As i understand it the refresh rate is how fast the monitor is redrawing the screen. This sounds similear to fps in that fps are the number of frames that pass in a given time. From my understanding it appears that these two can offset each other, ie a high refresh rate and a low fps would be about the same visual quality as a a high fps and a low refresh rate. I'm trying to get a clearer picture of this and something seems fuzzy about my current understanding. Pardon the pun. What would be the difference in visual quality of a refresh rate of 60hz and one of say 120hz?
Personnaly, I think FPS and refresh rate is the same thing. If V-Sync is enabled and your monitor supports example, 60Hz in a given resolution, the framerate won't go higher than 60 FPS. FPS is a gaming term, while refresh rate is often used when describing monitors. 120 Hz will allow lot more smoother framerate than 60, and in Windows desktop on stable pictures, 60Hz is unsupportable to me, as you can see the screen flicker. This is my point of view though, as many other people (BladeRunner) could help you out on those subjects...
Core i7 2600K @ 4GHz | Noctua NH-C12P SE14 | ASUS Maximus IV GENE-Z | 16GB G.Skill Ripjaws X 1600 CL9 | Gigabyte GTX 670 OC 2GB | 256GB Crucial m4 | 2TB WD Green | Samsung DVD±RW | Seasonic X 460w Fanless | Fractal Design Define Mini | Windows 7 Ultimate | Dell 2209WA @ 75Hz
Dukid - its a bad idea to take v-sync off with the geforce 2 mx. In games like CS you get tearing of the images. I think thats why 600R leaves it on. Hey - 85FPS is as smooth as it visibly can be anyway
------------------
TBird 800 @ 1008
Abit KT7-Raid
256mb Crucial @ 149 cas2
Prophet II MX(230/210)
IBM 75GXP 30Gb
Asus 50x
Mitsumi 24x4x4
Belinea 17"
TBird 800 @ 1008
Abit KT7-Raid
256mb Crucial @ 149 cas2
Prophet II MX(230/210)
IBM 75GXP 30Gb
Asus 50x
Mitsumi 24x4x4
Belinea 17"
60Hz refresh rate on a monitor gives me headache....
refresh rate and fps sounds similiar, but the main difference between them is that refresh rate is usually limited by the monitor, and once you've set it, it's constant at that rate; and FPS is all depends on the power of the graphic card and CPU, it varies from one sence in game to another.
If your monitor allows you to set refresh rate at at least 75 or 85Hz at whatever resolution you run your windows and games at(all recent monitors do), by all means do so. If you find yourself feeling sick after staring at the monitor after 5 mins, check the refresh rate : ]
Also, if you run games at different resolution and/or color depth than your desktop setting, you'll need to go to windows and set refresh rate on each and every resolution/color depth, otherwise the default or optimal setting is usually 60Hz... arrr.. my eye balls hurt
PS. V-Sync sets FPS to 1/2 of refresh rate. So, if the refresh rate is set at 60Hz (60 times per second) then FPS will be limited to 30 frame per second.
------------------
Hard decisions: Intel or AMD, 100 or 133, Netscape or IE, Baldur's Gate II or Counter-Strike, computers or women
[This message has been edited by atong (edited 02-26-2001).]
Hard decisions: Intel or AMD, nVidia or ATI, Windows or Linux, Neverwinter Nights or Counter-Strike, computer or woman.
well.i have a view sonic..19" and i run desktop at 1024/768 32bit color refresh rate at 100 and i get 175 fps in quake3 with my tweaked config..i run game at 32 bit color so how can u say refresh rate ham,pers ur FPs??? also i have win2k vsynch on det 7.25 i got 230fps when i used win98 but my mcse studies i have to use win2k P(
p3 800@1040
256 cas2 ram
asus geforce DDR
asus p3v4x mobo
view sonic A90 19"
sb live Xgamer
maxtor udma66 7200 rpm
------------------
is it hot yet?
[This message has been edited by jabroni (edited 02-27-2001).]
Fps is frames/sec, that sends your comp to monitor and refresh rate is how often your monitor shows those frames to you.
So if you have 2fps and 85 refreshrate, your monitor will show you 42 times samer picture and than 43 times other picture in 1 sec.
Refreshrate is important for your eyes and head, fps is important for you gameplay. They say, that you will not be able to realize difference between 24 fps and higher. But 60 refreshrate is minimum for your eyes....85 is just the right number...you will not be blind in your future...
That is my opinion.
Right on DanOertelt. The refresh rate tells you how many images the monitor is accepting from the videocard every second. The FPS in games and such tells you how fast your system is able to draw the frames for your program. I'm not sure, however, how Vsynch relates the two. Vertical Synchronization, hmmm...
jabroni - It only hampers your fps if you've got Vsync enabled. Vsync limits the video card fps to the monitor refresh rate setting. If your refresh rate is set at 100 Hz, and you're getting 175 fps in Q3, then you have Vsync disabled.
phenix - Yes the refresh rate is the number of times per second that the monitor is redrawing the entire screen. While it's good for your eyes to have the monitor refresh rate above 75 Hz, a high refresh rate will not compensate for low fps. No matter what your refresh rate is, if you're only getting 20 fps in Q3, it gonna be jerky and run like crap. So a high refresh rate cannot compensate for low fps as you seem to be thinking. But getting the refresh rate above 70 Hz will save you from headaches.
Another consideration is interlaced vs. non-interlaced. The 60 Hz refresh rate is interlaced, which means only half the scan lines on the screen (either odd or even) are redrawn in each scan cycle. This makes the flickering very pronounced. From 70 Hz on up, the scanning is non-interlaced, meaning the entire screen, both odd and even scan lines, are redrawn in every refresh cycle.
That's why the biggest difference is in going from 60 MHz interlaced to something like 75 Hz non-interlaced. Above that, most of the improvement is in the mind of the viewer. That is, unless Vsync is on. Because then the fps goes up with the refresh rate making the improvement more noticeable when gaming.
Dave B.i can appreciate ur knowledge but,i have it set to (on by default) which is set by default (v-synch)if i turn it to always off...i loose frames in timedemo..so it would seem ur statement is not all true..why do i get more with it on than set to off??
mind u this is point release 127 which sucks for speed compared to 117 which i was getting over 200frames per with v-synch enabled as well??
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks