It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussionWhere did the 30fps rumour come from?(85 posts)(85 posts)
(85 posts)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
This is my favourite topic
Posted January 03, 2016
So I see a lot of this "human eye can't detect past 30fps" rubbish online and sometimes "it can't see past 60fps".
Where did that all start and why do people continue to say it when it isn't true? What scientific evidence are they basing their findings on? Or is it a case of "it was on the internet...it must be true Hallelujah!"?

Because I can concurrently prove it 100% false because I did the test on Borderlands 2

30fps to 60fps - could easily tell the difference

60fps to 72fps - meh

72 to 120fps - another big difference, makes 60 look like 30

120 to unlimited (my monitor maximum of 144) - I was surprised to see a small flicker of difference, nothing I'd care about though.

Can we lay this rumour to rest by the power of the PC community?
Posted January 03, 2016
Saying "I see the difference" does not constitute proof.
Posted January 03, 2016
avatar
afarrah20: So I see a lot of this "human eye can't detect past 30fps" rubbish online and sometimes "it can't see past 60fps".
Where did that all start and why do people continue to say it when it isn't true? What scientific evidence are they basing their findings on? Or is it a case of "it was on the internet...it must be true Hallelujah!"?

Because I can concurrently prove it 100% false because I did the test on Borderlands 2

30fps to 60fps - could easily tell the difference

60fps to 72fps - meh

72 to 120fps - another big difference, makes 60 look like 30

120 to unlimited (my monitor maximum of 144) - I was surprised to see a small flicker of difference, nothing I'd care about though.

Can we lay this rumour to rest by the power of the PC community?
24 FPS is the minimum for fool the brain into seeing motion from a series or static images. And is the FPS you watch most of your films at. Higher FPS is better, but for most people looks worse.

This was discovered quite a while ago and is a well researched scientific basis.

However this requires certain factors to be applied which don't always happen with rendered images.

The most important is motion blur.
Posted January 03, 2016
avatar
mechmouse: The most important is motion blur.
which gives a lot of people motion sickness
Posted January 03, 2016
avatar
mechmouse: The most important is motion blur.
avatar
Sachys: which gives a lot of people motion sickness
I hate motion blur in games, always turn it off.

But its motion blur in films that let your brain be tricked. With out motion blur the low FPS becomes visible. If you recorded at 120 FPS and only used every 4th frame, the effect would be very apparent.

Consoles use motion blur and other tricks to make games look smoother than they are.
Post edited January 03, 2016 by mechmouse
Posted January 03, 2016
Pretty sure it's mainly a rumor started / upkept by the big publishers (just like the whole "cinematic feeling" ), so as to not have to tell the console pea... owners that due to technical constraints they get the lesser experience. Also an excuse for lazy PC Ports.

As for scientific proof, don't think there has been much/ any real tests done, but not like I particularly searched for them, so don't quote me on that one.
avatar
mechmouse: 24 FPS is the minimum for fool the brain into seeing motion from a series or static images. And is the FPS you watch most of your films at. Higher FPS is better, but for most people looks worse.

This was discovered quite a while ago and is a well researched scientific basis.
Most stuff based movies doesn't necessarily translate too well into videogames.
Post edited January 03, 2016 by Habanerose
Posted January 03, 2016
I remember a discussion elsewhere that came to the conclusion that you can consciously see ~30fps but higher rendering is needed in action based video games because your eyes/brain can perceive changes in motion above 120fps.

After a little web searching I found a webpage with a good breakdown of the different fps thresholds:
http://www.100fps.com/how_many_frames_can_humans_see.htm
Posted January 03, 2016
It is important to gaming because whatever you can see or not, 60fps will objectively be more responsive than 30.
Posted January 03, 2016
I'm going to preface this with "I don't play online games" and "I don't play games competitively".

I bought a g-sync screen largely because a) my old monitor was over 12 years old and was on the way out and b) I wanted to eliminate the judder you get on frame rates between 30 and 60fps when you have v-synch on.

The screen goes up to 144hz, but to be honest, I struggle to see the difference in fps when the rate goes above about 45. Maybe this is the G-synch module doing its thing, or maybe its because I don't play online twitch shooters.

Either way, it means that rather than targeting 60fps like I did before, I can get an enjoyable experience with a lower frame rate.
Posted January 03, 2016
Check this

Anyone here that does not see the difference between 30FPS and 60FPS? Excluding faulty or low hardware.

Anyway, the rumour was probably started by a group of people who was bothered that others could see the difference or that they couldn't and applied to everyone else because [insert irrational reason].
Posted January 03, 2016
avatar
Nirth: Check this

Anyone here that does not see the difference between 30FPS and 60FPS? Excluding faulty or low hardware.

Anyway, the rumour was probably started by a group of people who was bothered that others could see the difference or that they couldn't and applied to everyone else because [insert irrational reason].
I think more likely it's a reaction by people who have never paid attention nor spent money to achieve higher frame rates - and those people hearing 133t gamers talk about all this money they're spending on their gaming rigs. "Your hobby is a waste of time and money. You're spending time on something stupid and spending money on something that isn't even real. Ya dumb kid!"

That kind of thing.
Posted January 03, 2016
avatar
Habanerose: Pretty sure it's mainly a rumor started / upkept by the big publishers (just like the whole "cinematic feeling" ), so as to not have to tell the console pea... owners that due to technical constraints they get the lesser experience. Also an excuse for lazy PC Ports.

As for scientific proof, don't think there has been much/ any real tests done, but not like I particularly searched for them, so don't quote me on that one.
Relevant article here.
avatar
Nirth: Check this

Anyone here that does not see the difference between 30FPS and 60FPS? Excluding faulty or low hardware.
Yes. Also, that link has been posted before, and plenty of people responded that they couldn't tell the difference.
Post edited January 03, 2016 by Wishbone
Posted January 03, 2016
If the only game you play is minesweeper then even the concept of frames per second is ridiculous :)
Posted January 03, 2016
avatar
Nirth: Check this

Anyone here that does not see the difference between 30FPS and 60FPS? Excluding faulty or low hardware.
Me! Me! Pick me!

No, seriously. I don't. I would stare at for three minutes, only to see a "maaaaaybe", but you could probably switch them around at this point and I wouldn't realise.

But maybe something's just wrong with me. For example I can hardly see even the "best" 3D in movies.
Post edited January 03, 2016 by Breja
Posted January 03, 2016
I can certainly tell the difference, but anything over 60 is overkill to me. That's smooth enough for me.

As far as movies are concerned, I don't care at all for higher frames there as it oftentimes make them look worse to me. *shrug*
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussionWhere did the 30fps rumour come from?(85 posts)(85 posts)
(85 posts)