• @stevestevesteve@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    57 months ago

    One of the big benefits of 144 and 120 over 60hz display is actually how well they render lower frame rate content. Watching a 24fps (so cinematic!) movie on a 144hz ``display results in a new frame every 6 refreshes (or 5 for 120hz). With a 60hz display, you get an new frame every 2.5 refreshes. Generally this results in judder where every other frame is displayed for longer than the others

    • Fushuan [he/him]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      17 months ago

      Wouldn’t by that logic also be impossible to show 60fps content at 60 fps in a 144 monitor?

      • @stevestevesteve@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        17 months ago

        Not impossible at all, but there would be similar judder without some compensation. It’s pretty normal for 144hz monitors to support being driven at 60fps, but it’s pretty abnormal for a 60hz monitor to advertise 48 or 24fps via edid. Most modern 60+hz TVs are perfectly capable of doing so, though.

        Either way, that’s one reason I’m very happy with the 240hz wave that seems to be going on. You can display 24 and 60 fps content simultaneously with no judder, as well as even higher frame rate content.

        That combined with the popularity of VRR and free/g sync makes me even more optimistic for people to see just about everything the way it was meant to be seen