2018

>2018
>only now getting on the 240Hz bandwagon
I guess you never had a high end CRT that could do +200Hz at sub-WSVGA resolutions.

Attached: Laughing Whore.jpg (762x900, 161K)

Buy Dell's OLED monitor I guess?
Since SED is DED and AUO obviously couldn't get FED into commerically viable territory (since we've heard nothing from them about it in years) it's really the only alternative for now.

If LG ever releases W-OLED for monitors, we'll have OLED level contrast and colors, but still have motion drawbacks since it's an IPS LCD on top. W-OLED does increase longevity over RGB OLED and doesn't have color shift with age like RGB OLED does (as each each color subpixel has a different lifespan)
Panasonic too has a solution for the contrast problem - 2 fused IPS panels, which unlike either OLED solution will actually last, but it'll chew power like no tomorrow for backlighting since it needs 4x the brightness to look as bright as a single layer and since Panasonic wants to do 1000nits HDR, we're almost back to PDP levels of power consumption. Also still has crappy motion.

I wonder what happened with LaserVue

God that shit was amazing. Driving Quake 3 at 200+ FPS on a 6600GT looked fucking phenomenal.
We need to go back...

I remember an user once posted a scene from a movie that illustrated just how bad low framerates are.
It was a scene where the camera rotated horizontally on its axis, from a movie featuring a jungle. Maybe Predator.
Everyone who watched the video got a headache from how fucking blurry it was.

Attached: 5467695.png (495x366, 187K)

I have 144hz and 144fps support is surprisingly uncommon in most gaymes. Don't fall for it unless you only play a handful of games that are confirmed to work. Just get a 1440p or 4k monitor.

Frau Kojiro is not a whore.

Attached: iu[1].jpg (1078x599, 56K)

>144fps support is surprisingly uncommon in most gaymes
Literally all games I have can easily run at that refresh rate, aside from one indie shit with hardlocked sprite animations

Attached: received_1113808945415477.jpg (1280x720, 38K)

Bull fucking shit retard. Literally every game I play supports 144hz refresh rates except some shitty indie crap, just like mentioned.
Let me guess, you're also one of those retards that claims 21:9 support is uncommon, yet I have absolutely no problems running all games at that aspect ratio.

You're not fooling anyone with your 60hz monitor, pleb.

>have 144hz and 144fps support is surprisingly uncommon in most gaymes
you fucking retard

Good luck with selling both of your kidneys to afford a hardware capable to run games and stuff in 240 Hz.

Attached: 111.jpg (800x570, 109K)

High refresh rates are nice, but fuck TN panels. I'd only be interested in high refresh rate IPS or OLED panels.

>240hz
>on a 1080p screen
>with a shit TN panel
>for those 3 games you can actually play at that full resolution
>old games that actually look like shit themselves
>until you get frustrated and spend even more money on a 1080 ti
>and then you find out your cpu is now a bottleneck and to game at 240fps you would need to overclock to 5Ghz at least
>so you buy a 8700K as well
>and now you can finally play better games
>but they're locked at 60fps so too bad
>or the engine maxes out at 200fps
>or you can go beyond 60fps but everything in the game breaks
>so you just hide the tears as you play cs:go all day on your shit panel that cost you way too much

Attached: smug_cake.gif (500x281, 371K)

bullshit every single game i play runs it fine youre just a retard

also, 1440p 144hz isnt that expensive and 4k is shit

>2018
>not 480hz

Attached: project480-rear.jpg (3311x2587, 1.85M)

Human eye can't see over 24fps

What is this

ZisWorks x28. It should be capable of 1080p480hz but I'm not sure if they ever fixed the firmware bug causing it to bug out. It does do 540p480hz fine though.
There's also this one projector that does well over 1000hz but it's a crazy low resolution.

ʙJG oM' doJɴks ( ( ( G ~ ᗩ ~ ᑎ ~ G ) ) )

>lightboost
enjoy input lag

my chinese cartoons are 24fps and animated either 8 or 12fps.

