Jump to content


48 Hz Refresh Rate


  • Please log in to reply
21 replies to this topic

Sharp1903 #1 Posted 23 August 2018 - 11:57 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 38455 battles
  • 1,880
  • Member since:
    01-10-2014
I play wot on 48 Hz today instead of 60 Hz. I got still 60 fps but it looks smoother. Anyone tried it before? 

Sharp1903 #2 Posted 23 August 2018 - 03:46 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 38455 battles
  • 1,880
  • Member since:
    01-10-2014
Or any disadvantage? 

Nethraniel #3 Posted 23 August 2018 - 03:50 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 13522 battles
  • 2,165
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    05-30-2012

If your monitor is refreshing at 48 Hz it does not matter, if you get 60 fps ingame from your graphic card. So, instead of 60 fps you get 48 Hz refresh rate.



Sfinski #4 Posted 23 August 2018 - 04:02 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 32016 battles
  • 2,687
  • [-PJ-] -PJ-
  • Member since:
    09-26-2013
The higher the better. 

Balc0ra #5 Posted 23 August 2018 - 04:22 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 66636 battles
  • 16,673
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

View PostSharp1903, on 23 August 2018 - 03:46 PM, said:

Or any disadvantage? 

 

Worst case scenario. You get some screen tearing now and then when turning the camera fast. As one shows it faster then the other can update it. 

PervyPastryPuffer #6 Posted 23 August 2018 - 04:34 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 31223 battles
  • 2,303
  • [VRTC] VRTC
  • Member since:
    09-13-2013

The refresh rate in WoT is rubbish...

 

If I wanna set it to 30, it stays at 60... If I wanna set it to 50, it stays at 60... Set to 24, still 60... :facepalm:

 

Why do other games such as for example The Crew have a simple setting between 30 or 60 Hz refresh rate with VSync which actually works, while WG's refresh rate system is basically useless across all their games?

 



4nt #7 Posted 23 August 2018 - 04:35 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 23304 battles
  • 233
  • Member since:
    04-09-2013

View PostSfinski, on 23 August 2018 - 04:02 PM, said:

The higher the better. 

Okay, I must ask a stupid question. For years I've played with 60MHz and 60-100fps, various games. I've never noticed any difference in games if changed to 75-100MHz and over 100fps. Only if performance dips under 60MHz and sub 50fps, naturally, I can discern real difference. This is also the reason I won't swap to 4k... So, is there something wrong with my eyes or is the difference smallish in reality?



PervyPastryPuffer #8 Posted 23 August 2018 - 05:11 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 31223 battles
  • 2,303
  • [VRTC] VRTC
  • Member since:
    09-13-2013

View Post4nt, on 23 August 2018 - 04:35 PM, said:

Okay, I must ask a stupid question. For years I've played with 60MHz and 60-100fps, various games. I've never noticed any difference in games if changed to 75-100MHz and over 100fps. Only if performance dips under 60MHz and sub 50fps, naturally, I can discern real difference. This is also the reason I won't swap to 4k... So, is there something wrong with my eyes or is the difference smallish in reality?

 

If your monitor supports refresh rates higher than 60Hz, you should see a slight difference. If it doesn't, you won't.

4nt #9 Posted 23 August 2018 - 05:19 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 23304 battles
  • 233
  • Member since:
    04-09-2013
Well can't test it with wot at least, same sticking to 60MHz as others have reported... But in other games no difference. My monitor is deffo 100MHz compatible.

AliceUnchained #10 Posted 23 August 2018 - 06:32 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 38414 battles
  • 8,928
  • [322] 322
  • Member since:
    10-18-2011

View PostNethraniel, on 23 August 2018 - 03:50 PM, said:

If your monitor is refreshing at 48 Hz it does not matter, if you get 60 fps ingame from your graphic card. So, instead of 60 fps you get 48 Hz refresh rate.

 

That's not how it works... You don't get 48 Hz instead of 60 FPS as refresh rate and frames per second are not the same thing... So one does not, and cannot, replace the other.

 

View PostSharp1903, on 23 August 2018 - 11:57 AM, said:

I play wot on 48 Hz today instead of 60 Hz. I got still 60 fps but it looks smoother. Anyone tried it before? 

