3 ms·

I have 60hz and 144hz monitors side by side and the difference in eye comfort is noticeable. 30hz is on the realms of possible unnecessary eye damage in the lo

• bouncycastle 5y ago
  Eyes damage with age. I also grew up on CRT monitors, they probably did the most damage...
  • hu3 5y ago
    Other factors contribute to eye damage too. Slow refresh rate is one of them. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4170366/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4170366/
    • bouncycastle 5y ago
      I think that this article might be referring to the CRT displays (when the CRT gun would pulsate and cause visible flicker especially when the monitor was not interlaced). I do not notice any flickering with the LCD display. In fact, the text appears sharper when compared to another 4k monitor I have with a higher refresh rate... It's not the best though, but compared to what was 10-20 years ago it's amazing. That said, it's certainly not for watching video or playing games.
• jrockway 5y ago
  I doubt it's going to damage your eyes. It's sample-and-hold, after all. It is just very tedious that you have to wait 33ms between when you type a key and it appears on the screen. You will notice, and you will be frustrated. I have a 360Hz monitor and it is really amazing what the reduction in input latency feels like in the real world. All of this input lag that gets blamed on USB or bad input subsystems is really just double-buffered vsync.