• yggdar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Our eyes and brains don’t perceive still images or movement in the same way as a computer. There is no simple analogy between our perception and computer graphics.

      I’ve read that some things can be perceived at 1000 fps. IIRC, it was a single white frame shown for 1ms between black frames. Of course most things you won’t be able to perceive at that speed, but it certainly isn’t as simple as 30 fps!

    • TheSlad@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      Also most monitors only go up to 60fps, and even if you have a fancy monitor that does, your OS probably doesn’t bother to go higher than 60 anyways. Even if the game itself says the fps is higher, it just doesn’t know that your pc/monitor isnt actually bothering to render all the frames…

      • fiah@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        my man, just because you’ve never seen the refresh rate option in the monitor settings doesn’t mean it hasn’t been there since basically forever

      • pivot_root@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        This is blatantly false.

        Windows will do whatever frame rate the EDID reports the display as being capable of. It won’t do it by default, but it’s just a simple change in the settings application.

        Macs support higher than 60 Hz displays these days, with some of the laptops even having a built-in one. They call it by some stupid marketing name, but it’s a 120 Hz display.

        Linux requires more tinkering with modelines and is complicated by the fact that you might either be running X or Wayland, but it’s supported as well.