 

Looks can be deceiving, and feelings won't ever be a proper substitute for stone cold facts. If you still get 60 FPS, while having V Sync enabled, that simply means your display is still refreshing at 60 Hz. Any particular reason you decided to try 48 Hz?



Sharp1903 #11 Posted 23 August 2018 - 06:42 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 38455 battles
  • 1,880
  • Member since:
    01-10-2014

View PostAliceUnchained, on 23 August 2018 - 08:32 PM, said:

 

That's not how it works... You don't get 48 Hz instead of 60 FPS as refresh rate and frames per second are not the same thing... So one does not, and cannot, replace the other.

 

 

Looks can be deceiving, and feelings won't ever be a proper substitute for stone cold facts. If you still get 60 FPS, while having V Sync enabled, that simply means your display is still refreshing at 60 Hz. Any particular reason you decided to try 48 Hz?

 

Actually it was accident but now it seems better than 60 Hz. On some maps, like Ensk or Province, I was having some fps drops , from 60 to 54-55 fps. Then I was having stutter cuz of vsync. Now even If drops , I dont feel any stuttering. Game is smoother and I like it :) 

lnfernaI #12 Posted 23 August 2018 - 06:47 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 29065 battles
  • 3,700
  • [ALLGE] ALLGE
  • Member since:
    09-15-2012

View PostTankyouverymuch2, on 23 August 2018 - 05:34 PM, said:

VSync 

if you use V-sync,you subject yourself to horrible input lag. It's an outdated technology.



AliceUnchained #13 Posted 23 August 2018 - 06:49 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 38414 battles
  • 8,928
  • [322] 322
  • Member since:
    10-18-2011

View PostSharp1903, on 23 August 2018 - 06:42 PM, said:

 

Actually it was accident but now it seems better than 60 Hz. On some maps, like Ensk or Province, I was having some fps drops , from 60 to 54-55 fps. Then I was having stutter cuz of vsync. Now even If drops , I dont feel any stuttering. Game is smoother and I like it :) 

 

Regular V-Sync would actually drop to 30 FPS, so I'm guessing you were using Adaptive V-Sync? Small drops like that shouldn't cause stuttering normally, but can't be excluded entirely either (but most likely are caused by rather big changes in frame times). Any way, even if it only 'feels' smoother by all means stick with it. Shouldn't cause any harm.

 

Just out of curiosity, where did you change the refresh rate setting?



Sharp1903 #14 Posted 23 August 2018 - 08:23 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 38455 battles
  • 1,880
  • Member since:
    01-10-2014

View PostAliceUnchained, on 23 August 2018 - 08:49 PM, said:

 

Regular V-Sync would actually drop to 30 FPS, so I'm guessing you were using Adaptive V-Sync? Small drops like that shouldn't cause stuttering normally, but can't be excluded entirely either (but most likely are caused by rather big changes in frame times). Any way, even if it only 'feels' smoother by all means stick with it. Shouldn't cause any harm.

 

Just out of curiosity, where did you change the refresh rate setting?

 

Ingame graphic settings

Roudari #15 Posted 23 August 2018 - 08:58 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 34124 battles
  • 730
  • Member since:
    01-28-2011

Iam self-taught so feel free to comment if you know more. Just got the feeling that something here doesnt add up so, if i could explain a bit.

 

Monitor = Hertz (pretty much how many times per second the screen shows a new picture. 60hz means the screen or monitor refreshes 60 times per second)

Computer = Sends monitor the frames or pictures (fps= frames per second) that your monitor then tries to show you.

 

Problems can occur when your computer cant send a new picture (lets say your computer is sending 30fps) when the monitor (60hz) already is trying to show you a new picture. This means the monitor is going to show you the same picture twice. This is often referred as lagging or stuttering. New picture didnt come up and the monitor showed you the same picture as before. And if its vice versa.. (computer sends more pictures/frames than you monitor can show) Then "screen tearing" happens wich means the monitor refreshed new picture before the old one was fully shown so the top of the picture is different than the bottom of it. In simpler way 120fps computer sending 60hz monitor pictures means the picture would change to newer picture half way the monitor was showing it. Usually this means shadows and stuff like that jitters/tears but imo its better than lagging.

