Monitor Refresh rate…how important to flight simming?

[Mower]

60 Hz versus 144 Hz…does it really matter?

Looking for a new 27 inch monitor and the difference in price is quite wide.

Is 60 Hz going to be good enough for fluid flight simming?

Cheers brothers.

[Shadow]

I not long purchased a nice 32" MVA 10bit color Panel, and its great but I would be happier still if it was free sync / 144 Hz.

I think Monitors are an important Item cause thats where all the other stuff output to. (And the speakers or headset).

Frame time is the thing, not just FPS.

https://www.144hzmonitors.com/freesync/

[BlueRaven]

Hi Mower, flight simming does not involve frenetic action, so 60 Hz is for sure enough.
The real thing, as Shadow indirectly said, is ensuring you can achieve a constant frame rate and have the lowest possible input lag: that’s why adaptive sync technology - be it Freesync or G-Sync - makes a big difference, especially for non perfectly balanced builds that have some bottlenecks.
So, don’t let datasheets with ‘amazing 1ms response time’ fool you (response time tells absolutely nothing about monitor capabilities) and aim for panel quality, low input lag and support for adaptive sync.

[Ironman53rd]

how do you activate “adaptive sync” on a Titan Nvidia GC?

[Raptor]

My max game fps can reach 250 based on my hw and vga card. My monitors by default work at 60hz. If I play with this combination the result will be to see strange lagging images within game, mostly if I turn my head quickly from one side to another. It is not a showstopper, but considering the hw -aspect it is not acceptable for me. So, I pushed monitors to have a refresh rate of 75hz (they support this), enabled the “set g_bAllowAllRefreshRates” value on config file, selected vsync on from within game, and I now experience a steady 75fps within game, fully aligned with my monitor capabilities, no lagging. There is no need to go higher at this point/configuration (until a VR solution; )

[BlueRaven]

@Ironman53rd:

how do you activate “adaptive sync” on a Titan Nvidia GC?

Hi, it should be an option in your NVIDIA Control Panel.

[tirta]

yes, for bms 60hz is enough.
but if possible get one with gsync or freesync.
I find no screen tearing is very nice.

[Ironman53rd]

Having just set up my new 3x27" monitors running at 7680x1440 and getting 50 to 60 FPS at 144Hz - I can say categorically it DOES make a difference ;0)

I notice the difference most when panning with Track IR but on the whole the “smoothness” is tangible.

Like most things in life - if you can afford it do it - if you cant, then wait until you can.

But believe me 144hz does make a difference.

[Arty]

Well it’s not just your 3x27" @144Hz @7680x1440.
But and the system driving them that can handle the load.
If the system can’t, then having such a setup is pointless.

Στάλθηκε από το MI 5 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk

[Ironman53rd]

@Arty:

Well it’s not just your 3x27" @144Hz @7680x1440.
But and the system driving them that can handle the load.
If the system can’t, then having such a setup is pointless.

Στάλθηκε από το MI 5 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk

I agree - but the question was “does it make a difference” newly qualified answer " yes if your system can handle it"

[ApeX89]

Well, that is a rather interesting question.

I own an ACER screen for quite some years now and I noticed from the start some weird “white tearing” on dark edges when panning around in BMS.
Not to an extent that it is really giving me a hard time, but I would like to get rid of it.

My monitor is similar to the Acer G276HLJ

It is not a super high-quality screen, but apart from this little tearing issue, it is just working great for me!

Thank you very much in advance.

Chris

[Arty]

@Ironman53rd:

I agree - but the question was “does it make a difference” newly qualified answer " yes if your system can handle it"

Sure is, couldn’t agree more.

I was just mentioning it cause some when hot don’t consider all aspects, go buy the thing and pull their hair afterwards.
Worst case they could come back and say bad things or consider your suggestion as bad.

Στάλθηκε από το MI 5 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk

[Gastone]

As others have said if you have the horsepower, 144 hz is a nice addition. Other than a greater overall smoothness, there are some practical benifits too. During a carrier approach the pilot is supposed to spend 15 seconds in the groove. At 60fps you have 900 frames to make adjustments and hit the three wire. With a 144 Hz monitor you have 2,160 frames to make adjusments. That increased grainulaity makes landing easier and less erratic.

Just be aware for the technology to work fully you need to pair a gsync with a Nivida card and Freesync to an AMD card.

[Arty]

A good read on the subject and the fps thing:
http://www.pcgamer.com/how-many-frames-per-second-can-the-human-eye-really-see/
Based on actual studies.
So the speed is on peripheral vision.
For the center he says it’s not going to make u better. U just experience something different.
He sets the bar to around 90hz, but have in mind movies are at 24fps.
It’s all hypothetical and have to do with human perception and uniqueness.

Στάλθηκε από το MI 5 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk

[Gastone]

@Arty:

A good read on the subject and the fps thing:
http://www.pcgamer.com/how-many-frames-per-second-can-the-human-eye-really-see/
Based on actual studies.
So the speed is on peripheral vision.
For the center he says it’s not going to make u better. U just experience something different.
He sets the bar to around 90hz, but have in mind movies are at 24fps.
It’s all hypothetical and have to do with human perception and uniqueness.

