top | item 8793721

(no title)

Qiasfah | 11 years ago

Most serious FPS gamers swear by screens that have a higher update rate than 60hz.

In the past this was achieved by setting your CRT to a low resolution and upping the refresh rate. More recently you can get TN LCD panels that offer 120 or 144hz update rates.

Moving the mouse in small quick circles on a 144hz screen compared to a 60hz screen is a very different experience. On a 60hz screen you can see distinct points in the circle where the cursor gets drawn. With 144hz you can still see the same effect if you go fast enough, but it is way smoother.

This makes a huge difference for being able to perceive fast paced movements in twitch style games and is the reason there has been a shift to these monitors across every competitive shooter.

My thoughts on this is that this behavior is similar to signal sampling theorems. Specifically the Nyquist theorem talks about how you have to sample at at least 2x the max frequency of a signal to accurately represent the frequency. For signal generation this means that you have to generate a signal at at least twice the rate of the max frequency you want to display. If you want to accurately reconstruct the shape of that signal you need 10x the max frequency (for example two samples in one period of a sine wave makes it look like a sawtooth wave, ten samples makes it look like a sine wave).

So, if you're moving your mouse cursor quickly on a screen or playing a game with fast paced model movement even if your eyes can only really sample at something like 50-100hz the ideal monitor frequency might be 1000hz. There's a lot of complexity throughout the system before we can get anything close to this (game engines being able to run at that high of a framerate, video interfaces with enough bandwidth to drive that high of a framerate, monitor technology being able to switch the crystals that fast, etc.).

Yes, 48fps movies typically look less cinematic, but I think this is a flaw in movie making technology and not of the framerate. The fight scenes in the hobbit sometimes look fake because you can start to tell how they aren't actually beating up the other person. This detail is lost at 24fps and is why they have been able to use these techniques.

discuss

order

emtel|11 years ago

2 samples of a sine wave does not result in a sawtooth wave being reproduced by the DAC. A perfect sawtooth wave actually contains infinitely high frequency content and thus can't be perfectly represented digitally.

Check out this video http://xiph.org/video/vid2.shtml which was recently posted here. Also the wikipedia page on sawtooth waves has an animation showing additive synthesis of a sawtooth wave: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sawtooth_wave

zanny|11 years ago

I just upgraded to a 144hz monitor and a 290 this Christmas, to celebrate them working on Mesa. And yeah, they work pretty flawlessly, even in my now 3 monitor setup.

And Quake. Holy shit. Playing that game at 144hz makes it feel incredibly real, even if its blocky and pixilated, the movements are incredibly organic and the camera turning feels like a head turning rather than spinning around on Google Maps.

adamcanady|11 years ago

Wait a second.. can you explain the 10x the max frequency part to accurately reconstruct the shape of the signal?

It's my understanding that you just need 2x (two points in a sine wave) to construct a unique wave. If you're getting a sawtooth, it means that you're sampling a wave that is composed of very high frequencies, and you're accurately sampling it, so a DAC can reconstruct it uniquely.