 

V-sync was made to battle screen tearing. What it means is that the monitor will only show picture when its fully ready to be shown, so now halfway refreshing. BUT this means more work for the monitor wich creates a bit of lag because the monitor has to wait confirmation that the picture is full and ready to be shown before the monitor shows it. So it kinda creates like a buffer of images to ensure that the showing them is smooth, but then again this really becomes a problem in games that are fast paced because there just isnt time to "buffer" images and everything just needs to be shown and reacted immediatly. This is referred as input lag and its best seen in fps games. I dont personally like it because as everyone knows in monitors we are talking about milliseconds when the fps from the computer are being transferred to the monitor and there just isnt time for software to ensure that the picture is full and clear before showing it. If your fps is lower that the hz on the monitor then v-sync to my knowledge is just useless.



Balc0ra #16 Posted 23 August 2018 - 09:16 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 66636 battles
  • 16,673
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

View PostTankyouverymuch2, on 23 August 2018 - 04:34 PM, said:

Why do other games such as for example The Crew have a simple setting between 30 or 60 Hz refresh rate with VSync which actually works, while WG's refresh rate system is basically useless across all their games?

 

Well, oddly enough even the RTS most WOT assets and models came from that used the bigworld engine, could even do that. 

Cannes76 #17 Posted 23 August 2018 - 09:37 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 67853 battles
  • 1,758
  • [TAKE] TAKE
  • Member since:
    04-16-2011

Sounds like there are other problems which could be fixed to give you a better experience with 60 Hz and 60 fps.

I recently got a 144 Hz monitor and it has greatly improved the experience eventhough my dated graphic card only rarely outputs more than 120 fps. It is much better than steady 60 fps. I will never go back, not even for 4k resolution. will buy new computer soon which should be able to render at the capacity of my new monitor regardless of the action!



PervyPastryPuffer #18 Posted 23 August 2018 - 09:56 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 31223 battles
  • 2,303
  • [VRTC] VRTC
  • Member since:
    09-13-2013

View PostlnfernaI, on 23 August 2018 - 06:47 PM, said:

if you use V-sync,you subject yourself to horrible input lag. It's an outdated technology.

 

Oh I'm sorry for not having a Freesync/G-Sync monitor and wanting a smooth stutterless image. :sceptic:

lnfernaI #19 Posted 23 August 2018 - 11:54 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 29065 battles
  • 3,700
  • [ALLGE] ALLGE
  • Member since:
    09-15-2012

View PostTankyouverymuch2, on 23 August 2018 - 10:56 PM, said:

 

Oh I'm sorry for not having a Freesync/G-Sync monitor and wanting a smooth stutterless image. :sceptic:

 

I don't either,but that's not my point. I'm speaking from a technical viewpoint (as I tend to work for repairing issues like these sometimes).

I don't use V-sync either,simply because it makes this horrible input lag,that literally nobody is capable of fixing,and by the looks of it,isn't going to anymore. I don't like the screen tearing,but I can't stand the fact that my twitch-shooter games like L4D2 and TF2 get their controls wrecked. Get it now?



Baldrickk #20 Posted 24 August 2018 - 08:45 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 30307 battles
  • 14,518
  • [-TAH-] -TAH-
  • Member since:
    03-03-2013

View PostlnfernaI, on 23 August 2018 - 11:54 PM, said:

 

I don't either,but that's not my point. I'm speaking from a technical viewpoint (as I tend to work for repairing issues like these sometimes).

I don't use V-sync either,simply because it makes this horrible input lag,that literally nobody is capable of fixing,and by the looks of it,isn't going to anymore. I don't like the screen tearing,but I can't stand the fact that my twitch-shooter games like L4D2 and TF2 get their controls wrecked. Get it now?

L4D2 and TF2 don't really suffer for V-sync.

They've been programmed sanely.

For dog's sake stay away from Dead Space where they put rendering, physics ai and control all in the same loop and tied it to 30fps...

 

Yes there is some latency, but assuming you can stay above 60fps at all times,  the upper bound for average latency is 1/120 of a second. This is reduced the faster you can actually produce frames.

The real problem lies when your framerate drops below 60 fps.

V-sync then caps the output at 30fps (which is why you want adaptive vsync that disables itself when under your screen's refresh rate.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users