this post was submitted on 10 Nov 2023
109 points (87.1% liked)

Technology

55940 readers
3764 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Title says it all (i have turned on 165hz on settings). Its a cheap monitor, do some 165hz monitors not truly give you that experience? Or are my eyes fucked

(page 2) 38 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] onlinepersona@programming.dev 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I'm 100% sure if the majority of people in here claiming they see the difference were actually tested, they'd fail it. Something like

  • 60Hz, 120Hz, 144Hz, 165Hz, 200Hz
  • multiple game scenes and clips:
    • varying FPS ranging from 29 to 320fps
    • quiet and busy (not much stuff happening vs a lot of stuff happening)
    • slow and fast camera or background movements

Take the Cartesian product of that for all the different possibilities and play them a random set thereof. Maybe 20 or so.

It's just like screen resolution. If you sit at arms length or further away from your screen (which you should) and increase the resolution of your screen, everything becomes smaller (icons, text, images). That means you'll have to scale them up to be at the same size as when they were at a lower resolution.
Also, at a certain distance, you become unable to spot details of a certain size --> you physically will not be able to see the different between 1080p, 2k, and 4k from that distance. It's called visual acuity. I bet you, if you put did a similar test as above with video resolution, screen resolution, screen size, and distance from screen, the majority would start do much worse than they think they can.

It's mostly marketing and "bigger number = better" think.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] galaxi@lemm.ee 2 points 8 months ago

Surprised I haven't seen this, but have you tried a different cable? Display port? Could be worth a shot.

[–] snooggums@kbin.social 1 points 8 months ago

Depends on the game as to whether it will be noticeable. If you aren't looking quickly in multiple directions like in a first person shooter then it is not nearly as noticeable as a slow scan at 60 generally looks pretty good.

It also matters how well your video card matches up to the monitor refresh rate because otherwise you might end up with a frame being displayed twice.

[–] TheRedSpade@lemmy.world 0 points 8 months ago

I usually can't even tell the difference between 30 and 60; anything more is a waste.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›