Cool, I’ve never seen this before. Thanks!
Comment on I can barely tell the difference between 60 and 165 hz on my monitor
Toes@ani.social 7 months ago
Try the UFO test. www.testufo.com
If you still can’t see the difference there may be a setting on the monitor or PC preventing you from seeing it.
FartsWithAnAccent@lemmy.world 7 months ago
tony@lemmy.hoyle.me.uk 7 months ago
I’ve never seen any difference with the top two with that test. My monitor is 144hz and TBH I might as well have saved my money and got 60Hz ones.
We’re not all hardcore gamers trained to see miniscule differences.
Vlyn@lemmy.zip 7 months ago
Humans can see a single solid color frame changing at 1000 fps. So if you don’t notice a difference between 60 and 165 fps something isn’t working. It’s not your eyes.
GiveMemes@jlai.lu 7 months ago
Seeing a solid color frame change is completely different from the minor changes generally occurring per frame, especially in media such as movies and games which are continuous.
Vlyn@lemmy.zip 7 months ago
The Hobbit movies at 48 instead of 24 fps still looked much smoother and better.
Turun@feddit.de 7 months ago
Your usecase may be different, but I am usually not required to catch solid color frames in my day to day computer use.
andrew@lemmy.stuart.fun 7 months ago
The difference shouldn’t be miniscule, though. If you’ve never been able to see a difference, my money’s on not setting the refresh rate in Windows. It’s not automatic.
tony@lemmy.hoyle.me.uk 7 months ago
It’s mostly marketing. Films are perfect at 24fps and gamer bros think they can see framerates ten times that.
midnight@kbin.social 7 months ago
Really? Movies at 24 fps are tolerable because we're used to it and there's a lot of motion blur, but any motion or panning shot still looks incredibly jerky. You have to get way up into the 100s of fps before you hit diminishing returns of smoothness, and even then it's still noticeable.
Rai@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 months ago
…240FPS is insanely noticeable.
Dudewitbow@lemmy.zip 7 months ago
You dont have to be a hardcore ganer to see the difference. A lot of people who use phones see the difference 90/120hz makes over 60.
Rai@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 months ago
You’re either trolling or you have a 60hz monitor lawl
tony@lemmy.hoyle.me.uk 7 months ago
I’ve really upset the gamer bros here…
Rai@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 months ago
I use 165hz for art and productivity lawl
GenderNeutralBro@lemmy.sdf.org 7 months ago
Or it just doesn’t work right in their browser. It says in big bold letters “VSYNC is not available on the Linux platform” and at 960 pixels per second I actually can’t tell the difference between the 100hz and 50hz lines. If I slow it to 480 pixels per second it becomes apparent, but I still feel like that’s browser funkiness rather than a true frame rate difference. I don’t think it’s actually running at 100fps.
It’s not my eyes, btw. I can usually tell the difference very easily. I had a problem with my Nvidia drivers for a while that would often make it reset to 60hz on reboot, instead of my display’s max of 100. It was always immediately obvious to me just from the mouse cursor, even without consciously looking for it.
LOL as I was writing this, I reloaded the page and now it’s very very obvious at 960. Something’s definitely inconsistent on my device. Go figure.
Tavarin@lemmy.ca 7 months ago
I have a 60 Hz monitor and it doesn’t even try and display any UFOs above 60 Hz, just 15, 30, and 60. So if they see a row with 144 Hz, then they have a 144 Hz monitor.
MustrumR@kbin.social 7 months ago
Do you have elite enabled in Windows tho?