200Hz LCD/OLED

Discussion in '3D Hardware, Software & Output Devices' started by Dave B(TotalVR), Mar 22, 2008.

  1. Dave B(TotalVR)

    Regular

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    491
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    Essex, UK (not far from IMGTEC:)
    Ok, this might be a lot more feasible with oleds due to their fast reaction times...

    But there is still room in LCD. a 2ms LCD screen can change colour state 500 times per second (though in reality that will be considerably lower).

    Why hasn't anybody come out with a screen that can refresh considerably faster? like 200Hz?

    This is not to reduce flicker, as there is none on an LCD, this is to allow 200FPS in a game with Vsync enabled.

    Playing on my dell 2407WFP at 1920x1200 I am limited to 60 FPS with vsync, I don't want to turn vsync off because the tearing messes with my eyes.

    Back when I had CRT, I'd play Counterstrike locked at 100 FPS with vysnc and it was as smooth as silk, albeit in a lower rez and with no AA.

    At 100 FPS locked it looked and felt a hell of a lot smoother than when I disabled vsync and it ran between 120-250 FPS without it.

    So how about an LCD that refreshes at 200+hz?

    Or does somebody have one out now? I was also wondering how this would effet the maximum transition bandwidth over DVI/HDMI.
     
  2. suryad

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2004
    Messages:
    2,479
    Likes Received:
    16
    I would love to have one of them high refresh rate LCDs. I am running a 30 inch with my SLI 8800 Ultra setup and without vsync games tear like crazy even at max resolution. I would be the first in line to get one of them 120 Hz bad boys!

    Found this article...http://gizmodo.com/341848/philips-offers-proof-of-120hz-worth-in-side+by+side-demo-of-its-7403--lcd So I guess its not as much as a gimmick as I thought it was first when they came out. Now launch some 30 inch monitors with these refresh rates!
     
  3. MfA

    MfA
    Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    6,923
    Likes Received:
    502
    The digital interfaces can't handle it.
     
  4. Humus

    Humus Crazy coder
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    3,217
    Likes Received:
    77
    Location:
    Stockholm, Sweden
    What's the limitation in the digital interface?
     
  5. Silent_Buddha

    Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Messages:
    16,871
    Likes Received:
    6,030
    Weren't some manufacturer's doing R&D on 100 and 120 hz LCDs?

    Regards,
    SB
     
  6. nicolasb

    Regular

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2006
    Messages:
    421
    Likes Received:
    4
    Yes, but I think those only accept a 60Hz input signal and then generate their own in-between frames, either setting them to be all black, or actually interpolating between consecutive input frames. I'm not aware of any LCD monitor designed to accept >60Hz input.

    DLP would be a more obvious choice of display tech for something like that, anyway. (There are some DLP displays that run at 120 frames per second to produce sterescopic 3D images in combination with LCD shutter glasses - 60Hz for each eye).
     
  7. Dave Glue

    Regular

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2002
    Messages:
    634
    Likes Received:
    25
    Then force triple buffering - look up D3dOverride.
     
  8. mczak

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2002
    Messages:
    3,018
    Likes Received:
    114
    Pretty sure that most will accept more, at least over VGA connection. At least some definitely list up to 85 Hz in their specifications (but may not accept more than 60Hz at their native resolution, i.e. pretty useless).
    Depending on the resolution of the LCD, you'd indeed have trouble reaching higher refresh frequencies. For instance 1920x1200 is almost at the limit of single-link DVI (154Mhz with reduced blanking vs. 165Mhz limit). Though you can actually "overclock" DVI to higher frequencies - though I've only tried that with non-reduced blanking by accident (don't ask...), worked just fine at 195Mhz or so :).
    Though if you're asking for 200Hz, that would require more than 3 times the bandwidth for very little (some would probably argue none at all) improvement - not going to happen. Movies still have not even moved to more than 24fps for the most part...
     
  9. Blazkowicz

    Legend Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2004
    Messages:
    5,607
    Likes Received:
    256
    I still use CRTs as they are basically free and I don't like some of the issues with LCDs (especially the cheap TN).
    Counterstrike is utterly great at 1024 100Hz vsync on, with 16xS AA/16x AF, even though it's updated quake 1 technology it isn't something I can give up :).

    Even old LCDs typically accept 70 or 75Hz.. but I learnt a few years ago that they just drop frames to display 60Hz, which is a bit lame and useless.

    There's dual-link DVI and now Display Port to play around with higher frequencies. Wikipedia tells they can do respectively up to 7.92GB/s and 10.8GB/s, so a 30" display could do at least 80Hz on the latter, maybe 85 ; 24" and lower could do up to 120Hz on DVI.

