I am mildly offended! /kappa

Jan 10, 2020 7:17 PM

NovaZek

Views

127358

Likes

3603

Dislikes

97

Technically, if the train was moving fast and the game was doing motion blur, parts would look different.

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

TIL there are more mountains at a higher frame rate

6 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I honestly don't care about the pc/console war crap. Just go with what you prefer and enjoy.

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The difference is slight OK, but you should see that frame at 140FPS! Blows your mind :-)

6 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Pretty sure those to pictures are 1FPY

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Words can’t describe the difference, numbers can tho 60-30=30

6 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Internet has ruined me just spent more time than I’d like admit looking for something hidden in the picture

6 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Ignoring these are still images, they're not the same photo... literally. Compare the mountains in the top left. Slightly different angle.

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Man, this is stupid. I love it.

6 years ago | Likes 25 Dislikes 0

Anything with fast action matters but it doesn't mean a game can't be enjoyed at a lower frame rate. Shit I played Crysis on a Pentium 4.

6 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

So did I. P4 3.2GHZ 2GB of ram and an AGP ATI 1950Pro 512MB. Turn enough stuff down and it would run.

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Sorry i have 144fps, but i can have 300 If i want

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

This image is so small, how are we supposed to even tell the difference? This is dumb.

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

/s

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Now show the next frame!

6 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

What if you shake the image a bit?

6 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

Kinda freezes at 1.5FPS and causes BSoD for me ...

6 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Lol

6 years ago | Likes 239 Dislikes 7

You just got 170 points off of "Lol" It takes me 2 months of mediocre comments to get 50. I need to invest more in Lol.

6 years ago | Likes 19 Dislikes 0

Bro I’m just as shocked, and also appalled. But also grateful, I guess?

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Seriously...

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

PC's are clearly technologically superior, but anyone who unironically buys into that Master Race crap is just a dipshit.

6 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 5

PCs are for rich people and/or idiots with no capabilities for money management

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 17

Well... you don’t have to go for the top notch components. Idiots purchase out of their means but you don’t have to be “rich” have a pc 1/2

6 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

With a decent paying job I am still able to upgrade my PC on occasion while still building my savings. Consoles & PCs both have pros/cons

6 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

I really DGAF about PC vs consoles. But any devs fucking up a control scheme "because consoles" can get assfucked in hell. Right, Bethesda?

6 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 1

Checkmate, atheists

6 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

Thanks Obama

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Hillary did it.

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

6 years ago | Likes 31 Dislikes 3

I'd happily take a 50% loss in pixels to go from 30 fps to 60 fps.

6 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

PC "master race" are by far the most annoying platform warriors.

6 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 3

Man I got shit on by console gamers earlier while playing COD MW with it being cross-platform because I was on PC. Both sides are annoying

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Even Yahtzee, the guy who invented the term in one of his Zero Punctuation videos, wishes he'd called them something else for how >

6 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

> obnoxious they've become.

6 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

It was originally meant to be an ironic thing, used for joking, but too many asswipes took it seriously and started ragging on people >

6 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Lol 60fps. 144+ is how we see the world now.

6 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 16

High FPS is nice and all, but 300 FPS on 60Hz monitor is a different experience altogether vs. 300 FPS on a 240Hz monitor. You get lower 1/2

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

Fps is bound to the maximum Hz value. If you have a monitor with 60hz but your rig can put out 166fps, you will regardlessly see only 60fps.

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Well yes nobody has negated that. But tests on this issue shows less input lag with say 300 fps on 60Hz vs. 60 on 60Hz. Check Linus test@YT.

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

input lag with 300/60 than say 60/60, but the visual experience will still feel like 60Hz. Combine refresh rate/frame rate for best results.

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

This man speaks the truth. 60fps is for peasants

6 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 4

6 years ago | Likes 43 Dislikes 2

6 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

.....I need this in my life

6 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

I feel this is a bit overdone but at the same time, that's real dedication right there.

6 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

v

6 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 2

Amazing how much this guy transformed himself.

6 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Snorlax has an evolution?

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

There is a FP post showing this guy looking ripped.

6 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

A stable rate is preferred. The jumps between fps is what makes it noticeable.

