You probably don’t need a 1,000 Hz gaming monitor
- Thread starter JournalBot
- Start date
There's advantage to it, and I'm glad it exists, but rolling frames seem the bigger development and that's what I want to see implemented more. We can, of course, have both. We're not yet anywhere close to the point where the screens can do rolling LINES though, but considering just how fast CRTs draw individual lines, that may be imperceptible anyway.
As for the specific framerate itself... It's weird, but I'd like to see it reach 1260. Not a single frame more, that'd be enough to have a native frame rate fully divisible by 60, 30, 35, and 70, hitting all the old highlights games were largely designed around back in the day without having to switch modes.
Except 50/25 off in the PAL regions. Those will do fine at 1000. Mode switching when playing movies would cover all other cases. If you wanted a truly nearly universal framerate, it'd be 1680, to include 24/48 material, but still excluding PAL and all of those really weird framerates of obscure or older consoles.
Variable Refresh Rate allowing a lot of nuance down to 6 decimal places would cover direct switching to those anyway.
As for the specific framerate itself... It's weird, but I'd like to see it reach 1260. Not a single frame more, that'd be enough to have a native frame rate fully divisible by 60, 30, 35, and 70, hitting all the old highlights games were largely designed around back in the day without having to switch modes.
Except 50/25 off in the PAL regions. Those will do fine at 1000. Mode switching when playing movies would cover all other cases. If you wanted a truly nearly universal framerate, it'd be 1680, to include 24/48 material, but still excluding PAL and all of those really weird framerates of obscure or older consoles.
Variable Refresh Rate allowing a lot of nuance down to 6 decimal places would cover direct switching to those anyway.
Upvote
-1
(2
/
-3)
There has weirdly always been this assumption that you only need to refresh your display fast enough that you can't see each frame as a distinct image. Like we only see distinct moments in time, and as long as the display is at least that fast, we have ourselves fooled.
That's definitely not the case though. The goal of really high refresh rate monitors is to remove artifacts caused by the display. I'm pretty sure I know where your link is pointing and that's exactly what that describes. It's really worth a read for anyone who is thinking "why the hell would this matter?"
Upvote
16
(18
/
-2)
Thomas Cochrane
Ars Centurion
Hey, gamers! I have 1000MHZ ultra-mega-high-definition gaming water availabe, for the ultimate refreshment and syncronicity. Be the best! Link in bio!
Upvote
-5
(6
/
-11)
How fast do rods and cones cycle? One would think that once the emitters exceed the detectors by a reasonable amount, that further improvement becomes academic.
Upvote
-7
(2
/
-9)
A harmless pie
Ars Centurion
The people who make the frame generators like to say all frames are fake. Nonetheless, it depends on the game really. I'm sure some older games could theoretically run at 1000fps on a 5090, but newer stuff... definitely going to be leaning on frame generation.
Upvote
2
(2
/
0)
The thing to keep in mind is.. it isn't this clean cycle you might imagine. Indeed, so long as the cells are being stimulated, the signal is continuous. Further, with all the pre-processing our eyes do along the way to the brain, it's even less clean. I suppose the best way to do any sort of comparison is just to know how fast those cells alter their behavior after a change in lighting conditions. Get close to that, well now that's a start!
Upvote
10
(10
/
0)
Great, now it'll match the mouse timing but the eyes will always be deceived at almost 10x the speed of regular mortals.
Upvote
-1
(0
/
-1)
LG said it themselves when they said it would be for e-sports. So this will be purchased by a few individuals, but really only be accessible to gamers with corporate sponsorships.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
Totally unnecessary
"...there’s some evidence that you would need a 40,000 Hz monitor to totally eliminate perceived motion blur on a sufficiently large, high-resolution monitor..." - Oh, onwards and upwards then! The GPUs will just have to catch up!
Sarcasm aside, I find the combo of 120Hz and VRR/ProMotion, to be good enough for me. Beyond that, panel quality, colour accuracy and brightness are more important factors.
"...there’s some evidence that you would need a 40,000 Hz monitor to totally eliminate perceived motion blur on a sufficiently large, high-resolution monitor..." - Oh, onwards and upwards then! The GPUs will just have to catch up!
Sarcasm aside, I find the combo of 120Hz and VRR/ProMotion, to be good enough for me. Beyond that, panel quality, colour accuracy and brightness are more important factors.
Upvote
-2
(2
/
-4)
Why would the area of the screen have anything to do with temporal resolution?
Besides, sitting a couple of feet away from a decent sized gaming monitor results in the displaying taking up at least as much of your FoV as sitting in a cinema at maybe all but the first couple of rows at an IMAX.
Upvote
0
(1
/
-1)
I disagree with the common wisdom that high frame rates are only beneficial for esports twitch-based first-person shooters.
In my personal experience, high frame rate / low persistence is actually more beneficial in a gamepad driven side-scrolling game. If I'm playing an FPS with a mouse, I'm usually flicking the view around quickly, so my eyes aren't really directly following the movement of the background. However, if I'm playing a side scrolling game, and the visuals are moving across the screen at a more or less consistent speed, it's easier to directly track the movement of the image and see the improvements of better motion clarity.
