Frame Rates - A utilitarian Perspective

[freedquaker]

vivster said:
I think you got the columns mixed up.

Did I? I mean, on the left side, you get a certain utility for a certain frame rate. The higher the frame rate, the higher the utility. And to the North East (up and right), the frame rate as well as utility increases. It seems ok to me. Maybe I am not seeing what you're point at...

JoeTheBro said:
How do you determine the utility?

In absolute sense (values), I do not determine, we don't specifically know those values either. Human mind doesn't work with MATH. It works with PREFERENCES, so it cannot be precisely enumerated. However, Math can SIMULATE it. The gist of this comparison is, how STRONGLY we prefer one thing over another, and how SIGNIFICANTLY we perceive those changes.

SvennoJ said:
It seems that graph only takes response time or lag into account.

Frame rate needed depends on movement. Bigger screens and faster moving objects require higher frame rates to eliminate judder. Your eyes track and follow moving objects, the frame rate needs to be high enough so the objects don't 'skip' across the screen. The speed you can comfortably pan a camera at depends on frame rate.
You can watch a 30fps youtube video in a window and the frame rate is fine, stick the same thing in VR glasses and judder becomes a big problem.

Brightness also plays a factor. The higher the brightness the more you notice judder. Although low brightness doesn't make the skipping problem any better, it makes your eyes blend more after images together.

Higher frame rates will become more important with large size 4K screens and especially VR glasses.
Back with Doom on a 10" screen 10-12 fps was considered good.

 

All valid points, which this function above does not honestly address. Don't get me wrong, they CAN be formulated. It's just that I don't have the sufficient information how to formulate. However, the current illustration is, though not precise, still makes general and common sense.