120Hz PC Monitors....Where are they?

[RaiderJ]

Mostly for games, having a better refresh rate would allow for games with odd refresh rates to look smoother. Emulators too that run at non-60Hz refresh rates.

Thoughts?

 

[TheStu]

LCD monitors are measured in milliseconds (response time), whereas LCD TVs are measured in Hertz (refresh rate, which is technically wrong since refresh rate in technology has to do with has fast the electron gun in a CRT would raster the image).

Based on my calculations, 120Hz (which would be 120 cycles/second) comes out to 0.0083333 (and some more 3s after that) for the time that 1 Hertz takes. That in turn converts to 8.33 (and again, some more 3s) milliseconds. So, if you get a monitor with a 8ms or better response time then you will have what you are looking for.

I think that the larger problem is that TVs generally have coprocessors that help to make the images sharper, and other sort of things.

 

[RaiderJ]

Graphics cards still only update monitors at 60Hz.... so no, you don't just need <8ms response time.....

 

[Blain]

Originally posted by: RaiderJ
120Hz PC Monitors....Where are they?
Or am I the only one who think they would be useful?

Thoughts?

From what I understand, an 8MS "response time" LCD monitor is about the equivalent of 120-125MHz "refresh rate".
In a 120MHz LCD TV, the tuner (or other component), is fabricating frames, based on image movement (frame before & frame following).
It gives the appearance of smoother motion.

So it's not upping the technical refresh rate, it's simply adding to the content already there.

 

[RaiderJ]

But don't the graphics cards need to know that the data can be sent more than 60 times a second? If the monitor is getting refreshed at 300 times a second, but new image data only comes in at 60 times a second, then it will still be off. Right?

Or do I have this all backwards?

 

[SonicIce]

A videocard can output any refresh rate i guess? You can have true 120Hz (and up) on many CRT's. I'm not sure how 120Hz LCD's work though.

 

[Operandi]

Originally posted by: RaiderJ
But don't the graphics cards need to know that the data can be sent more than 60 times a second? If the monitor is getting refreshed at 300 times a second, but new image data only comes in at 60 times a second, then it will still be off. Right?

Thats pretty much it. The image is only being drawn at 60hz regardless of what the pixels are doing. If you getting 100fps in UT3 you are effectively stuck at 60fps. At least thats how I understand it.

120hz in TVs has more to do with film content being 24 fps than anything else, 24 doesn't dived into 60 but it dose divide into 120.

 

[Chopstick217]

Newer LCDs or LED TVS are rolling out with 240 mhz now. This is for film content, as Operandi stated. BLu rays only output 24 hz, which can be multiplied by 5 and 10 for 120 and 240. It gives a more natural feel when watching TVs with higher Hz

 

[krnmastersgt]

Originally posted by: RaiderJ
But don't the graphics cards need to know that the data can be sent more than 60 times a second? If the monitor is getting refreshed at 300 times a second, but new image data only comes in at 60 times a second, then it will still be off. Right?

Or do I have this all backwards?

Like the others say, you have it correct, however modern video cards can go above 60hz, the only reason you wouldn't be seeing it is that it detects the max refresh rate on whatever monitor/tv is plugged into it and only lets you choose up to that refresh rate.

Now a monitor that is capable of outputting 300 frames a second can go up to 300, simple as that, having only 60 per second being fed to the display won't make it choppy, it will just look the same as an equivalent monitor refreshing only 60 times a second. Depending on the image that you're viewing, be it game or video, if the frame rate of that is enough that it seems smooth you won't have any problems, the human eye can only work so fast after all.

While it is true that 120hz or 240hz TVs can give a more fluid/crisp image, the majority of people can't see the difference, more a "feature" they can stick on big expensive TVs to make them seem worth the money 😛 Unless you have hardware capable of putting out images that quickly, and have a need for more than 60 frames a second, I see no point in going above that.

 

[Knavish]

Originally posted by: Chopstick217
Newer LCDs or LED TVS are rolling out with 240 mhz now. This is for film content, as Operandi stated. BLu rays only output 24 hz, which can be multiplied by 5 and 10 for 120 and 240. It gives a more natural feel when watching TVs with higher Hz

That's Hz, not mhz!! 🙂 1mhz = 1,000,000 Hz

I've also heard some rumors about stereo (3D) video being supported by these 120Hz+ LCDs. You'd have to use shutter glasses, but I guess that's not too much different than those "3D" kids movies that come out these days.

 

[TidusZ]

Originally posted by: Knavish

Originally posted by: Chopstick217
Newer LCDs or LED TVS are rolling out with 240 mhz now. This is for film content, as Operandi stated. BLu rays only output 24 hz, which can be multiplied by 5 and 10 for 120 and 240. It gives a more natural feel when watching TVs with higher Hz

That's Hz, not mhz!! 🙂 1mhz = 1,000,000 Hz

I've also heard some rumors about stereo (3D) video being supported by these 120Hz+ LCDs. You'd have to use shutter glasses, but I guess that's not too much different than those "3D" kids movies that come out these days.

Stereovision

I only watch tv recorded through a high speed camera so that I never miss anything. Even 240hz isn't 1e37 enough for me. Bring on the 480 hz. And then 960. And then bring on faster speed cameras. And then a time machine so I can watch more than 1 episode a week.