I don't actually have a display that goes over 120Hz, but my 120Hz OLED TV has a low persistence mode that shows each frame for 40% of the refresh cycle, thus providing the motion clarity of a 300Hz full-persistence display. I find that it provides a significant visual improvement to many games. And the indie games I often play are usually much easier to drive at high frame rates than the typical AAA games.
Is 300Hz to 1000Hz as significant as 120Hz to 300Hz? Probably not. But it also isn't the equivalent of high def audio as a previous commenter posted. There are real-world benefits of very high frame rates that the majority of people could see. Does that mean they should buy this particular monitor? Probably not. A GSync Pulsar display, which combines low persistence and variable refresh rates, would probably be a much better investment for most people who want better motion clarity.
Upvote
13
(13
/
0)
FWIW, I have a 43" / 110cm CRT that does 720p. I can just barely pick it up by myself. It's not that heavy, it's just hard to get a secure grip. It's been a few years since I picked it up, but I think it's about 50 pounds / 22kg.
Upvote
-2
(1
/
-3)
Launch? What you're describing is Early Access. If I hire a firm to build a house, I don't want to begin occupying it when they say it's finished ("launch") yet have them fixing things and continue making big changes for months.
If it really was "launched" in such an incomplete state, that is not laudable in any way. In fact, it's rather dishonest because a reasonable person would not expect large changes after launch. If it ends up that the eventual finished product is too different from what it was beforehand, then the players are not allowed refunds if they dislike it.
Upvote
-3
(1
/
-4)
If I'm not running my graphics at cinematic, I get up to 700 frames on my 4090 for war thunder.
Upvote
1
(1
/
0)
Upvote
2
(2
/
0)
24.5″ - even at 100000Hz it's still a tiny monitor.
To each his own I guess.
Hell many people like to game on PHONE screens. I'm not joking!
To each his own I guess.
Hell many people like to game on PHONE screens. I'm not joking!
Upvote
2
(3
/
-1)
jonbob_newcastle
Ars Scholae Palatinae
I had a 19” (I think) AOC that did 1600x1200, which was far superior to LCD panels at the time. Unfortunately there was an incident with a magnet that must have permanently damaged the shadow mask, so that was the end of that.
I wish I could remember why I associate LCDs with needing to enable vsync. Was tearing on them - especially early models - just a great deal worse than CRTs?
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
Just checked Unreal Tournament 2004 and I'm getting 800-1200 FPS with a 7800XT @ 1440p.
Upvote
3
(3
/
0)
You joke but I maintain that 3D is underrated, and it being used in VR is a good example of well-done 3D. I've been playing my 3DS a lot and 3D adds a lot to the experience. Only drawback is it tires the eyes out much quicker.
Upvote
1
(1
/
0)
50 pounds seems very... conservative... for a 43" CRT. I had a 27" Toshiba that weighed about that.
Upvote
10
(10
/
0)
They're so terribly optimized that PS5 games couldn't run 10th the speed anyways...
Plus, Sony's problem. Leaving potential billions on the table. Sony makes exactly 0 games I want.
Upvote
1
(1
/
0)
jonbob_newcastle
Ars Scholae Palatinae
I wondered about that. 43” was the largest CRT you could get and those things weighed over 400lb.
Upvote
8
(8
/
0)
Crimson Desert wasn't launched in to EA. They released a finished game that players had serious issues with. The control scheme was pretty bad for a lot of gamers used to the western standard and there were requests to add additional content that Pearl Abyss hadn't thought of or cut due to time constraints.
They have gone about this totally differently to a standard EA following more along the lines of an MMORPG with fast, quick fixes.
If you look through the patch notes it's pretty impressive how much they have listened to feedback.
Edit to add: It's worth noting Pearl Abyss sold 5 million copies. which is about 3.5 million more that they projected so a lot of this content and support is a response to having a metric fuckload of money they weren't expecting to have.
Double edit: I totally bolloxed up my numbers in that edit. Apologies, I am extremely tired.
Last edited:
Upvote
4
(4
/
0)
Finally, I can Quake 3 without motion blur! Seeing as that is the only class of game that can probably even get close to 1000hz without hitting bottlenecks way sooner than 500hz. OK, maybe Counter Strike Source can too.
Fuck, LG just give me a 1080p 120hz OLED dang it. It has a similar level of market interest. I would settle for 60hz even lol. Sony used to be able to mfg 1080 25" OLED panels nearly 15+ years ago without issue and no white sun pixel that could hit 250 nits no problem. Surely you can too! Beating this old dead horse here. Don't mind me.
Fuck, LG just give me a 1080p 120hz OLED dang it. It has a similar level of market interest. I would settle for 60hz even lol. Sony used to be able to mfg 1080 25" OLED panels nearly 15+ years ago without issue and no white sun pixel that could hit 250 nits no problem. Surely you can too! Beating this old dead horse here. Don't mind me.