It was never supposed to be able to do 480 Hz at 1080p, the timing controller doesn't have enough bandwidth for that. Was always at most 480 Hz at 540p and given some of the manufacturing and firmware issues it's not totally guaranteed to actually get to the highest modes stable anymore.

Eccellent post

43Hz untermensch race here

intel atom was a mistake

Nobody with a brain would do this though.

>muh 10000 Hz
>all other specs are garbage

>muh fast CRTs that you HAD to drive at 200Hz to not see fucking flicker
Garbage. And why do people forget that all CRTs designed for 60Hz (literally all TVs and PC monitors before 2000) have even more blur than current LCDs?

Beause i do colorwork/programming/layout design, gaming is secondary. 4k witha correct color scale is way more importtant.

this guy rotated so fast he bleached the nigga and his own hair

>.kz
Why do slavholes all look so very similar?

59 HZ MASTER RACE REPORTING IN

12 fps per eye masterrace

1hz is more than enough, 2 tops.

Human eye can't see anything at all

144Hz was always stupid. 120Hz supports 24fps media, 30fps media, 60fps media without frame issues.
Of those common formats, 144Hz only matches 24fps media. 120Hz is good, 240Hz is better (obviously). Nothing else is good.

You can run 144hz monitors at 120hz though.

Huh I guess that makes sense.

24Hz is enough! Why do you think movies are made with 24 FPS?

morons ITT lol

>CRTs designed for 60Hz have even more blur than current LCDs
This is just straight up wrong. The amount of motion blur is determined by the amount of time each frame is visible while the eye is moving. CRT phosphors are only at their peak brightness for a fraction of the frame which is what causes the flickering but also causes the image to have very little perceived motion blur. Modern displays that have low motion blur modes achieve this by shutting off the backlight for most of the frame with the same drawback of flickering. A regular sample and hold 144 Hz LCD will still have 3-4x as much motion blur as a CRT at any refresh rate.

This article goes over it pretty well and has a good set of illustrations in the persistence section: blogs.valvesoftware.com/abrash/down-the-vr-rabbit-hole-fixing-judder/

Frame rate is a social construct.

Lightboost 120hz still looks better than all of those. Why do people buy into this meme?

I remember now that the movie was actually one of the live action Transformers movies but I can't find the scene

>Double the refresh rate again and again for triple the price each time to take off blur.
>Your brain more than happily adds the blurring back since it won't handle that images at that rate anyway.

>with a shit TN panel
The only lcd type that can sustain 1ms response time.

What about 150hz? My monitor is 150hz.

Most things aren't even produced at above 24 FPS so all I need is 30.

To bad response times arnt even worth it when you have to deal with shitty viewing angles and possibly bit depth

they are absolutely worth it. find the right angle and sitting position you sperglord, it's not that difficult

Who gives a fuck about viewing angles it’s right in front of your fucking face

12 eyes per frame

i don't use 240hz, because i want 1440p and 1440p 120hz with ulmb is easier to achieve with current hardware. i'm not even sure if there are 240hz displays with a resolution higher than 1080p.

Attached: ulmb2.jpg (767x434, 118K)

Except when sometimes you tilt your head or sit like pic related it's noticeably worse.

Attached: 280cf00cee6c3fcb0e69320d93b50e9d.jpg (720x556, 58K)

spiders HATE this one simple trick

This. ULMB is already 10x better than 240hz. Why do we even bother? It’s just a fucking meme. ULMB or lightboost is the way to go.

I also love input lag too.

>144fps support is surprisingly uncommon in most gaymes
learn into config.cfg pleb

Lightboost produces less input lag than native 144hz. What you mean friend?

>breaks the physics or has other side effects
Maybe during the time where most games weren't console ports.

That doesn't even make any sense, the only thing strobe-type blur reduction does is turn the backlight off for most of the frame. It can only add to display lag compared to the same display timings without strobing.

Even so, I’d much prefer a unnoticeable amount of input lag vs any motion blur at all. Blur in any amount is cancer.

Totally agree with you there.

Its weird how normalfags prefer some motion blur. The video game community even caters to these crowd for some reason.

