05-13-2019 04:17 PM
05-15-2019 01:57 AM
05-15-2019 02:30 AM
05-15-2019 02:58 AM
CrashFu said:
Luciferous said:
JeremyC85 said:
snowdog said:A 10Hz drop probably won't be noticed by a lot of people
I actually tend to agree with this. We'll see about the black levels, the newest "through the lens" video does look promising tho!
Yes but a 120-144hz bump up will be 🙂
I don't... I don't think refresh rate works that way???
It's my understanding that the human eye (with the exception of exceptional individuals such as Fighter Pilots) just cannot see more than 60-80 frames per second, period... so for the average person there would literally be no difference between 80z and 2000hz. Anything between would just be more frames than an average person could even see.
There's certainly no noticeable difference between 90hz and 80hz; Oculus are the ones who invented the 90hz standard, and they were aiming high at the time, to play it safe.. if years of testing told them that 80hz or even 72hz were good enough, then I think they know better than anyone. They wouldn't make that change if it actually risked turning off any significant number of users, after all..
05-15-2019 03:08 AM
Even semi-casual gamers can tell the difference between 60hz and 120hz on monitor gaming so I'm sure the same principles apply in VR. I personally can tell up to 120hz on a monitor, easily too. 120hz vs 144hz is tough for me and there is definitely diminishing returns past 120hz for me. But, there's a reason pretty much every pro gamer is on 240hz these days because the response times are so fast. There's a smoothness factor too. The higher the refresh, the more lifelike things move in game. At 60 hz things are jerky.
CrashFu said:
Luciferous said:
JeremyC85 said:
snowdog said:A 10Hz drop probably won't be noticed by a lot of people
I actually tend to agree with this. We'll see about the black levels, the newest "through the lens" video does look promising tho!
Yes but a 120-144hz bump up will be 🙂
I don't... I don't think refresh rate works that way???
It's my understanding that the human eye (with the exception of exceptional individuals such as Fighter Pilots) just cannot see more than 60-80 frames per second, period... so for the average person there would literally be no difference between 80z and 2000hz. Anything between would just be more frames than an average person could even see.
There's certainly no noticeable difference between 90hz and 80hz; Oculus are the ones who invented the 90hz standard, and they were aiming high at the time, to play it safe.. if years of testing told them that 80hz or even 72hz were good enough, then I think they know better than anyone. They wouldn't make that change if it actually risked turning off any significant number of users, after all..
05-15-2019 03:27 AM
snowdog said:
OmegaM4N said:
^^^Yeah i would not worry too much about that refresh rate, i disable AWS when i am playing certain steam Vr games that are hogs and lock it to 45hz and it works fine, and that drop in RR might actually help with those steam games overal, we shall see. 😉
I always use OpenComposite myself, SteamVR has always been a bit of a clusterfuck with regards to performance for Rifts.
05-15-2019 03:51 AM
Wildt said:
CrashFu said:
Luciferous said:
JeremyC85 said:
snowdog said:A 10Hz drop probably won't be noticed by a lot of people
I actually tend to agree with this. We'll see about the black levels, the newest "through the lens" video does look promising tho!
Yes but a 120-144hz bump up will be 🙂
I don't... I don't think refresh rate works that way???
It's my understanding that the human eye (with the exception of exceptional individuals such as Fighter Pilots) just cannot see more than 60-80 frames per second, period... so for the average person there would literally be no difference between 80z and 2000hz. Anything between would just be more frames than an average person could even see.
There's certainly no noticeable difference between 90hz and 80hz; Oculus are the ones who invented the 90hz standard, and they were aiming high at the time, to play it safe.. if years of testing told them that 80hz or even 72hz were good enough, then I think they know better than anyone. They wouldn't make that change if it actually risked turning off any significant number of users, after all..
There's a lot of articles etc on the subject, but personally I find the difference between 60 and 120 to be huge.
There's some decent info here
"tl;dr: The human eye can physiologically detect up to 1000 frames per second. The average human, tasked with detecting what framerate he/she is looking at, can accurately guess up to around 150 fps. That is, they can see the difference in framerates all the way to 150 fps."
05-15-2019 04:12 AM
05-15-2019 07:06 AM
05-15-2019 07:18 AM
JeremyC85 said:
After giving it some thought, I ended up ordering the Rift S. It should greatly improve tracking in my specific area and the resolution bump will be nice. Just can't believe it has WORSE audio, black levels, and refresh rate
05-15-2019 07:32 AM