Displays with MORE THAN 240HZ??????

[Rxd]

It has always bothered me why those don't exist. Is it a physical limitation or the assumption that "no one can see more than 240hz" ? Because even though use cases are extremely limited, they exist - simple example is CS:GO where you can get way over 400fps with 2080ti and 9900k!

[Bananasplit_00]

i can get 900fps in CS:GO with worse specs at 1080p but whatever. anyway i hardly notice the difference between 144Hz and 240Hz, the frame times are already super tiny with a 240Hz display so i dont think there is much of a point going further. The largest jumps are 30 to 60 and 60 to 75+, those really make a difference

[Knight77]

6 minutes ago, Rxd said:

It has always bothered me why those don't exist. Is it a physical limitation or the assumption that "no one can see more than 240hz" ? Because even though use cases are extremely limited, they exist - simple example is CS:GO where you can get way over 400fps with 2080ti and 9900k!

The tech isn’t there yet. 

Although DisplayPort 2.0 allows for up to 1,000Hz - that’s due end of next year.  

I guess everyone’s different. 

I can see the difference between 144 and 240. 

Others can’t. 

But, from the report BlurBusters did, Humans can perceive the difference up to the 1,000Hz mark at least. 

I think in the next 5-10 years, we will see 480Hz screens. 

Especially when MicroLED Matures. 

OLED has very, very low response times, like 0.1-0.3ms so it’s completely possible to do up to 1,000Hz and MicroLED will be the same. 
 

[Rxd]

@Bananasplit_00 I meant average fps but yeah got you, I just don't get why someone don't make one so we can see at least!

[Rxd]

@Knight77 

[Bananasplit_00]

2 minutes ago, Rxd said:

@Bananasplit_00 I meant average fps but yeah got you, I just don't get why someone don't make one so we can see at least!

you can just buy a panel and a controller and make one yourself if you are so frame desperate or drop resolution to like 480p and overclock whatever you have

[Knight77]

1 minute ago, Rxd said:

@Knight77 

For reference,

 

It’s a good read:

 

https://www.blurbusters.com/blur-busters-law-amazing-journey-to-future-1000hz-displays-with-blurfree-sample-and-hold/

[KarathKasun]

A small OLED exists that refreshes at something like 500hz+, but you start running into limitations in switching speed.

[Doobeedoo]

There's a 480Hz prototype monitor, but yeah, would need to have such consistent framerate anyway. 

[Princess Luna]

^

https://www.blurbusters.com/480hz-monitor-at-blur-busters-being-tested/

 

The reason there isn't anything on the market is because it's an imperceptible difference at this point, hells 240hz is far more gimmick than anything already... frametimes are far too narrow.

[SolarNova]

17 hours ago, Rxd said:

It has always bothered me why those don't exist. Is it a physical limitation or the assumption that "no one can see more than 240hz" ? Because even though use cases are extremely limited, they exist - simple example is CS:GO where you can get way over 400fps with 2080ti and 9900k!

 LCD technology can not even handle 144hz let alone 240hz, so going any higher is pointless.

 

LCD pixels simply cannot, at this time, change fast enough to keep up with higher frequencies.

 

Even the 144hz monitors technically dont have fast enough pixel response times to keep up with the refresh frequency. Dispite their advertised specs of 1ms on TN panels, its a half truth as it represent a cherry picked figure from a test that does not represent the true maximum response time, but rather a average response time of a specific transition.

 

At 144hz the pixel have to have a MAXIMUM response speed of 6.9ms. Currently i know of no LCD monitor that can do this. Most which have an AVERAGE below that number also have maximums well above it, which means certain pixel transitions are to slow to keep up and thus will result in bluring and ghosting.

 

Note we are only talking about LCD here, not OLED, which is fast enough to handle up to 500hz bassed on current 55" OLED TV's that have a MAXIMUM response time of 2.4ms (~500hz capable), and an average below 0.2ms (~5000hz capable)