My point is that older CRTs had less flickering because they had longer persistence phosphors - but also had more blur

Not him but it doesn't. For an optimal lightstrobing experience, you need to time the flash when the panel has refreshed about midway, which means you add about half a frame of latency. At 120hz, this is 4.166ms.
You can customise the ULMB of the Benq monitors to choose when to flash, so at the top of your panel for less latency if you want, at the expense of the bottom half of the screen having ghosting issues.
Pick your poison really. 240hz would be useful with Lightstrobing solely for reducing input lag. i.e half a frame of 240hz < 120hz

Meant for

LCDs were a mistake

Because it makes it look more “cinematic” or some shit

Refresh rate aside, I hope we can all agree that 4K+HDR+adaptive sync are minimum specs for our next monitors.

>not using 144hz with lightboost

I'm fine, OP.

Attached: CROPPED_LightBoost50.jpg (3040x1014, 608K)

Good luck getting a 1080p CRT for $5.

>4ms
forums.blurbusters.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=16

Even so, the lack of blur makes up for the input lag.

There is no perceptible imput lag, at least in my benq, that had pretty low imput lag to begin with.

The blur reduction is VERY perceptible, thou.

I'm just going to keep using my 60hz IPS monitors until they stop working or some new display technology that doesn't suck hits the market. My GTX770 struggles to even play some newer games at 60fps so if I got a 120hz or 240hz monitor I'd end up having to upgrade most of my pc just to make use of it.

you turds are aware that going above 60 starts giving nausea to most people and that's why the motion blur effect exists?

you're literally paying thousands of dollars to get something that will make you sick AND is blurred out anyway

I get sick with motion blur.
high refresh rate without mb is clean and comfy, never had that problem.

Even then you can add motion blur to a 144hz screen in most games and it will be better then motion blur on a 60hz screen. Don't know why you would wan't to do that, thou...

What's the next gem you're gonna pull out of your ass?

Attached: 1450946867112.jpg (400x400, 23K)

Crt4lyfe

Uh Minecraft has no FPS lock, sweaty.

that's why playing at 40 fps stutters like shit compared to 144. Stop spreading false info, retard.

Different parts of the eye have different response speed. The corner of your eye doesn't see color, but is fast; the center sees color, and is slower. This means that when you look at a 60 Hz monitor straight-on, the image is perfectly steady; but when you look at it from the corner of your eye, it is flickering. As you go to even higher frequencies of refresh, even the rods don't respond fast enough.

This make sense from an evolutionary perspective. When the saber-toothed tiger jumps at you, you need to know about it - quickly. You don't need to know its color. So using the faster rods (sensitive, fast, no color sense) in the edge of the field of view is a good survival strategy. But since we can't move very far in 1/100th of a second, there is no need for sensors that respond at that speed.

The difference is real, and can be perceived. In the corner of your eye, for most people.

Incidentally, the rendering of fast motion is helped by the higher frame rate; if you show a bright object against a dark background moving left-to-right across the screen in 1/30th of a second, the brain will notice the difference between "two images comprise the full motion" and "four images comprise the full motion", even if you don't really perceive the individual frames. You will see a smoother action when more frames make up the motion: after all, in real life you really see "infinitely many frames" even though they blur together.

how to sync eye refresh rate to monitor's?

Yeah this bullshit.

Attached: ufotest.png (1745x677, 706K)

did you just fucking printscreen and post? go back to /soc/ you dimwit..

Any decent 144hz 2K GSync monitor?

>gsync monitor

480 will be best. Human mind/eyes can't see/perceive more than 300 frames in a second, anything beyond that will look identical.

My secondary monitor is a 1440p 120hz monitor and compared to my main monitor (4k60hz) it's visibly smoother but it's not worth twice the money smoother especially since high framerate monitors have panels with garbage color.

From my personal experience:
4k 60hz > 1440p 120hz > 1080p 240hz

refresh rate affects response time

Attached: 1498343801586.jpg (600x663, 62K)

>he doesn't play old games that goes over 200fps