6 years ago | Likes 17 Dislikes 4

Even if it's stable 30fps is just garbage. 60 is nice, but personally I find the jump from 60 to 75 very noticeable

6 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 8

Stable 30FPS isn't garbage, it's just that the PS4 and Xbox One never stayed at a stable 30FPS. Take Bloodborne for example, that chugs.

6 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Anyone who claims 30fps is unplayable/garbage is just being a framerate snob. Games are perfectly playable on consoles with a 30fps cap, and hell, you can swing lower and still get a playable experience depending on the type of game. I have one custom mission in Arma 3 that used to chug at 15-20fps on my old rig and it was still perfectly playable because the game doesn't require lighting-fast response times.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

personally i don't ming 30 fps for most games.

6 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

If it isn't created to run natively at (at least) 60FPS, then it will look like trash at 60FPS. Games are good, movies/tv is not.

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I only play ps3 cause I don't game that much and don't want to buy a ps4 til I'm out of school. I had no idea games get up to 200 fps. Wtf

6 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Might as well wait for the PS5. You'll be able to keep playing your PS3 games on it anyway.

6 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

Asus just released a 360 fps monitor, that's a stupid amount of frames.

6 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

No, they did not. They released a 360Hz monitor. Refresh rate and frame rate are two different things altogether. You don't get extra 1/2

6 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

However the motion is buttery smoothe...

6 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

I have a 240Hz monitor and some games don't give me more than 60fps, while other games again give me 300fps, or 400fps, it all just depends.

6 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

frames from a monitor. You get frames due to CPU/RAM/GPU & what the game supports. If your HW is good enough, you can get high fps. 2/2

6 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I know that very well, at no point did i say that this monitor will magically give you a higher frame rate.

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

You said "360 fps monitor" though & referred to it being a lot of frames. That's the problem with what you said. FPS/Hz = 2 different things

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The monitor is capable of displaying 360 frames per second so it's just petty semantics.

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I did that because the person i replied to didn't seem that familiar with pc monitors.

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

v

6 years ago | Likes 21 Dislikes 2

6 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

Sauce?

6 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

My favourites

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Mark Ronson - Feel Right

6 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

she has a very punchable face lol

6 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 5

I see this as a reply everytime this gif is posted. The hostility lol.

6 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

she just seems like a bitch. but she is an actor so I guess that means she's doing her job

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

That's quite the reply. That attitude must get you a lot of girlfriends.

6 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

I personally wouldn't hit her, she just seems like a huge bitch all. like if someone laid into her, I'd probably understand

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

I'm sure it's just the role from whatever this is

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

yeah, probably right. guess that just means she's good at what she does.

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

You can tell all that from a 1 second gif. You seem like a massive dick from your 140 character comment

6 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

oh boy, a stranger called me a dick on the internet, let me go cry in the corner and cut myself! how will I ever go on!

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

We cant see more than 120 decibel anyway

6 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 2

what?

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Reminds me of when they were doing quality comparisons for TV and monitors in ads...

6 years ago | Likes 1346 Dislikes 6

Can potentially work

6 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 5

Or the ads on some VHS movies that compared DVD vs VHS picture quality...

6 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

Video speaker reviews are great, they put in a sound test and 1) their mic distorts the sounds 2) the audience probably has bad speakers...

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Some monitors will compare hz with pictures, and the one with lower hz will be all blurry lol

6 years ago | Likes 124 Dislikes 1

https://www.testufo.com/framerates#count=3&background=none&pps=960 it's not the worst way to illustrate it tbf

6 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Proof:

6 years ago | Likes 56 Dislikes 0

Funny to see but there's really no other way they can try to show it. Even if it was a video, unless you have high refresh you won't see it

6 years ago | Likes 47 Dislikes 0

Slow down the other vid to 30fps or like 22 so it is slightly stuttering

6 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 0

Same same.

6 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

These pictures are made for people who have no clue and would probably be more confused by that. Plus more would look at a picture than 1/2

6 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 0

In fairness, the lower the refresh the more you see motion blur

6 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

"Wow those colours look really good... Oh wait if I already have those amazing colours what's the benefit?"

6 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 1

Smoothyness.. get a system and video card that can push 240+fps get a 240hz monitor. Enjoy dat buttery smoothness..

