Monitor refresh rate matters?

[wanderer27]

Here's an excellent article I found going over this and other Graphics settings:

http://www.tweakguides.com/Graphics_1.html


Basically, with an LCD (vs a CRT), the image is "always on". The refresh in this case is just a reference to how often the picture is updated.
For a CRT, the refresh is actually redrawing the whole picture each interval.

A bit over simplified, but that's roughly it in nutshell.

 

[Seero]

I recently bought a 23 inch LCD screen. It supports up to 1920x1080 and the colors are great. It's refresh rate is only 60 hz however. Does that really matter? I imagine I'll be turning V-sync off for my games anyways. Will my kickass graphics setup with amazing frame rates be wasted thanks to the monitor?

Simple answer: A bit.

Long answer:
60Hz <> 60FPS, and 60FPS <> 1 frame every 1/60th second. FPS is an aproximation. That means the computer may be telling you that you are playing at 60FPS, but in fact you only see 40 distinct frames per second. For example, in 1/30th of a second, the video card generated 3 frames, but since the monitor only refreshed once (2 distinct pictures), you either lost a frame, or see tearing. V-sync solves the tearing problem, but you will still lose 1 frame from the above scenario. Note that you may still lose that frame if it is a 120hz monitor (4 distinct pictures) because it really depends on the intervals between those frames. If the interval is smaller than 1/120 of a second, then you will miss a frame. On a 60hz monitor, the interval is 1/60 of a second.

Other than that, objects on 120hz monitor appears to be shaper than 60hz monitor.

 

[Petey!]

120hz in 2D mode is a HUGE difference over 60Hz in 2D mode. Anyone who tells you it makes no difference has either never seen both, or has serious vision issues.

 

[Lonbjerg]

Like I said above, a higher refresh rate will reduce tearing. Also if it’s high enough - say a 60 FPS game being displayed on a 1000 Hz display - it can theoretrically cure it if frames never arrive between refresh cycles.

Only on LCD's, I run between 85-120Hz on my CRT's , never use VSYNC and don't have any tearing.

LCD's are not for me...they are a visual downgrade...and yes I don't care about size/powerconsumption.

I hate being over at friends, loking at their LCD's...image always looks "fad" compare to my CRT setup.

 

[NoQuarter]

What does cause that "top to bottom" in LCD? In CRT's it was clearly the lone gun doing its job, but I thought that each pixel in LCD could act on its own?

I think it's just the way the LCD controllers are designed because it tries to emulate the way a CRT functions for VGA compatibility.

 

[toyota]

Only on LCD's, I run between 85-120Hz on my CRT's , never use VSYNC and don't have any tearing.

LCD's are not for me...they are a visual downgrade...and yes I don't care about size/powerconsumption.

I hate being over at friends, loking at their LCD's...image always looks "fad" compare to my CRT setup.

if you don't use vsync then you do get tearing. tearing is much less of a problem on crt but it is still there. getting less tearing at lower framerates or higher refresh rates is just theoretical. in practice, EVERY game is completely different as some tear horribly at 20-30fps while others hardly tear at all even at 100fps.

 

[NoQuarter]

The fact remains: a display with a higher refresh rate has a higher sampling rate, and is thus less likely to tear than a lower refresh one.

I'm not convinced of this the more I think about it. I don't think measuring out refresh intervals matters to the argument because the frames will finish at random times, it will never be consistent. The monitor is the only thing constant - it will always poll the buffer every 16.67 ms. Frames will finish randomly from say, 10-20ms each.

But if you think about this in extremes, if you have a 1hz monitor it would only update once per second. The odds of that 1 update happening during a frame change are far less than the odds of hitting a tear if you updated 1000 times per second. The more times you update the screen per second the more likely you are to catch the video card with its pants down rewriting the buffer in the middle of your read.

Similarly the higher your fps the more likely the video card will be rewriting the buffer when the monitor reads it. However the higher your fps the less difference between each frame, reducing the tear size.

So when I think of it like this a higher refresh rate actually gives you a higher chance to encounter tearing. But the increased refresh rate means it will be visible so briefly as to not matter. Now if it takes the monitor less time to read the buffer at higher refresh rates it would help get it in and out before the buffer gets modified but I don't believe higher refresh rates equals faster reads, just more frequent.

