Does the size of the monitor affect FPS?

[Bladen]

You need 4 to bring it from a hot yellow sun to a cool blue sun.
http://img7.imageshack.us/img7/5259/dfhgx.png

A blue star is hotter than a yellow star.

Cooling down a yellow sun would make it orange or red hot (red hot is cooler than orange).

 

[Lifted]

LOL

Only ATOT could take a question that's a .1/10 on the technical scale and make it a 10/10.

I like the idea of sitting in front of a monitor the size of the sun, but where are we going to get the resources to build such a monitor? It would surely take more planets than exist in out solar system.

The real question is what sort of gravity would such a large flat object have. Would we feel heavier than we do on Earth when sitting a few feet from it (or on it I guess), or does that much gravity require depth, so that the only gravity being asserted on us would be from the bit of materials directly in our proximity, while the material further away from the center of the monitor doesn't contribute much to our "weight"?

 

[cantholdanymore]

Poltergeist?

 

[TidusZ]

Not that it matters, every god damn monitor is now a pathetic 1920x1080.

Monitor makers have gone full retard.

You never go full retard.




2560x1600 ftw

 

[tigersty1e]

It's not about the size. It's how you use it.

 

[T_Yamamoto]

It's not about the size. It's how you use it.

True.

And either if you care or not

 

[KingFatty]

You would see the image update from the center outward, and when the outer edge finally updates then start the new frame. Only then would you be limited in framerate as you calculated, and even then you could mask that by delaying the center pixels to maintain a 60FPS or whatever you want, at the expense of 8 minutes of lag. That's not an option planned for any driver release that I know of though, so as far as the original question goes, it wouldn't affect the frame rate.

But is the mask/compensation you describe inapplicable to something interactive like a game, because you need to wait on the screen before deciding your next move? If I tried to line up a shot, I'd have to wait for the visual lag to see where to aim, then provide input to rotate the view and line up the shot, then wait on the visual lag to see if I was aimed correctly, then pull the trigger, wait, etc.

I could see how you can just add a delay to the nearby pixels in front of your face, to allow the edge pixels to refresh first and let the update "ripple" inward at the speed of light toward the nearby pixels then everything would be in sync, but seems to me that would only apply to something passive like watching a video or seeing a pre-scripted event that is not interactive and dependent on you seeing the screen and reacting to it.

 

[Joseph F]

LOL
Only ATOT could take a question that's a .1/10 on the technical scale and make it a 10/10.

Except this isn't ATOT, it's ATVC&G if you want to be technical about it.

 

[poohbear]

Technically yes...insignificantly. You won't notice and the electronics won't either.

Light takes ~12 ns to travel that extra inch. So if we assume a base 60 fps on the smaller display, that's 16666667 ns per frame.

Adding another 12 ns delay puts us at 16666679 ns per frame, for a *pathetic* 59.9999556 fps.

omg u're one of those annoying people at parties that tries to be a know it all and says junk like this. it never impresses the ladies though, but u can measure ur geek penis much better with nonsensical info like that.

This is a personal attack. We don't allow that in the tech forums. We need to maintain a certain healthy and professional aura here, and that necessitates a show of mutual respect; I hope you understand your post (and any other posts like this) run counter to that goal.

Please don't do this again.

Moderator jvroig

 

[KingFatty]

omg u're one of those annoying people at parties that tries to be a know it all and says junk like this. it never impresses the ladies though, but u can measure ur geek penis much better with nonsensical info like that.

But, how can we all agree on what units to do the measuring... this is a very complicated subject I'm sure

 

[exar333]

Short answer is no (practically speaking). Larger monitors (>24'') tend to have higher resolutions, but thats not always true.

 

[MotF Bane]

The real question is what sort of gravity would such a large flat object have. Would we feel heavier than we do on Earth when sitting a few feet from it (or on it I guess), or does that much gravity require depth, so that the only gravity being asserted on us would be from the bit of materials directly in our proximity, while the material further away from the center of the monitor doesn't contribute much to our "weight"?

Arthur c Clarke would like a word with you.

.

 

[KingFatty]

Arthur c Clarke would like a word with you.

.

From this reference: http://www.pgccphy.net/ref/gravity.pdf at page 4 shows how to calculate gravity of an infinite plane. Looks like the gravity is constant no matter how far away from it you get? Your big monitor would be very 'attractive' get it?

Note that this is a constant: the acceleration due to gravity of an infinite plane of mass is independent of the
distance from the plane!
In his science fiction novel 2010: Odyssey Two, author Arthur C. Clarke describes a large rectangular slab
that has been build by an alien race and placed in orbit around Jupiter. Astronauts are able to calculate the
mass of the slab by placing a small spacecraft near the center of the large face and timing it to see how long
it takes to fall to the surface of the slab. By approximating the slab as an infinite plane, they use Eq. (22) to
find the acceleration; from that and the falling time, they can calculate the mass. (Actually, Dr. Clarke got the
wrong answer in the book. You may want to find the book and see if you can calculate the correct answer.)

 

[AdamK47]

Sometimes it's fun to go into a thread that starts with a simple question and scroll to the bottom to see how much it deviates. This one does not disappoint.

 

[Lifted]

Arthur c Clarke would like a word with you.

But, we're talking waaaaay larger than the monolith.

 

[KingFatty]

Could a big enough monitor give you a tan?

 

[fastman]

Sometimes it's fun to go into a thread that starts with a simple question and scroll to the bottom to see how much it deviates. This one does not disappoint.

No kidding, I got the answer/confirmation early on, then the BS stories started rolling in. You'd think I asked this in the Techinical Forum!

Unsubscribing now as I'm tired of it.

Thanks for those with answers on target.

 

[Ben90]

Unsubscribing now as I'm tired of it.

Thanks for those with answers on target.

I still stand by the notion that universal expansion lowers the perceived framerate on the edges of the monitor.

For those of you guys that understand relativity (not me). What would happen to the perceived frame rate and input delay when traveling near the speed of light such as below: