Thread has been deleted
Last comment
why u pay for 240 hz if human eye can see only 10% of this- 24fps?
never understood it u guys stupid
13 replies
12 replies
2 replies
XDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
8 replies
4 replies
u dont have 240hz aswell, lol
2 replies
18 replies
8 replies
lmao what's the problem with people speaking russian ?
4 replies
everything
2 replies
Nt Belarus
2 replies
1 reply
Thats why they drive to Vilnius for shopping XD
nt noscener
8 replies
Poland cs scene lul
7 replies
poland dead scene , lithuanian scene doesnt even exist
6 replies
bymas > all of polish scene
5 replies
botmas ?
3 replies
no, bymas
2 replies
nt , but im sure that dycha or michu > all cz scene
1 reply
sure man, if you think
XDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
bought cause i can
tbh 144 is more than enough
9 replies
+1 144hz 3440x1440 user here. widescreen is way more worth than more hz.
but i have to warn you, if you go widescreen a normal 16:9 flat screen will look stupid after that.
7 replies
1 reply
its not even nearly as bad as 4k, but it takes a toll for sure.
but these kind of monitors usually have freesync which makes even lower fps seem fine.
4 replies
it does have a full support for widescreen so its not bad at all, and you allways have the option to use 16:9.
3 replies
only cause your simple polish brain can't doesn't mean ours can't
6 replies
germany and poland is almost exact same thing so shut up
4 replies
time for NL to drown
3 replies
start a war bitch
1 reply
no need i just let car running and sea level will solve problem
calm down angry jerman
0/8
nice bait
1 reply
vodka vision
Lel people think hardware will get them to pro, but they forget that everyone has the same monitors on LAN
3 replies
240hz is the norm on LAN since 2015 or something.
2 replies
They think they will get an advantage with hardware that's what I meant
1 reply
Of course, noobs won't but good players definetely will^^
Eyes= 576 hz
over 60 hz is useless, human eyes cant see more than 60 fps
6 replies
LOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL
0/8 bad bait.
I have 270Hz display and laugh on 240Hz peasants.
360hz......... 240hz is for peasants...
2 replies
out of stock :(
1 reply
I was justjust joking, i used 144hz monitor for years myself, upgraded to 240hz about a year ago. Wasn't a big difference imo. 360hz seems a bit overkill
human beings don't see in fps, because frames per second are a measurement of simulated movement. IRL that movement isn't composed of thousands of images layered in sequence to one another. So to say we can only experience a capped perception is as nonsensical as saying "you can only breathe at 6 meters/s"
TL'DR: FPS isn't applicable to vision as a unit of measurement because human's don't see life in frames
8 replies
This is not a troll post.
I don’t really get it though. I mean there is retention persistence (persistance rétinienne) which is 1/25second (25fps). From what I knew it means that if during this time another image comes in between, we won’t see it. 25 images per second is the limit of where you see things as being “continuous”.
However I see a huge diff between 60 and 144Hz on monitors, as does everybody.
So where is my reasoning wrong?
6 replies
Around 24 frames per second our eyes start perceiving things as a solid stream, as a video. (as you said, image becomes continuous instead of separate shots) With smoothness etc. Films also mostly shot on 24 frame rule. Reduces production time and costs etc. There is probably a limit to how much an eye can perceive, with many factors like how trained an eye is, how good is your eyesight and what features your particular eyes have.
5 replies
Thanks but this doesn’t explain my paradox
4 replies
It has higher vertical refresh rate. It updates more times per second, more than double the 60 hz. Doesn't change the frame amount gpu produces, but rather better fills in spacing between each frame due to updating more frequently.
It explains it exactly. <24 frames a second your eye will be able to see different images like a slide show, >24 fps it will appear as a constant stream like a moving image like a video. The higher you go above 24 fps the smoother it gets. Also note that on desktop monitors, this effect is amplified due to screen tearing which is an intrinsic property of how the frames are drawn on the monitor. These are the reasons why you can see a huge difference.
2 replies
no it doesn't explain anything.
continuous - there is no "more" or "less" continuous. Either it is or it is not.
>24fps = continuous so it shouldn't matter whether there are more fps, since it's the limit from which on we interpret single images samples in time as being continuous.
1 reply
Your argument only holds water if the eyes see single images - which they don't as the original commentor explained to you. If you don't believe me consider it this way. Mains electricity is alternating current (think of a sine wave) that has a frequency of 60 (or 50)Hz. if you look at a light bulb you can often see the flickering from the alternating current. This flickering is either 60 or 50 times a second yet the human eye can still detect it.
What you need to understand is, although the eye can detect changes 60 times a second, it is not able to count the number and tell you its changing 60 times a second, but it can tell you theres a difference. Same way you can't count 60hz or 144 hz frames with your eyes, but your eyes can distinctly tell the difference between them.
that's not true. we have spinal motor neurons and axons so we do signal transmissions just like a computer and it has a refresh rate just like a computer has but it's too high compared to a monitor so we can see differences between hertz values under 600 hz~
Imagine thinking that +250/300 fps matters.
mad cuz broke
So that's why poles are so angry
They only see in 24 fps
2 replies
Could not feel a difference going from 144 to 240
0.5/8
0/0
With same logik why someone buy Lamborghini since he can’t get 350k/m in national roads.
ur just like average polish
believe marketing like human eye can only 24fps, over 60fps on monitor is useless etc....
human eye no fps cap so any higher hz = better 60 is just marketing
My mum actually did not me so i dont really care.
u r truly mistaken, human eye can see differences up to 5000hz, above that it becomes unrecognizable.
24fps is enough to make a movie work, thats it...
2 replies
1 reply
the future is closer than you might think.
samsung released "the wall" a dynamic shaped screen system, based on microled.
it already has 3840hz refresh rate ( see specs at: samsung.com/us/business/support/owners/p.. ) but its locked to 60fps atm.
If they would change just that to support also some values around 1000fps, its done.
dont ask for the momentarily cost of this thing :P as it is pioneering in this field,
just that we know whats already possible AND available.
60hz gang where we at?
yea man . because human eyes see in frames
you say this cuz you dont have a 240hz
lol
thought I would play better, but the problem has always been me
Bet value
Amount of money to be placed
Winning
Odds total ratio
-
