27 ms·
> I never cared about anything (let alone terminals) to go above 30 fps. I find that a bit hard to believe. Try setting your monitor's refresh rate to 30hz ins
by bogwog 3y ago
> I never cared about anything (let alone terminals) to go above 30 fps.
I find that a bit hard to believe. Try setting your monitor's refresh rate to 30hz instead of 60hz, and the difference is huge. Going from 60 to any higher is also a very obvious improvement to the user experience (not power usage).
But I agree about the terminal emulator case. I've personally never had an issue with terminal performance on Linux, but someone in the comments mentioned that building AOSP in a slow terminal actually slows the build down due to it taking up an entire core just for rendering the display. Although, I think that's an extreme edge case.
- qwerty456127 3y agoWell, yes, the actual monitor is the only exception. Although low refresh rate never looked different than high to me, it somehow felt worse. On CRT monitors I have tried 60 Hz (looks Okay but feels unpleasant), 85 Hz (totally Ok), 100 Hz (no difference from 75 Hz). On LCD displays I tried 60 Hz (perfectly Okay, what I consider the norm), 75 Hz and 100 Hz and both felt no different from 60 Hz - I would never be able to distinguish. I may confuse 75 with 85 and 100 with 120 - I can't remember what exactly that was clearly. So a 75-85 Hz CRT or a 60 Hz LCD feels like what I need. Less is worse, more makes no difference. But this is about the physical refresh rate of the display. What I meant in the previous comment is about the rendering FPS a program would produce.