|
Post by sphincter on Feb 25, 2020 23:41:11 GMT -5
So I'm using a 10 year old 42 inch vizio 1080 tv with 60 hz that claims a response time of 5 ms. Which I feel, is pretty good for a tv. When I go to upgrade my whole setup within a few years, I know Ill want a massive tv with atleast 120 hz and maybe by then at 4k. but im here to ask you guys this... Lets say you have a 240 hz display. 5 ms response lag would occur well below just 1 fps. So how is it possible a human can see the difference between 1 ms or 20 ms? I'm asking to determine if I would really need a separate gaming display like the ones made by MSI or ASUS claiming <1ms and although I can see the horizontal fov advantage of the extra wide displays, I dont think it would be a setup I would like, I think the standard aspect of 1080 is right, like a movie screen.
|
|
|
Post by ShrimpBrime on Feb 25, 2020 23:49:15 GMT -5
You'll notice a big difference between your 5ms 60hz 1080p and a 1ms 144hz 4K display.
So 144hz 4K you want 1ms response time to handle 144fps without micro-stutter which some people notice and some don't.
I'm using a similar monitor (TV) to yours. 60hz 1080P. Does fine for my needs. However my 4K is much nicer on the HTPC. way sharper image.
|
|
|
Post by Vinster on Feb 27, 2020 22:37:11 GMT -5
for a gaming TV you'd want to go to OLED from my understanding. the response on those are better. LTT has done a few vids about it and I've seen other from other tubers.
I have a 43" 4K, but I've never hooked up my PC to it.
Vin
|
|
|
Post by sphincter on Mar 2, 2020 21:59:02 GMT -5
yessir, ive seen many videos on the subject. I'm just trying to rationalize how milliseconds of difference would be noticeable to my eyes, when it all mathematically occurs within 1 fps even on a high refresh display. I understand sitting here with my 60 fps, why a higher refresh rate is nice.
|
|