Upvote
-2
(0
/
-2)
This is quite literally a waste of electricity at this point, nobody is going to be able to perceive the difference.
But I guess this is par for the course in our idiotic AI-bubble-fueled tech space where power efficiency is no longer considered relevant.
But I guess this is par for the course in our idiotic AI-bubble-fueled tech space where power efficiency is no longer considered relevant.
Upvote
-6
(0
/
-6)
I do play games where higher refresh rate is actually helpful, but perhaps one of the things I enjoyed the most was when I realized I had the FPS of Slay the Spire 2 limited to 60. Setting it at 240 and watching those animations get buttery smooth was far more satisfying than I think is reasonable.
Yeah, I upgraded my setup in a similar fashion (60hz -> 165hz for me) about two years ago; difference in my experience was the upgrade was extremely notable. The change was noticeable enough that I started to perceive the input lag and lower sensor resolution of the midrange-at-best mouse I was using. Once all was said and done, I actually was performing legitimately better at several of the games I was playing with no changes in my baseline skill. Not just FPS's either - turns out higher refresh rates make it easier to track the mouse cursor too, which helped a lot in LoL and Starcraft (yes, I just dated myself...). It was wild to experience. I had not expected it to be as impactful as it was.
Upvote
1
(1
/
0)
Only 1080p? So it's ugly but at least it's faster than you can possibly see (assuming your GPU can keep up)?
Seriously, I'm so ruined by 120 Hz 4k HD now that trying to code, browse, watch videos, or word process on 1080p (or fit all my windows) is just fugly. 'I can see the pixels!' Yes, for some super beefy games I have to go to quarter rez and upscale (I only have a 3080), but that means I'm just back at... 1080p. And then back to blissful 2160 for desktop work. So allow me to join all the other commenters asking what's the point of this.
Seriously, I'm so ruined by 120 Hz 4k HD now that trying to code, browse, watch videos, or word process on 1080p (or fit all my windows) is just fugly. 'I can see the pixels!' Yes, for some super beefy games I have to go to quarter rez and upscale (I only have a 3080), but that means I'm just back at... 1080p. And then back to blissful 2160 for desktop work. So allow me to join all the other commenters asking what's the point of this.
Upvote
-1
(1
/
-2)
Maybe silly for a monitor, but can see for instance this getting shrunk down and put into a VR headset where you might actually benefit from extra refresh rate. Seems silly now but once upon a time people were chuckling about GB hard drives so 
. Somebody has to pay for v1 before the useful applications emerge from further development.
. Somebody has to pay for v1 before the useful applications emerge from further development.
Upvote
2
(2
/
0)
What games are are optimized for precisely 35 or 70 FPS? Never heard of any.
I'd want 600 Hz, for support of 24, 50, and 60 FPS without changing the refresh rate. 1200Hz to also support 48 FPS... but I don't know of any 48 FPS content available for consumer devices. There have been a small handful of 48 FPS movies, but the only one I know of that can be purchased is Avatar 2 for the Apple Vision Pro.
Upvote
1
(1
/
0)
I have a 240hz OLED and game on it both with modern games, but also emulation. Depending on the "modern" game I can get into the 200fps space but typically shoot for 120fps-144pfs and don't see a lot of benefit beyond that point (or I have to drop graphical fidelity so much that I'd rather the lower framerate, relatively speaking).
However, on the emulation side, I use BlurBusters' CRT beam simulator for 80s/90s-era games in particular and it looks really good "even" at 240hz (you get 4 sub-frames for the beam, not a ton but it's not too bad). This is actually the area where I would care about and expect getting to 1000hz will genuinely provide a more accurate visual representation, since stepping up to ~16 sub-frames/60hz frame will be a massive leap.
Computationally, it's also relatively cheap to do this from what I can tell, although I imagine synchronization will come under increasing strain as the (sub) framerate pushes upwards. It already needs a good bit of tweaking on my current machine to ensure a smooth visual experience.
That said, this is a very niche application for adding +30-50% cost to a display purchase. I imagine the relative cost will drop as the technology matures, though, and it would be exciting to see this kind of display technology emulation come for older media types which were mastered for displays we no longer have ready access to.
Also, lots of revenue opportunities to insert 1/1000th of a second subliminal advertisements into children's programming, or whatever dystopian horror implementation one likes.
Upvote
4
(4
/
0)
Upvote
-5
(0
/
-5)
jonbob_newcastle
Ars Scholae Palatinae
When I first read the article I assumed there would be a caveat that it could only do 1kHz @ 1080p and it would be substantially less at 4K but I checked the press release and you’re right: it’s 1080p only.
So yeah, this is very much aimed at the competitive crowd.
Upvote
-1
(0
/
-1)
And that's the issue.
Need vs. want.
Apply that to the human race in general and it becomes quite easy to understand the problems we have today.
Upvote
-1
(1
/
-2)
Maybe stop blinking so much? If you keep your eyes open you can see better.
Upvote
1
(1
/
0)
Excuse me, this is America. Stop looking behind the curtain / exercising critical thinking and give us your money.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)