 

[Lonbjerg]

if you don't use vsync then you do get tearing. tearing is much less of a problem on crt but it is still there. getting less tearing at lower framerates or higher refresh rates is just theoretical. in practice, EVERY game is completely different as some tear horribly at 20-30fps while others hardly tear at all even at 100fps.

I don't see any tearing, but I'd rather not have the input lag that comes with VSYNC:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/2803/7

So no VSYNC or multi-GPU for me

 

[NoQuarter]

I don't see any tearing, but I'd rather not have the input lag that comes with VSYNC:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/2803/7

So no VSYNC or multi-GPU for me

That totally depends on the game for me. Chronicles of Riddick had terrible input lag with V-Sync on so I played that with tearing instead. Most UE3 games (ME2, Borderlands) have had non-perceptive input lag for me with V-Sync on so I use it in those games. And if your video card is capable of higher fps then V-Sync should cause less input lag. I would prefer no tearing and no input lag but it's a game by game test for me.

 

[hans030390]

120hz in 2D mode is a HUGE difference over 60Hz in 2D mode. Anyone who tells you it makes no difference has either never seen both, or has serious vision issues.

The fluidity true 120hz adds to whatever you're doing is amazing, even if only moving windows around on your desktop!

 

[Karl Agathon]

120hz in 2D mode is a HUGE difference over 60Hz in 2D mode. Anyone who tells you it makes no difference has either never seen both, or has serious vision issues.

Thats exactly why im mainly interested in possibly getting one. I realize that the 3D aspect of it is what mainly gets pimped by manufacturers, but im more interested in 2D 120hz with 3D capability as a secondary benefit.

 

[taltamir]

120hz in 2D mode is a HUGE difference over 60Hz in 2D mode. Anyone who tells you it makes no difference has either never seen both, or has serious vision issues.

Nobody said anything like that, I said something similar yet very different.
I said 120hz does not in any way prevent tearing, but it might make it less noticeable.

 

[tyl998]

So umm...bottom line...given that I have this 23 inch 1920x1080 60 hz LCD, should I force Vsync on or off? Or select "leave it tot he application" in the Nvidia control panel? I currently have a GTX280 but my dual Gigabyte 460s should arrive within a few days.

 

[taltamir]

So umm...bottom line...given that I have this 23 inch 1920x1080 60 hz LCD, should I force Vsync on or off? Or select "leave it tot he application" in the Nvidia control panel? I currently have a GTX280 but my dual Gigabyte 460s should arrive within a few days.

ideally, do it on a game by game basis and or your personal preference.
If tearing REALLY bothers you, turn it on, if it doesn't, leave it off. If you want, you can do it on a game by game basis (Some games have bad tearing, some don't)

as for whether you should use in game setting or control panel... test it out. In some cases there can be huge performance benefits to EITHER method, I have seen really high performance differences and either option can be faster depending on the game, drivers, and exact setting in question (vsync isn't the only thing you can force in drivers)

 

[BFG10K]

Only on LCD's, I run between 85-120Hz on my CRT's , never use VSYNC and don't have any tearing.

What I stated applies to any device that displays at fixed intervals. Your CRT tears less because it has a higher refresh rate, which is the exact point I've been making. But set it to 60 Hz and you&#8217;ll see it tear on a similar level to an LCD.

 

[toyota]

What I stated applies to any device that displays at fixed intervals. Your CRT tears less because it has a higher refresh rate, which is what the exact point I've been making earlier. But set it to 60 Hz and you&#8217;ll see it tear on a similar level to an LCD.

I somewhat disagree. in some cases the tearing is less on the CRT even if they are both at the same refresh rate. I have gone back and forth between CRT and LCD both at 60Hz with same res and the CRT in many cases has no where near the visible tearing.

 

[tweakboy]

YES it matters. Why you think Im on my Sony CRT

60hz blows and is hurtful to the eyes. You turn vsync on and unless its 2ms its laggy mouse. This is why pro gamers only use CRT at lan festivals. Smooth mouse and no jittery. This is why I will never buy a LCD unless its 120hz refresh and a resolution of 2560x1600. Because I cant downgrade my resolution of 2304 after using it for 10 years. I hate 1920 res. PC monitors are moving slowly. Might as well get a TV that has 120hz or 240hz and just use its native 1920x1080

You have to turn vsync on because image tearing is nasty stuff. Once enabled its only at 60hz and will not go above 60fps . Its not going to be smooth action. 10 years going strong,, Ill use it for another 10 years until proper PC monitors come out like the Apple Cinema etc...

