9 ms·
The claim that "human eye can't see more than 24Hz" is rightly ridiculed, but I feel things are going a little too far in the opposite direction lately... Howe
by hoseja 1y ago
The claim that "human eye can't see more than 24Hz" is rightly ridiculed, but I feel things are going a little too far in the opposite direction lately...
However, improvements in brightness and contrast are wonderful.
- m-schuetz 1y agoThe difference between 144hz and 60hz is so massive, I couldn't go back. But yeah, not sure if 500hz would still be as impactful. Maybe for pro-players that want zero latency / input lag.
- dontlaugh 1y agoPersonally I find 120 to be the highest number that feels worth it. I’ve compared with higher and can see the difference, but it seems very minor. It also helps that’s it’s a multiple of both 24 and 60. It’s only 50 that is missed out.
- theandrewbailey 1y agoSeveral years ago, I wondered if I could see the difference of a high refresh rate monitor (60hz vs. more than that). I went to Best Buy to look at monitors, and I could tell. I've loved my 4k 144hz monitors ever since, and even bought more for my home office.
- m-schuetz 1y agoAnd with input that difference is even more apparent. Makes a huge difference if the time from mouse movement to display ia cut in half.
- preisschild 1y agoIt makes a clear difference between 60Hz and 120Hz, but going from 120Hz to 240Hz didn't really make a difference for me tbh. I expect 240Hz to 500Hz would make even less of a difference. (Experience from using the Samsung Odyssey Neo G9 57" 240Hz MiniLED Monitor)
- preisschild 1y agohttps://www.testufo.com/ https://www.testufo.com/ There is this test, which has different frame content in rows. 60Hz is extremely blurry compared to 120Hz. The difference from 120Hz to 240Hz is noticeable, but not by a lot.