Search Unity

  1. Unity 2020.1 has been released.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Good news ✨ We have more Unite Now videos available for you to watch on-demand! Come check them out and ask our experts any questions!
    Dismiss Notice

30 vs 60 fps

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Xenoun, Sep 25, 2015.

  1. Xenoun

    Xenoun

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2015
    Posts:
    201
    So I read this article recently: http://www.kotaku.com.au/2015/09/the-story-behind-steams-framerate-police/

    It brings up some points about 30 vs 60 fps and people who only want 60 because their hardware is good etc etc. From what I've seen a lot of the people complaining just don't seem to understand what frame rate is and what it actually means to what is going on. One guy even commented that he wanted 60 fps or higher because he didn't want input lag...just seriously WTF. I wish people would research things and then post a well informed argument but if we all did that then we'd likely have world peace by now.

    Put this up here to see what you guys think. Would you require/recommend 60 fps from all games as hardware can do that now or do you think 30 fps is still ok?

    To me 60 fps is required more when you're playing a first person shooter or similar game with tight controls and a lot of reflex moves, having that smoother movement from higher frame rate helps it look more visually appealing. Whereas if you're playing a digital board game, card game, turn based strategy etc 30 fps is fine.
     
  2. Ryiah

    Ryiah

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2012
    Posts:
    15,950
    Locking the frame rate makes no sense to me. If someone can afford the hardware to play games at 60Hz and above, then they should be able to play at that frame rate. Offering the option to limit is fine too for those on laptops.

    My next gaming monitor is most likely going to be 144Hz.
     
    Last edited: Sep 25, 2015
    Deleted User likes this.
  3. Xenoun

    Xenoun

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2015
    Posts:
    201
    The only argument I can see for locking it is when the movements are tied to the frame rate. If the game is designed to run at 30 fps to make it easier for the game dev and at 60 fps everything runs twice as fast and breaks the game.

    I haven't delved deep enough into Unity yet to find out what the frame rates it runs at are...but I was assuming 60 was the standard for it.

    I just don't see why people get so angry about 30 fps if having a higher frame rate would have no difference on the game.
     
  4. angrypenguin

    angrypenguin

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2011
    Posts:
    12,884
    A wildly fluctuating frame rate is said to be as distracting as too low a framerate, even if it remains above the desired minimum. Locking is useful when a game targets and is designed around 30hz, but where the target hardware is able to run some parts of the game much faster than that. So, essentially, when the scene complexity in your game greatly varies from time to time.

    It typically shouldn't be used as an excuse for not having written framerate independent code. There are indeed things where that's a perfectly reasonable approach (eg: it's done with physics systems to maintain simulation stability), but there's typically no reason to tie those things to the rendering frame rate (eg: Unity's physics is a good example - Update and FixedUpdate get called at different rates specifically because physics isn't tied to the rendering frame rate).
     
    jpthek9, christides11 and Xenoun like this.
  5. angrypenguin

    angrypenguin

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2011
    Posts:
    12,884
    Depends entirely on the game. If it genuinely makes no difference (eg: a game using cell animations drawn at 30fps), or if 30fps is desired for artistic or stylistic reasons (eg: the "film look" often means matching film frame rates of 30 or even 24fps), or if it's looking to save processing power/energy usage (a growing concern as games become more mobile), I think it's fine to cap the frame rate.

    See my previous post for thoughts on using it to hide flaws or to fix timing issues.
     
    Kiwasi and Xenoun like this.
  6. Ryiah

    Ryiah

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2012
    Posts:
    15,950
    I like the approach taken by some games. They allow you to choose from a selection of framerates, but also provide the option to smooth it to hide fluctuations. It seems to work great for those games I've seen it on.
     
  7. Frpmta

    Frpmta

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2013
    Posts:
    468
    I'm sorry to inform you that you are the clueless one in here.
     
    Zeblote and Martin_H like this.
  8. Kiwasi

    Kiwasi

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2013
    Posts:
    16,719
    Extra Creits just did an episode on frame rates. It's worth a look.
     
    Frpmta and elmar1028 like this.
  9. elmar1028

    elmar1028

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Posts:
    2,308
  10. Deleted User

    Deleted User

    Guest

    Even with things like FR smoothing, if you hit an async piece or look at a place with potentially dynamic lighting your frame rate will be variable (happens in pretty much any 3D AAA game I've every played). Now think of it like a "budget" if your FR starts going into the red like 20 FPS you will notice a lot of stutter / slowdown as you look around in 3D screen space as the GPU grinds.

    It doesn't matter if controls and phsyx are independent, as the camera you're tracking with still needs to render what's on screen.

    If you aim for 60 FPS, then you have a lot more "budget" to play with. So if for some reason the screen rate drops down to 40FPS with FRSM you don't really notice it at all. If you can keep your game @ a constant 30 FPS across the board, then fine but it just doesn't happen in 3D games.