 

[BFG10K]

I don't think measuring out refresh intervals matters to the argument because the frames will finish at random times, it will never be consistent. The monitor is the only thing constant - it will always poll the buffer every 16.67 ms. Frames will finish randomly from say, 10-20ms each.

I’ve already discussed this, so I’ll just quote myself:

Now, it’s quite likely a game doesn’t have a constant framerate, so on a 60 Hz display all the game has to do is update somewhere in between the 16.67 ms cycle to break it. On a 120 Hz display however, that window of opportunity is halved, so the game has to update in between the 8.3 ms cycle. On a 240 Hz CRT, that drops to just 4.1 ms.

The higher the refresh rate the less likely a frame will arrive between refresh cycles, so the less likely tearing will happen.

But if you think about this in extremes, if you have a 1hz monitor it would only update once per second. The odds of that 1 update happening during a frame change are far less than the odds of hitting a tear if you updated 1000 times per second. The more times you update the screen per second the more likely you are to catch the video card with its pants down rewriting the buffer in the middle of your read.

Huh? If the game sends 40 frames that second, that refresh cycle is going to tear 38 or 39 times on that 1 Hz display because it’ll change that many times while the monitor is drawing the image.

So when I think of it like this a higher refresh rate actually gives you a higher chance to encounter tearing.

No it doesn’t. Think of this way: if you had an infinite refresh rate such that a refresh cycle was always available when a frame arrived, do you think you would get tearing?

 

[zerocool84]

I wonder how many people commenting have even tried a 120Hz monitor. It makes a HUGE difference. Basic computing is is so damn smooth and when I fired up TF2, holy crap everything moved so smooth and felt so different. I never tried 3D and don't care about it but it makes everything so damn smooth. I didn't notice tearing once on any game I played. The thing is though that you don't need it at all. Sure it makes a difference but there's better things that you can spend your money on to make a larger difference in your gaming.

 

[tweakboy]

Yes Zerocool84 I agree with you alto I haven't used a 120hz pc monitor.

You are totally correct and as long as triple buffering is on and vsync is on you will not get tearing and get smooth mouse movements like a CRT.

 

[railven]

I recently had a conversation with a few people about this subject (including triple buffering) and I was having a hard time trying to explain how V-Synch prevented tearing and Triple Buffering helped, but didn't prevent tearing.

I'll gladly point back to this thread, thanks for the info Talt and BFG.

 

[toyota]

I recently had a conversation with a few people about this subject (including triple buffering) and I was having a hard time trying to explain how V-Synch prevented tearing and Triple Buffering helped, but didn't prevent tearing.

I'll gladly point back to this thread, thanks for the info Talt and BFG.

triple buffering doesn't do anything with vsync off so it has nothing to do with tearing.

 

[NoQuarter]

Huh? If the game sends 40 frames that second, that refresh cycle is going to tear 38 or 39 times on that 1 Hz display because it&#8217;ll change that many times while the monitor is drawing the image.

Uhm isn't the buffer read itself very quick. A 1Hz monitor would poll it one time per second. Just because it's only reading it once per second doesn't mean the buffer read takes the full second? It will be as instantaneous as each poll from a 120Hz monitor. It just does it less often. Unless I misunderstand how it constructs the signal from the buffer. If I am and it builds the frame over the duration of the cycle then you're right.

 

[Ben90]

What creates a tear is when the front/back buffer switch and the frame has not been completed. The chance for a frame to be transmitted exactly when the monitor is "ready" is extremely low and is actually a function of verticle resolution, framerate, and Hertz. When the framerate is equal to or lower than the refresh rate the chance to tear is completely dictated by verticle resolution. A ridiculously simplified version of this equation is: 1/VerticleResolution &#37;chance to not tear. For all intended purposes, an image is going to tear every single time without Vsync regardless of framerate/refresh rate.

 

[deepinya]

120hz trumps all.

I tried out the 120hz LCD from viewsonic and its utterly smooth as glass in games. I did get rid of it due to the color reproduction not being up to par. Now Im rocking a Mitsu 22" 2070sb (CRT) and loving it. 120hz gaming cannot be rivaled by any 60hz LCD.

I always keep VSYNC OFF and didnt experience any tearing on either monitor.