• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Interlaced vs. non-interlaced

C

CTho9305

Elite Member
Ok - I know that interlaced is bad. But isn't that b/c they only interlaced up to like 43Hz? If you interlace at 60Hz, does each pixel get refreshed 60 times per second or does each pixel get refreshed 30 times per second?
 
I thought interlaced meant every other line was drawn on the screen. At 60Hz every line is refreshed 60 times/sec, right? So if this is true then you could run interlaced at any refresh rate and just have every other line displayed? I am probably totally wrong but this is the way I interpreted it.
 
Interlaced at 60 Hz would probably flicker less than non-interlaced at 60-85 Hz, but I've never heard of it being done, probably because it means drawing 120 separate frames a second and require a much faster horizontal scan rate for this. But regardless of the refresh rate, it's easier to draw a complete picture in a single sweep than to line up 2 separate frames with one another because a lot more time passes between frames than between individual adjacent lines in a sweep.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top