SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD)
AMD 204.70-2.5%3:59 PM EST

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: fyodor_ who wrote (56735)9/30/2001 1:56:55 PM
From: andreas_wonischRead Replies (2) of 275872
 
Fyo, Re: It's well-documented that the human eye can easily discern between 50fps and 100fps, and probably much higher as well (although I don't have the documentation to back that up).

I believe the limit is at roughly 100fps. Just set your monitor refresh rate to 60 Hz and compare it with 100 Hz. You'll notice a huge difference. But between 100 Hz and 120 Hz it seems about the same (at least for me) -- both images don't appear to flicker any more. So the limit for the human eye is probably in that range.

Since no one supplies a trace of the frame rate during a benchmark, the only number we have is the average frame rate.

There are several games who actually report three different frame rates: minimum, maximum and average. Unfortunately most hardware sites only use the average frame rate for their benchmark tests.

BTW, another point: Every framerate that is actually above the refresh rate of your monitor (i.e. usually everything above 100fps) can't be display anyway, so it doesn't make much sense to compare 200 fps to 250fps. If you use a TFT display it's even worse (usually they can only be refreshed between 20 and 30 times per second).

Andres
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext