| roamin |
18th March 2012 3:30 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Davez621
(Post 14189967)
You're joking right? 24 fps is considered fast enough for the human eye, such that it is used in motion pictures. Anything above 30 fps is a waste, IMO.
|
no offence but you clearly have no idea what your talking about.
why do you think there is 100hz - 200hz and so on in tv's? its not just fps that matters, yet high fps coupled with high hz makes a huge difference.
its about the smoothness of the overall image.
you running xp still and ie8 tells me your not huge into pc's.
as said earlier go play battlefield 3 at 30 fps and 60fps.
if you can not see a difference you really do need your eyes checked. makes a massive difference.
oh and a side note, try google chrome as its one of the most common browsers now days
to back up what im saying please have a LONG read of all this HERE
Quote:
Originally Posted by Link
the concept that there is a maximum possible FPS beyond which the human eye can't distinguish any real difference is not entirely accurate. For more details, see this article and this article among the many which refute this claim. In particular the common claim that "The human eye can't see more than 24 (or 25 or 30 or 60) FPS" is completely false, and is partly borne of the misconception that TV or movie FPS is the same as PC game FPS, and partly possibly borne out of a need to justify lower framerates.
|
|