I disagree with the conclusion you are drawing, and also think you’re being a bit ingenious. You’re taking bits of the article and applying them to serve one of your preconceived biases. Mainly that refresh rate is inconsequential.

In the article Busey states “Certainly 60 Hz is better than 30 Hz, demonstrably better, Whether that plateaus at 120 Hz or whether you get an additional boost up to 180 Hz, I just don’t know.”

This article is poorly written it’s a jumbling of ideas and quotes which consistently contradict each other. One expert goes on to say “It’s clear from the literature that you cannot see anything more than 20 Hz,” Which, 1, Buesy contradicts two paragraphs up. And 2, we know is wrong as

@Arty:

For the center he says it’s not going to make u better. U just experience something different.

The article is quoting Adrien Chopin, where he states “After 24 Hz you won’t get better”. Again which defies practical experience. Try playing CS go at 24 fps, or sticking a carrier landing on the three wire in BMS. You’ll be at decide disadvantage. The delta time between frames provides a practical advantage most players can make use of.

Most people can make use of the edge that 120hz gaming provides. Here is a great video that get into 144hz vs 240hz gaming. I think the last part of the video is more relevant to the discussion at hand, so I’ll link that

. A bit earlier they get into wether it’s possible to tell 240 from 144, and yes it is for some.

What it really comes down to is, that 144hz is something that people actually need to get their hands and see. It is quite impressive. I have had mine for over a year and I know consider refresh more important than resolution, within reason. I’m going to wait a generation or two on displays and cards till there are reasonable priced 4k displays with a refresh of 120hz +.

Beyond the arguments of visual acuity, FPS can also improve the simulation and feedback loop. The sim interpolates from frame to frame using both Rk4 and LERP, With smaller time between frames you get more accurate positional updates, edge cases are smoothed out. You make the sim it self more accurate and if you have the controls, skill and perception you can take advantage of that edge.

Here’s a practical example. Lets say we’re flying a carrier approach in the hornet at 136 knots.

70 meters per second = 136 knots
At a FPS of 60
1/60 = .016

70* .016 =1.12 meters per frame of interpolation

144 FPS
1/144
.0069 * 70 = .4 meters per frame of interpolation

Thus, when the sim is running at 144hz the distance the object moves per frame in the sim is half. A doubling of precision based entirely on frame rate.

Gsync further helps smooth this out by by keeping the monitor displaying at the exact frame as the simulation is at. This means less wrapping to interpolation. While also minor it does continue to lend an advantage.

Do you need it? No, you do not need a 144 hz monitor, but it will make it you’re learning experience easier, The same way having a Warthog or high end joystick will too. Better precision means more control-ability, which generally leads to an easier experience. That is especially true if you’re attempting a carrier landing the proper way.

[Arty]

@Arty:

It’s all hypothetical and have to do with human perception and uniqueness.

Hello Gastone thanks for your wonderful answer and please excuse my ingenious self, but Wich part of my last paragraph quoted above u didn’t get?
In addition my quotation was that hey guys I found a good read on the subject and wanted to share with you.
My writings after the quotation were like a small update what it talks about in case someone is bored to read it.
I never said that what it says are 100% true.
He based what he wrote on scientific findings and not to “just” a handful of YouTubers or gamers.
I don’t believe or take for granted the: “what’s said on the internet is 100% true”. Do u?
This fps and monitors subject is going on for many many years.

If you want my personal opinion is that it’s an experience thing. What u experience is it satisfying? Yes then I’m ok. Not? Breaker down the problem and find the experience.

And yes I can land on a carrier with the fps you mention. If u want some more on it there are some guys doing it with keyboard or game a gamepad… What does that prove? For me nothing, just a personal experience.
Have fun, happy New year.

Στάλθηκε από το MI 5 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk

[Zaltys]

Ok, I’m lost now. If in Falcon I get lower than 100 fps, is it worth setting refresh rate in Falcon’s UI higher than 120 Hz? I mean with HDMI I can set only 120 Hz and if I change to DP cable, probably I can set to maximum display refresh - 144 Hz.

[Guest]

@Ironman53rd:

Having just set up my new 3x27" monitors running at 7680x1440 and getting 50 to 60 FPS at 144Hz - I can say categorically it DOES make a difference ;0)
But believe me 144hz does make a difference.

Hmmm… I’m a bit confused. Is it the 144Hz that is the factor or is it the 50-60fps? I mean if I can have a 60Hz monitor but still get 50-60fps, is that the same thing?

[Arty]

Try them and decide which looks better for u.

Στάλθηκε από το MI 5 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk

[Ironman53rd]

@-Ice:

Hmmm… I’m a bit confused. Is it the 144Hz that is the factor or is it the 50-60fps? I mean if I can have a 60Hz monitor but still get 50-60fps, is that the same thing?

Hi Ice,

Complicated maths aside - I can say categorically that 50/60 FPS at 144Hz is, seen by my eye, as MUCH smoother than 50/60FPS at 60Hz

Also check you PM