    P.S I watched the video, studies show graphics sell games LOL!..
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 25, 2015
    Ony likes this.
  11. Xenoun

    Xenoun

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2015
    Posts:
    201
    Care to actually pose an argument to back up that statement? I asked for what people think about 30 vs 60 fps if you care to contribute to the discussion then please go for it.

    Yep, I watched that the other day.
     
    Last edited: Sep 25, 2015
  12. hippocoder

    hippocoder

    Digital Ape Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2010
    Posts:
    26,727
    Dark souls doesn't care about your pathetic master race rig. Prepare to die. At 30fps locked.

    Joking aside, back in the day I'd run various quakes at 120fps ish with monitor refresh around 85hz. I can see higher than 100 but it's not so important to me beyond 85. At 60 it's a bit smush but I can tolerate it. At 30 it's perfectly OK because generally a game will have nice motion blur.

    In short as long as a game never drops below 30 + high quality motion blur I'm perfectly happy.
     
  13. Xenoun

    Xenoun

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2015
    Posts:
    201
    Dark Souls doesn't need it though. Also being a port from console (albeit a dodgy one) I imagine it would have taken a lot of extra work to enable 60 fps. Likely way more than their budget.
     
  14. hippocoder

    hippocoder

    Digital Ape Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2010
    Posts:
    26,727
    And there you go. Most games don't need it. Street fighter 4 and a twitch shooter would. As for framerate police, they're just children. Most of the internet's elitist noise comes from children. Not sure why people are listening to kids who haven't even held down a day job or understood the world properly yet.
     
  15. calmcarrots

    calmcarrots

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2014
    Posts:
    681
    Ah nothing is better than that buttery smooth 60 fps.

    http://30vs60.com/

    Honestly I strongly prefer 60 fps if that is possible but if it isn't, that is not going to ruin the game. I won't really notice it after a while of playing.
     
  16. Eric5h5

    Eric5h5

    Volunteer Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Posts:
    32,244
    Except 120fps. ;) You can get used to 30fps, but if you play 60fps games for a while and then start a game locked to 30fps, it looks really stuttery and yuck. The same thing happens, albeit to a lesser extent, when going from 120fps to 60fps...you may think 60fps is "smooth", because you're used to it, but after experiencing 120fps, you realize that it's not really. The problem, of course, is that 120Hz monitors aren't common, and getting games to consistently run at that rate can be difficult. But it sure is nice if you can manage it.

    --Eric
     
    calmcarrots and Ryiah like this.
  17. hippocoder

    hippocoder

    Digital Ape Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2010
    Posts:
    26,727
    Yep but the reason I say "framerate police are kids" is because on one hand they demand the very best in visuals and rendering but on the other hand complain when their ultra setting drops fps below what their hardware can manage... this is the most common kind of idiot and an actual problem for developers.

    It's a problem so much so that developers have resorted to flat out disabling features quietly - usually things that push past memory budget and would cause excessive transfer of new textures etc.
     
    Martin_H, Deleted User and darkhog like this.
  18. darkhog

    darkhog

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2012
    Posts:
    2,219
    So basically a... PICNIC?
     
  19. hippocoder

    hippocoder

    Digital Ape Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2010
    Posts:
    26,727
    PEBKAC ID10Ts having a PICNIC. But it should be resolvable if a nice fat warning message was used: "WARNING: may destroy your framerate."
     
    darkhog likes this.
  20. Frpmta

    Frpmta

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2013
    Posts:
    468
    Wanting a higher framerate so you can have less input lag is pretty reasonable.
    After all It is the reason we place input controls into Update rather than FixedUpdate.
     
    Last edited: Sep 25, 2015
    sean244 and Martin_H like this.
  21. ShilohGames

    ShilohGames

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2014
    Posts:
    2,808
    I strongly prefer higher framerates. I love first person shooter style games, and 30 fps stutters and lags compared to 60 fps for those types of games. 30 fps is fine for a lot of other genre of games, though.

    BTW, that Extra Credits episode did an excellent job of example the concepts. They even remembered to bring up the issues with v-sync where a game that falls below 60 fps will actually run at 30 fps due to the way v-sync works with monitors. With v-sync on, a game running 65 fps will render at 60 fps, but a game running at 55 fps will render at 30 fps.
     
  22. Frpmta

    Frpmta

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2013
    Posts:
    468
    Think the Extra Credits guy forgot addressing triple buffering though.
     
  23. GarBenjamin

    GarBenjamin

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2013
    Posts:
    7,442
    If people are going by this video as proof that 60 fps makes a big difference in gaming than they may not be paying attention to what the person making the video is doing. Most obvious in the Minecraft block world segment near the end where the entire 30 fps clip they are constantly jumping while moving then comparing that to non-jumping straightforward movement in the 60 fps. Duh! Of course the 30 fps will look "jumpy" Ha ha ha! Now whether they did did it on purpose to make their point or simply have no clue that had they compared both clips moving the exact same way it would have provided a true comparison of 30 fps vs 60 fps I do not know. Either intentionally trying to mislead or misleading by being incompetent. Take your pick.

