@[email protected] to [email protected] • 1 month agoDoes anyone really need a 1,000 Hz gaming display?arstechnica.comexternal-linkmessage-square44fedilinkarrow-up164arrow-down14
arrow-up160arrow-down1external-linkDoes anyone really need a 1,000 Hz gaming display?arstechnica.com@[email protected] to [email protected] • 1 month agomessage-square44fedilink
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilink3•edit-21 month agoThis is a demonstration of latency, not frame rate. Did you intend to link something different?
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilink3•1 month agoA 1000Hz display necessarily has a latency of 1ms between frames. For 100Hz, that’s 10ms. But this is only the lower bound. You have to include all other sources of latency, such as software, input hardware, drivers, graphics card, etc.
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilink2•edit-21 month agoAhhh, now I see the connection! It’s the update interval. I had to chew on it for a minute but the math checks out.
This is a demonstration of latency, not frame rate. Did you intend to link something different?
A 1000Hz display necessarily has a latency of 1ms between frames. For 100Hz, that’s 10ms.
But this is only the lower bound. You have to include all other sources of latency, such as software, input hardware, drivers, graphics card, etc.
Ahhh, now I see the connection! It’s the update interval. I had to chew on it for a minute but the math checks out.