’s just really not a big difference between that and 120 unless you’re really looking for it.
Same could be said about my expensive headphones too I guess lol.
Yeah for headphones i can relate, while i can hear the difference, after about 5 minutes of listening I no longer care and most headphones are good enough for me.
With my monitor i instantly feel whenever the 280hz mode fucks up and drops to 240hz even though it should barely make a difference. I tested it out with some friends and some couldn’t see the difference between 120 and 280 while I can pretty much spot on tell what refresh rate im running except 144 vs 165hz
Beyond 90 and it’s hard for me to tell. Very much diminishing returns.
Depends on the game. I have a 3090ti and most games let me rock 60 fps and everything is clear and crisp. Some games I go unlimited or up to 120.
You must be playing some ultra high end games if you can only get 60 and sometimes 120 with a 3090ti. I still use my overpriced 3080.
Are you talking about games like Cyberpunk?
FFXIV is my primary. I play Fortnite with my kid and was playing fine at 120. I throw in some COD. Starfield. Forza. Star Wars. I’m probably missing something.
I mostly play FPS games and I can tell the difference. My ranked level literally went up 1 tier in OW2 and my K/D in CoD went up from 1.2 to 1.8.
This is when I upgraded from 144hz to 380hz monitor.
Interesting. My CoD K/D has sat at .99 for like 5 years lol. Only time I regularly had a k/d over 2 was the original MW and MW2 before I had a bunch of kids!
Akila
Vsync = ON gang FTW!
AMD Freesync gang
Old Disney got a reputation for quality by doubling (or more) the frame rate to 24 fps. Then Southpark comes along and taps into nostalgia for the mass produced TV animation by making their computers crank out choppy, low frame rate shows.
Above 60fps is really important if you want to play high ranks in competitive games. Other than that is just cool to have a smoother experience and you won’t miss if you don’t have it.
Strong disagree, the smoothness afforded by high frame rates will make any game where you directly control the camera feel much better to play.
So I guess you would miss because you had it. Basically what I said.
Anyone playing an older game can have it. I used to think Half Life 2 was special because it just felt better to play, more responsive and fluid, but it turns out it’s just a well optimized game with a framerate cap of 300.
Did you have a 300hz monitor back then?
I did not, but decreased frame time is still noticeable on refresh rates lower than frame rate.
Good video
The human eye cannot process more than 20fps at a time anyway
That’s stupid, I can only look at 1 picture at a time anyway
In total. So 10fps per eye
Yes, I thought that was implied.
It’s more than 10fps per eye for those with glasses.
20/20 refers to frame rates per eye. The worse your vision, the better your framerate!
1.25e-9 fps per person
20fps looks very choppy unless there is a lot of motion blur. Where did you get this metric? and lower latency is often the main reason for higher framerates anyways
There’s actually a study that found 500fps was about the max.
Whoosh
deleted by creator
I’m no computer scientist, but I’d say if we add more motion blur it’s probably going to increase the framerate. In fact, we should all just crank up the motion blur on all the games we play. Everyone just loves that motion blur.
Game devs, I hope you’re listening. I know you already do this, though. So THANK YOU so much. Go ahead and leave that setting enabled by default. Everyone LOVES it.
I know you’re just being sarcastic, but motion blur is a relatively heavy effect (particularly depending on how it’s implemented), that’s going to lower the framerate. That said, while motion blur lowers FPS it can make things seem more fluid and can convey motion information better. I’m not a huge fan of motion blur either, though. I think it can look cool, but usually it doesn’t feel great to me.
Lol, there’s apparently alot of people taking you seriously.
Pretty sure it’s 20spf
That’s the European units of measurement.
