Wyoming knows his stuff:
Clearly not. I also reported him for trolling as I sincerely hope he isnāt be serious. 
3 Likes
Dont take it personally, itās just an expression.
It is 100% not a placebo effect. The difference between 72hz and 144hz is as obviously different as red and blue.
1 Like
Itās rude and inappropriate.
Youāve obviously convinced yourself that itās a massive difference and worth whatever price you paid for it so thereās no use in further discussion.
There is, though. This isnāt just me āconvincing myself it was worth it.ā Like itās such a massive and obvious difference and literally everyone else Iāve ever met, including like 99.99% of the people on this forum other than you have said the same thing.
Iām saying it because I think youāre doing something wrong if you canāt tell a difference. If you think the difference is so tiny that itās unnoticeable or a placebo effect, then you almost certainly have your game/monitor configured wrong.
Yes it is.
Lots of people do fall for marketing jargon.
No Iām not. I have a 144hz monitor. Itās set to 144hz. The game is configured perfectly fine.
People donāt see in frames per second. They detect change in light. A human can easily detect a change in light that only appeared for 1/300th of a second. That doensāt mean having 300 frames per second is useful. Anything above 120 fps has pointless levels of diminishing returns as human reaction time canāt even respond anyway.
I donāt know what to tell you, then. I honestly dont know what to tell you if you think itās just marketing. Literally everyone but you has said the same thing, but sure, itās just marketing jargon and every single person ever except you has fallen victim to it.
1 Like
Wyoming is a technical expert and he agrees.
300FPS burns a hell of a lot more CPU cycles. Thatās about it.
Wyoming is a super nice guy who is very helpful at times, but he is not by any means a technical expert.
Wyoming Myst most valuable player technical support
Thatās what it says under his name.
This is the problem with giving random people a fancy title. It makes people believe they are experts for no reason. At any rate. Flagging Hulk for trolling.
3 Likes
This is a myth.
Nerves in your eye can fire between 300-1000 a second. Itās debatable that you can see 1000 fps but they can perceive 200-300 fps with repeatable consistent results. No one really has a answer of what fps your eye is at. Itās not 30 fps tho but it could between 100 and 1000.
Iāll end with a basic experiment when flashed an image for 1/220 the of second not only did the person see the flash they saw the image consistently.
3 Likes
Actually the research shows that the human eye can only process up to about 90 frames per second.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2016/12/22/why-do-we-need-120hz144hz-monitors-if-the-human-eye-cant-see-beyond-60hz/
https://www.healthline.com/health/human-eye-fps#:~:text=Some%20experts%20will%20tell%20you,and%2060%20frames%20per%20second
https://www.pcgamer.com/how-many-frames-per-second-can-the-human-eye-really-see/
in more regular terms [Jordan DeLong, assistant professor of psychology at St Josephās College in Rensselaer] feels that the drop-off in people being able to detect changes in smoothness in a screen lies at around 90Hz
2 Likes
Iām not really sure why the user included a 120fps comparison since youtube only does 60fps playback. It will probably fool a lot of people into thinking there is no difference.
1 Like
This forum wonāt let me post images, but whatever. Anyone with eyes can determine with absolute certainty the difference between 30, 60 and 120 frames per second.
2 Likes
I have a low latency and low fps monitor. ^^" But NVidia is great also. (60fps monitor, and reported 0.6ms latency, the one I have is smooth enough for me.)
So I just tested 30fps half refresh rate adaptive sync with NVIDIA driver level 30 FPS cap on a 60hz monitor and itās perfectly smooth
Honestly donāt need more than that
The only problem is the input lag
What actually matters more than frame rate is regular frame time intervals
1 Like