Screenshots from v0.1
Moderator: Moderators
-
- Posts: 21
- Joined: 01 Nov 2004, 03:33
FPS
Uhmmm, 24 FPS is the Cinema standard.
30 FPS Interlaced is NTSC TV/DVD/VHS/blah (actually its 29.9999..)
25 is PAL for European TVs.
Quake actually runs the animation at 20
TA I have no idea but its probably 20 too.
most VGA monitors use a 60Hz refresh
SVGA 75 Hz to 85 Hz+
you can infact tell the difference between 60Hz and 90Hz refresh rates too.
15 Hz is like a fast slide show, slow and anoying.
30 FPS Interlaced is NTSC TV/DVD/VHS/blah (actually its 29.9999..)
25 is PAL for European TVs.
Quake actually runs the animation at 20
TA I have no idea but its probably 20 too.
most VGA monitors use a 60Hz refresh
SVGA 75 Hz to 85 Hz+
you can infact tell the difference between 60Hz and 90Hz refresh rates too.
15 Hz is like a fast slide show, slow and anoying.
80 is where it get comftable, but you have to remember refresh rate is not to do with fps. 25 fps will trick the eye just fine if interlaced, 50 without, the flickering is the refresh rate on the monitor which should be much higher.
Most old TV's were uncomfatble to watch for to long as they ran at 25fps interlaced and 50 htz refresh, no they run at 100 htz refresh. Thsi ofcourse means the TV draws the same picture twice. Same principle on the PC, only the pictures can be updated faster if need be.
(some people can run Quake 3 at 300 fps, but then the monitor only refreshes at 75 (as an example) so you wont actully be able to tell the difference betwwen 300 and 100 fps!
aGorm
Storm, I know you might know that that was not aimed at you, kjust sharing genral know how.
Most old TV's were uncomfatble to watch for to long as they ran at 25fps interlaced and 50 htz refresh, no they run at 100 htz refresh. Thsi ofcourse means the TV draws the same picture twice. Same principle on the PC, only the pictures can be updated faster if need be.
(some people can run Quake 3 at 300 fps, but then the monitor only refreshes at 75 (as an example) so you wont actully be able to tell the difference betwwen 300 and 100 fps!
aGorm
Storm, I know you might know that that was not aimed at you, kjust sharing genral know how.
-
- Posts: 578
- Joined: 19 Aug 2004, 17:38
Somehow, the 24 FPS that is used for movies is not sufficient for playing a game. Even if you won't see the individual frames, you'll find a game a bit uneasy to control at 24 FPS. I don't know what's the human perception limit, and it probably depends on personal differences. I'd say that humans starts stopping to notice difference when improving over 50 FPS.
What!!! It better not swich you to 60!!! I cant look at a monitor at 60 for more than 5 mins! How would i be able to play!?!?!?
No storm, I was not expecting you to, but i could not tell if i had worded it well enough to not make it sound patronising. I wernt kidding when i said i cant do english, it may be my only language but i realy am bad at it!
aGorm
No storm, I was not expecting you to, but i could not tell if i had worded it well enough to not make it sound patronising. I wernt kidding when i said i cant do english, it may be my only language but i realy am bad at it!
aGorm
link to refreshforce: http://www.pagehosting.co.uk/rf/
refrech rate
OK guys we all know it but u guys ramble on to much about whos right and wrong maybe ur just tryin to get the right answer but could someone be the bigger man and find resources to back him up or someone pls just back down and let it be?
-
- Posts: 128
- Joined: 24 Feb 2005, 19:05