    The 60Hz limit is something I can very much notice. I remember once forgetting back in the days to change refresh rate moving from a temporary 12" CRT from 1987 (shit happens :)) to a more capable CRT, first thing I noticed in CS : it was too slow! then, duh, it's obviously at 60Hz.
     
  10. Squilliam

    Squilliam Beyond3d isn't defined yet
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2008
    Messages:
    3,495
    Likes Received:
    114
    Location:
    New Zealand
    I take it you also hate input lag anyway? That would be noticable if you can tell between 60-100htz with that clarity.
     
  11. Moloch

    Moloch God of Wicked Games
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Messages:
    2,981
    Likes Received:
    72
    You noticed because you can see it refresh(60hz crt= FAIL), not because it was "too slow"
    1024 also is horrible, why not choose a higher resolution???
     
  12. tabs

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2007
    Messages:
    1,717
    Likes Received:
    258
    Location:
    UK
    I can certainly tell the difference between 60fps and 100fps, can't you?

    Remember he's using vsync so the framerate is capped.
     
  13. Silent_Buddha

    Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Messages:
    16,871
    Likes Received:
    6,030
    Aye but is he using triple buffering? You'll notice more "lag" or "slowness" from triple buffering than dropping from 100 fps to 60 fps.

    Or at least I do. :p It's why when I used to do competitive FPSing back in the day that I avoided anything that would introduce input lag.

    Either way. Lag due to triple buffer is much more noticeable than any perceived lag in going from 100 fps to 60 fps to me.

    Then again 60 hz screen refresh on a CRT is a killer for eye strain regardless of what FPS your game is running at.

    Regards,
    SB
     
  14. Nite_Hawk

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2002
    Messages:
    1,202
    Likes Received:
    35
    Location:
    Minneapolis, MN

    Under the right circumstances I can tell the difference. Under the right circumstances I can't tell the difference.

    Nite_Hawk
     
  15. Moloch

    Moloch God of Wicked Games
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Messages:
    2,981
    Likes Received:
    72
    Not if the game updates everything in a non retarded(i.e quake 3) way and the framerate is a constant 60fps.
    Considering 60fps (and even 30fps) is the framerate cap in many new titles apparently devs think 60 (or even 30) fps is enough :razz:
    V-sync without triple buffering is shit btw.
     
  16. kyleb

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2002
    Messages:
    4,165
    Likes Received:
    52
    This is a missunderstanding I see repeated quite often. Triple buffering doesn't add latenced over double buffered vsync, it reduces it by allocating memory to store a finished frame instead of having the GPU sit idle after each frame, waiting for the backbuffer to clear on vsync.
     
  17. tabs

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2007
    Messages:
    1,717
    Likes Received:
    258
    Location:
    UK
    I've a feeling the lag that people notice is akin to the microstuttering problem of SLI/Crossfire systems, where the frames are not evenly distributed timewise.
     
  18. Silent_Buddha

    Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Messages:
    16,871
    Likes Received:
    6,030
    Actually it does add some latency if the implementation instead queues up 3 frames rather than just storing extra frames IF frames are available.

    This is most noticeable when you have min framerates that go particularly low.

    Regards,
    SB
     
  19. kyleb

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2002
    Messages:
    4,165
    Likes Received:
    52
    Triple buffering stores the most recent finished frame to flip to the front buffer on the next vsync, what ever you are talking about queuing up 3 frames isn't triple buffering. And as an example of low framerate, say you are running at 60hz refresh and it takes 1/19 of a second to render each frame, You'll get 19fps with triple buffering, where as with double buffering you'll only get 15fps because the GPU has to sit ilde in between finishing each frame and clearing the backbuffer on vsync.

    Perhaps you are noticing what bigtabs mentioned, the uneven distribution of framrete. For example, with triple buffering you might get a constant 45fps, which at 60hz would be one frame for two refreshes, the next frame for just one, then next frame for two refresh and so on. While with double buffering in the same scene you'd be limited to 30 fps which is a constant one frame for every two refreshes. But again, triple buffer improves input latency by allowing a new frame to be rendered directly after the previous one is finished rather than having the GPU sit idle waiting for vsync.
     
  20. Entropy

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2002
    Messages:
    3,135
    Likes Received:
    1,106
    Could you please explain what you mean?
     
Loading...

Share This Page

  • About Us

    Beyond3D has been around for over a decade and prides itself on being the best place on the web for in-depth, technically-driven discussion and analysis of 3D graphics hardware. If you love pixels and transistors, you've come to the right place!

    Beyond3D is proudly published by GPU Tools Ltd.
Loading...