• catloaf@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    3 months ago

    After a certain point, no, not really. 30 FPS is good for basic video. 60 is good for fine motion (sports, fast video games). 120 is good enough for basically every regular viewing use case. Beyond 144, it’s really diminishing returns. You know how when something starts spinning really fast, it just turns into a blur? Yeah.

    • mrfriki@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      3 months ago

      I don’t know where is the limit but I’m willing to keep trying. My previous monitor was 165 Hz and it was good. My new 480 Hz monitor it’s glorious when I can run the game at that speed. Played Boltgun and there where areas where it “only” ran at 360 Hz and others where it ran at full 480 Hz and the difference what noticeable and very satisfying.

      • BlemboTheThird@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        I think they’re mostly talking about regular video, in which case 60 is generally fine. Heck, 30 is usually fine. But I agree that in video games anything below 120 is downright painful

        • BluesF@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          3 months ago

          I definitely don’t play with anything near 120 and it doesn’t bother me. I suppose it’s something that once you start paying attention to you notice haha.

          • Nythos@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            3 months ago

            When you regularly start playing at >120hz you definitely notice when stuff is playing at lower than 60hz

            Like it sounds snobby but I can’t play stuff at lower than 100hz ish otherwise I somehow get motion sick from it

            • OrangeJoe@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              You would honestly probably be fine after a short while with lower frame rates. Guaranteed you used to game at those slower frame/refresh rates and never knew better.

              I absolutely agree there’s still benefit to be had above 60, but 60 is still mostly fine. Unless I guess all you do is ultra competitive gaming where twitch reactions are necessary.

            • BluesF@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              And my wallet is no doubt thankfully for it. As long as my old GTX1660 keeps chugging on I’ll keep gaming at ?Hz on my ???p monitor lol

        • BCsven@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          3 months ago

          Depends on the human, there was an article many years ago from a proper science study, some peoples internal vision refresh brain clock speed doesn’t get more info with the super higher refresh.

          I can tell that 90 is smoother than 60 just slightly, but when it involves large motion across the screen like at the movie theatre my brain doesn’t process the spots in between and I end up seeing static snapshots. it becomes nauseating, so for a scene I know will have a speedy side to side motion I end up looking down. And it is not the saccade phenomenon, because it happens even if I have a focal point on screen to not move my eyes of off.

      • AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        I played Half Life at 15 fps back then, and I can tell you that 60 fps is mostly fine.

        My next monitor will still be 144 or more though.