PDA

View Full Version : High refresh rate on TV's?



unphased
07-03-2012, 01:32 PM
I'm thinking about buying an HDTV and I really want have the ability to get at least a 120Hz buttery-smooth connection to the TV from my PC, because I just know I'm gonna want to hook it up to play some FPS games.

I'm not too familiar with the differences between the types of TV and initially I thought I would prefer a Plasma TV because of their high motion resolution, but it seems like even if a model says it's 600Hz it's only going to accept 60Hz input to flash the same frame 10 times. This may make for crisp transitions between frames and zero ghosting but I'm still effectively capped at 60. Furthermore I have seen reports that plasma does not look good sitting up close, so that's a slight deal-breaker.

What are my other options? LED/CCFL LCD TV's which support 120 or 240Hz (I've even heard of 480Hz)? I am aware that with almost all of the models out there the only way to actually see different frames displayed at these update rates are motion-interpolated frames which use a 60Hz source signal, which means I will only see an option for 60Hz once I plug it in.

Am I out of luck? If I'm in the market now for a TV is there any affordable option that will let me set 120Hz in my Nvidia driver panel and actually display all the frames (like these OC'd Catleaps can)?

I fear the answer is no. In which case I will probably end up picking up a $400 40" LCD TV.

Vikhyat
07-03-2012, 02:34 PM
I'm not that familiar with tvs, so I can only really speak in generalities. Like you seem to have figured out many tvs advertised as being over 60hz only accept 60hz signals. Additionally, tvs tend to have a very high input lag, which makes them far from ideal for gaming. Just another thing to consider when making your decision.

nexere
07-03-2012, 05:16 PM
Yeah, i was using a 42inch 1080p screen for a few weeks b4 getting my catleap, one of the biggest things i noticed was the faster response time (after the resolution)
Seams to get away with much lower fps cos of it, (maybe just in my head), as my screens are both only 60hz so might be different on a 600hz screen.

As far as i know hdmi is limited to 60fps, as even 3d film would only need 2x24 for 48fps, its just refreshes at 120hz/60hz per eye to stop headaches.
So there would be no way of gettin 600 or even 120fps on a tv, unless its using dvi or displayport.
I think the extra hz just makes films feel smoother/possibly just a sales number.
Im not a professional or anything but i don't beleve any tvs could run at 120hz as hdmi can't support it.

bishop
07-05-2012, 06:29 PM
Yeah I have one of those "600hz" tvs and no they will not run a true 120hz signal. The max my samsung takes is 65hz. It achieves the "600hz" through other digital methods where it creates frames. Seem more of like and illusion than the real thing.

HyperMatrix
07-07-2012, 12:54 AM
600hz subfield crap for Plasma's is just that. Crap. It is just 60hz, with the screen divided into 10 subsections. Each section is 60hz. So they call it a 600hz subfield. Lol. It's BS. Even 240hz tv's are BS. They just use Interpolation to give that ultra smooth motion effect which is great in adult videos, but not in movies or tv shows.

unphased
07-08-2012, 12:40 AM
I guess there is absolutely no reason for manufacturers to support 120Hz input in TVs because there is literally no media that will approach that speed.

What about 3D though? What is the technology that they use for 3D TV? My feeling is if they give one 60Hz frame to one eye and the next 60Hz frame to the other, it would produce a noticeable 30Hz frequency flickering.

Also you kind of blew my mind Hyper. I have a 120Hz TV with the smooth post processing stuff in it but I have never thought to try that out with HD adult videos. Never occurred to me.

Though when I get the Catleaps I see no reason to ever want to use the TV

spikestabber
07-08-2012, 02:31 AM
The biggest issue is when they decided to remove DVI ports from all TV's.
A dual-link DVI port would had made true 120Hz operation of these panels a very simple matter.

You can blame HDMI's single-link copy-protected nature (along with its various (in-)compatibility mess) for the 60HZ limitations we have for televisions today.

Also, today's 3D over HDMI is very gimmicky, you should read up on how it is implemented, and have a good laugh.

HyperMatrix
07-08-2012, 05:00 AM
I guess there is absolutely no reason for manufacturers to support 120Hz input in TVs because there is literally no media that will approach that speed.

What about 3D though? What is the technology that they use for 3D TV? My feeling is if they give one 60Hz frame to one eye and the next 60Hz frame to the other, it would produce a noticeable 30Hz frequency flickering.

Also you kind of blew my mind Hyper. I have a 120Hz TV with the smooth post processing stuff in it but I have never thought to try that out with HD adult videos. Never occurred to me.

Though when I get the Catleaps I see no reason to ever want to use the TV

I'm a dirty old man. Lol. What can I say. Regarding 3d, while technically you'd think 60hz 2d tv, 120hz 3d tv with 60hz per eye, it doesn't actually mean anything when movies are 24fps or some newer ones are just now pushing 48fps. Even when it comes to console gaming....highest FPS is what, 60fps? Few games even do that. So you're talking about 30fps per eye in 3d. And here we are buying a 120hz monitor.

The state of 3d is not very good at the moment. Both hardware and content are way behind.

Edit: p.s. there is software for your pc that can interpolate your videos (smooth post processing) either on the fly when you're watching it, or re-encode your videos. It's good for viewing some content.

nexere
07-08-2012, 05:59 AM
"Though when I get the Catleaps I see no reason to ever want to use the TV"

Cos of all those 2560x1440 movies? :P (and yeah, there probably are adult movies at the resolution, possibly even at 120fps)

And yeah, u would only need 24fps/max of 30fps per eye, just refreshed at 60hz to stop flickering and head aches( like i said b4 :P)

Couldn't imagine gaming at a max of 30fps cos of the 60fps limit tho......
but then console gamers r used to low fps :P

beefcakes
07-08-2012, 02:01 PM
The state of 3d is not very good at the moment. Both hardware and content are way behind.


I had a 3D VG278H Lightboost monitor for $600. I decided to return it after 25 days because even though it was 5/5 in Battlefield 3, it was only 3-4/5 in SCII and Diablo3 making it not worth $600 when it's essentially worth two catleaps.

Personally, if BF3 was my main game, I would've stuck with the 3D monitor.