Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
cool av
Mar 2, 2013

It takes about 1ns for light to move the distance of your monitor, or about 1/10000th of a ns to move 1 pixel. This implies a maximum theoretical “useful” FPS of 10000 billion FPS, or 10 trillion FPS.

This allows one full frame for each pixel to light up as an object moving at light speed traverses your monitor. There may be some possible “fringe benefits” or “perceived smoothness” to higher FPS, but generally if anyone claims they need higher than 10 trillion FPS they most likely don’t know what they are talking about.

I hope this can finally put the arguing and infighting to bed.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Second Hand Meat Mouth
Sep 12, 2001

cool av posted:

It takes about 1ns for light to move the distance of your monitor, or about 1/10000th of a ns to move 1 pixel. This implies a maximum theoretical “useful” FPS of 10000 billion FPS, or 10 trillion FPS.

This allows one full frame for each pixel to light up as an object moving at light speed traverses your monitor. There may be some possible “fringe benefits” or “perceived smoothness” to higher FPS, but generally if anyone claims they need higher than 10 trillion FPS they most likely don’t know what they are talking about.

I hope this can finally put the arguing and infighting to bed.

Augus
Mar 9, 2015


cool av posted:

It takes about 1ns for light to move the distance of your monitor, or about 1/10000th of a ns to move 1 pixel. This implies a maximum theoretical “useful” FPS of 10000 billion FPS, or 10 trillion FPS.

This allows one full frame for each pixel to light up as an object moving at light speed traverses your monitor. There may be some possible “fringe benefits” or “perceived smoothness” to higher FPS, but generally if anyone claims they need higher than 10 trillion FPS they most likely don’t know what they are talking about.

I hope this can finally put the arguing and infighting to bed.

if I pick my monitor up and shake it to the side does that mean the thing going across my monitor is moving faster than the speed of light

Regarde Aduck
Oct 19, 2012

c l o u d k i t t e n
Grimey Drawer

Augus posted:

if I pick my monitor up and shake it to the side does that mean the thing going across my monitor is moving faster than the speed of light

Yes

gradenko_2000
Oct 5, 2010

HELL SERPENT
Lipstick Apathy
Instead of frame rates, what about resolutions?

I like 1080p ultrawide

Al!
Apr 2, 2010

:coolspot::coolspot::coolspot::coolspot::coolspot:

gradenko_2000 posted:

Instead of frame rates, what about resolutions?

I like 1080p ultrawide

widescreengaming.com is fabulous, pretty much every old game has a widescreen mod now

Pulcinella
Feb 15, 2019

Anime Schoolgirl posted:

i know it's 3 times the power per cpu core than the last generation but "i expect 60 in idle scenes where they turn all the silly simulation code and grass animation on" is lofty when you're talking about 15-20gb of mesh and texture assets in regular use. SE are not id software. (this is also a problem starfield will have btw)

just wait for the pc port in 2.5 years where they'll integrate denuvo badly and give you stutters even in combat

I am loling at the naively hopeful gamers who think Starfield is going to be largely big free (and have good performance on PC). It’s a Bethesda game folks! It’s going to be buggy as poo poo and modders are going to have to fix it like every other Bethesda game. Also it’s going to come out and DF is going to figure out that it’s locked to 30 on Xbox because Gamebryo is still single threaded or something. There is going to be a main thread pegged at 100% CPU usage, a render thread at 50%, an I/O thread at 50%, and then the remaining CPU cores are just sitting silently with the lights off.

I know MS said they sent id to help out on Starfield, but I imagine there is only so much they can do besides telling Bethesda to radically rearchitect their engine.

Brimruk
Jun 5, 2009

gradenko_2000 posted:

Instead of frame rates, what about resolutions?

I like 1080p ultrawide

I’m a 1280 by 960 man; that upscale old games nicely and doesn’t make the text too small on new games for my lovely old eyes

Anime Schoolgirl
Nov 28, 2002

540p, that's how i get a brisk 32fps in modded-to-the-gills New Vegas on my Athlon 3000g

Antonymous
Apr 4, 2009

u can't even see 4k id rather have 31fps 1080 than 30fps 4k

Antonymous
Apr 4, 2009

what bit depth you guys like

technically 8bits x 3 channels is enough to encode all colors but you need a really good nonlinear color model

in rgb you need a lot of bits

Al!
Apr 2, 2010

:coolspot::coolspot::coolspot::coolspot::coolspot:

Antonymous posted:

what bit depth you guys like

420

Antonymous
Apr 4, 2009

did you know stereo sound is a gimmick like 3d glasses that we've all just accepted for no reason

Antonymous
Apr 4, 2009

drat that helicopter is flying around me!!!

Brimruk
Jun 5, 2009

Antonymous posted:

what bit depth you guys like

technically 8bits x 3 channels is enough to encode all colors but you need a really good nonlinear color model

in rgb you need a lot of bits

whatever bit depth console and PC pixel games used in the late 90s early 2000s, the golden era of game graphics

Pulcinella
Feb 15, 2019

Antonymous posted:

what bit depth you guys like

technically 8bits x 3 channels is enough to encode all colors but you need a really good nonlinear color model

in rgb you need a lot of bits

Serious post: I would like to move beyond 8 bits per color. Too much banding. Also “HDR” doesn’t really fix this because a bunch of HDR implementations still just use 8 bits per color, just over a wider range so highlights are brighter but banding is even worse since the gaps are bigger.

gradenko_2000
Oct 5, 2010

HELL SERPENT
Lipstick Apathy

Antonymous posted:

did you know stereo sound is a gimmick like 3d glasses that we've all just accepted for no reason

???

Al!
Apr 2, 2010

:coolspot::coolspot::coolspot::coolspot::coolspot:
tick tock

Antonymous
Apr 4, 2009

did you know the CD contains 74 minutes of perfectly reproduced audio with error correction and 90db of dynamic range

and so for 40 years now we've never needed an advancement in audio reprodution tech except MP3s which deliver good enough quality but can stream over internet due to lower data rates

when do you think video will hit the 'there is no human experience that cannot be reproduced' benchmark or have we passed it. certainly we can store it but maybe not display it yet

LIVE AMMO COSPLAY
Feb 3, 2006

gradenko_2000 posted:

Instead of frame rates, what about resolutions?

I like 1080p ultrawide

720p is enough for anyone

SomethingBeautiful
Oct 22, 2008

Some celestial event. No- no words. No words to describe it. Poetry! They should have sent a poet. So beautiful. So beautiful... I had no idea

is this the thread about video games?

Antonymous
Apr 4, 2009

what are videgames if not visual and audio and sometimes tactile stimulation

now that we have HD rumble for a while when will they have 4k rumble

Al!
Apr 2, 2010

:coolspot::coolspot::coolspot::coolspot::coolspot:

SomethingBeautiful posted:

is this the thread about video games?

no

LIVE AMMO COSPLAY
Feb 3, 2006

4k looks really clean but it requires optimisation and sacrifice that isn't really possible for video games. It's a marketing term for visualphiles

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Al!
Apr 2, 2010

:coolspot::coolspot::coolspot::coolspot::coolspot:
the thread about video games is here

https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=4034924

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply