SvennoJ said:
Norion said:
A mixture between those I suppose and that's strange to me since when I set it to 60hz to test it out it feels kinda choppy and the increased input lag is noticeable making it harder to quickly move it about accurately. Like at 60hz I can't effortlessly glide it to where I wanna put it as easily.
|
Interesting. Maybe I'm just to used to my mouse. I never think about moving it, just put it where it needs to be. The distance on the table is still the same!
But I do see quite a noticeable difference when I move the page up and down by dragging the scrollbar. That's a lot more 'stuttery' at 60hz. Still not smooth at 144hz though, but maybe a better showcase than just the pointer :)
Human motion blur is weird anyway. When you're driving (or better as a passenger) try to tell where the road ahead (or landscape to the side) turns blurry closer to the car. It's not a predefined line and sometimes you see snapshots of sharp images between the blur shooting by. (Your pupils tend to lock on to moving detail to sample an image) Hence I dislike motion blur as stuff I focus on is not blurred irl, the background is (unless it rotates of course, can't lock onto that)
I wonder is 240hz enough to eliminate the difference between real movement and on screen movement? 144hz is not enough yet to see a solid mouse pointer while moving it around, following it with your eyes. But indeed better than at 60 and a lot easier to keep your eyes locked on the pointer while moving it.
Trackmania Turbo was a nice demonstration on PSVR between 60 and 120 fps. Looking at rotating helicopter blades in one of the levels (without motion blur applied by the game) 120fps simply showed twice as many blades as at 60fps. Still far too slow to actually see the blur you see irl. Same when looking sideways at a fence while at speed. Twice as many fence posts at 120 as at 60. But no natural blur. Your mind puts the discreet images together, not seeing it as a 'smear'.
I guess the only way to get that (without adding motion blur) is to provide such a high fps that things only move 1 pixel per frame, not skipping any. So your mind collects the whole path in the sample time instead of multiple discreet images. Which is exactly what motion blur does of course, however the game doesn't know what you're looking at / following with your eyes.
Anyway higher fps, means less motion blur needed = better image!
(But only if that doesn't mean the image has to be much lower resolution to reach 60fps, always trade-offs)
|
A part of it might be me having the DPI set kinda high so even small movements of the wrist can move it a lot so it taking slightly longer to react to me stopping moving my wrist at 60hz makes a difference when I'm used to it being at 144hz.
It's been a while since I've looked into it but I think you need much higher than 240hz to have truly perfect clarity to the extent that there's a push for 1000hz monitors which considering that 500hz ones have been a thing since 2023 ones with 1000hz might just be a couple years or so away at this point. In fact I just looked that up and it seems 2027 is a likely year for it. They'll just be 1080p at first though so still some more years than that till truly perfect monitors refresh rate and resolution wise are available.
Last edited by Norion - on 06 January 2025