6 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

I do photo editing and 3d animation and stuff so opted for 4k for my gtx 1080. May add another monitor, I can't find one that fits my setup

6 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

6 years ago | Likes 1522 Dislikes 8

the lack of motion blur hurts my eyeballs.

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 4

This is a much better example. If someone has to post why 60fps doesn't make a difference, then they better post a friggin' gif about it.

6 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Oh god, I've been playing too many games on 120fps that the 60fps looks stuttery still. Fml

6 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Last time I saw this gif it was running at 30fps. This time, it's running at 50fps. Progress, but still not true.

6 years ago | Likes 22 Dislikes 1

You cant tell the difference in frame rate over 33ish? But you can see the effects of it.

6 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 3

Now let's step up those numbers....

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Make the 15 stahp! It hurts my eyeballs.

6 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

200 fps if you wanna feel like you're high.

6 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Where's the 144 and 240? Gotta represent!

6 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Exactly.

6 years ago | Likes 225 Dislikes 1

They all look the same.

6 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 5

i played and beat dark souls in 15fps. took 100 hours

6 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

I'm not a gamer but that 60 is painful. It's like watching a bad pan in a movie when everything goes unrecognizably fuzzy.

6 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 5

It's just supposed to show the difference.. that's the point..

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

May I recommend an eye doctor?

6 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 2

I need one with 144 and 240hz as well, after having such displays 60 simply isn't playable anymore

6 years ago | Likes 26 Dislikes 7

Slide a stick of butter across a teflon coated surface wiped down in canola oil.

6 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 0

Perfect analogy

6 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I got one of those screens and I have had nothing but trouble, most notably from Bethesda games that goes completely out of whack at 144Hz

6 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

That's the games fault. Almost all games support higher fps.

6 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

I know it is. But it doesn't matter because it's still a problem that together with malfunctioning g/free-sync compatibility is a mess.

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Agreed. No idea how you get down votes

6 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

Expensive and still quite rare. Also that as a gif would do little good for general users.

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Idk about rare, the aisles are full of them at places like microcenter and Fry's. A little more expensive sure but not absurdly so.

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Rare as lot of people not having one

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

For shooters I agree. Not necessary for civ or single player rpg stuff so much

6 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Well I mean you want that mouse pointer to be smooth.

6 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Im sure in a few hours I'll have a downvote for my obviously wrong console pleb opinion

6 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I'm really glad everyone here understands the joke!

6 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

6 years ago | Likes 135 Dislikes 0

6 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 1

Playing console makes me sick now

6 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

I love whipping out UFO test to explain it to people in person.

6 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Yeah, this.

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Do 144 and 240 too! Butter.

6 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 0

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Could you do the higher refresh rates like this?

6 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 2

Most screens are 60hrz so most people wouldn't see it.

6 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

I used to play league of legends on about 11 fps and as soon as i got a good computer i couldn't figure out how i didnt lose 100% of theTime

6 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

You compensated, most likely ended up making you a much better player when you had good equipment

6 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

I'll take 30-60 STEADY fps! So annoying to get a game that runs fine, then some spots it just craps itself and becomes a slide show for 2s

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Do 1000 fps!!!

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

6 years ago | Likes 34 Dislikes 3

This appears to be 0 FPS. That or I'm lagging... OH GOD AM I A COMMONER?!

6 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Nah. There’s a simulated shockwave here.

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

30 FPS is tolerable, if not great, and 60 FPS is nice. For me, I can tolerate one or the other, I just hate when it jumps around or drops.

6 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Avoid 155 FPS, got it

6 years ago | Likes 49 Dislikes 0

But playing BF4 with 200fps is so satisfying

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

155 first person shooters? That's pretty cool! Are they like on Steam or something?

6 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 0

Surprisingly no, GOG. It's weird I know.

6 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

But don't our eyes naturally see in 30?

6 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 5

6 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Real answer without shaming you; no. Our eyes work by continuously taking in light, which is then processed by the brain. Frame rate (1/?)

6 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

In media refers to still images shown one after another (think a flip book) to simulate motion. Fluidity can be increased through (2/?)

6 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Various ways, such as blur of a higher frame rate. Our eyes don't have a static, absolute limit they can see because whether we notice (3/?)

6 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

A change can itself be impacted by the factors. Imagine watching a completely Black screen in room absent of light, and for 1/200th (4/?)

6 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0