    The Batman video on the same page yeah that just shows that of course people are more concerned with performance than raw graphics quality. That should be common sense. No sense in making a game that looks phenomenal and struggles to maintain even 5 fps in certain spots / views. They'd have been better off dropping the quality down to the point where the game could maintain a playable fps all around.

    Disclaimer: the above is purely my opinion based on watching the videos on that page. I do agree that gamers complaining wanting the graphics to be the greatest they have ever seen and the fps to run at 60 fps are the ones making the most noise about this kind of thing. Not sure if that is really their fault or if maybe developers could target them with a high end version of their games. Seems like another potential source of revenue. Hey if you have these minimal requirements for only $15 more you can get the Premium Version running at 60 fps.
     
  24. ShilohGames

    ShilohGames

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2014
    Posts:
    2,808
    Yeah, and they also did not mention adaptive sync solutions from Nvidia or AMD, but I won't hold that against them. I felt like their video did a solid job of quickly covering the majority of the topic without bogging people down in too much tech babble.
     
  25. goat

    goat

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Posts:
    5,180
    This is a case of mistaking improved rendering with more capable hardware and software as due to the framerate; no it's better rendering.

    These mobile devices and TVs and such still only show 60Hz, some 120Hz, and fewer still 240Hz but they get those rates repeating the same frames not rendering faster so it's a farce.

    This link below will tell you better, closer to what the eyes & brains are physically capable of with optimal eye and brain health like air force pilots are required to have (they can recognize the type of plane when a image of it flashes in a room of total darkness for 1/220th of a second - of course it seems like cheating that they use something like the image of a plane type when air force pilots are required to memorize plane types as part of their job - they should be using a common but randomly chosen object for such a test and you'd see the fastest visual recognition rate be a longer time slice):

    http://www.100fps.com/how_many_frames_can_humans_see.htm
     
    Ryiah likes this.
  26. Hikiko66

    Hikiko66

    Joined:
    May 5, 2013
    Posts:
    1,022
    How is his comment wrong? It even looks like you actually use the same argument.
     
  27. goat

    goat

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Posts:
    5,180
    That's clearly a case of people blaming their lack of proficiency playing a game on the frame rate, the input system, their computer, ahem, but not themselves. They all have their place in context.
     
  28. Nubz

    Nubz

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2012
    Posts:
    553
    Very old news.
     
  29. HemiMG

    HemiMG

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2014
    Posts:
    911
    I was amused by the comment on the article that said "If you are using an engine that runs on 30fps, it is time to move away from the ancient engine to something else." The commentor, as suggested in this thread, has absolutely zero clue that graphics quality dictates frame rate, not the engine. I didn't realize that was a thing. I didn't realize there was a single person out there who didn't know that Ultra runs slower than High. Or that games using the same engine have wildly varying frame rates based on things like polygon count, post effects, etc. (I left things like draw calls out because I don't expect a layman to understand those).

    We need to get the people who spend thousands upon thousands of dollars to chain together three Nvidia Titans to counteract the frame rate police who seem to think that everything should target Intel HDs as the highest setting. Ideally, the Ultra settings in my game will run average 60fps or above on my 970m. But if I had to cater to one group, I'd rather the guys with beastly setups actually get to utilize those. As long as there is an option to turn it down to something that lower cards can handle, I don't see why there is any issue at all. Both groups can easily exist.
     
    Martin_H, Ryiah, Deleted User and 2 others like this.
  30. GarBenjamin

    GarBenjamin

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2013
    Posts:
    7,442
    Well you know some of these modern teen super gamers apparently move the joystick and click buttons faster than 30 times per second so it's really hampering their ability to play the games from the input perspective. ;)
     
    Teila likes this.
  31. movra

    movra

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2013
    Posts:
    571
    If we were talking baseball, swinging the bat 7 ms too early or too late makes the ball sail foul. Now reconsider an input resolution of 16 ms versus 33 ms.
     
  32. imaginaryhuman

    imaginaryhuman

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2010
    Posts:
    5,703
    I remember back in the Amiga days where 60fps was considered 'sophisticated' because there wasn't much hardware power so pulling it off on a fast-moving game wasn't too easy. But most arcadey games, scrolling 2d games, etc... look better with that quality smoothness. I don't think 3d suffers quite so much because the view doesn't pan quite so much.
     
    GarBenjamin and Ony like this.
  33. Ony

    Ony

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2009
    Posts:
    1,953
    You damned modern teen super gamers get off my lawn!!
     
    Teila, Martin_H, ShilohGames and 3 others like this.
  34. goat

    goat

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Posts:
    5,180
    LMAO. You got that one.
     
  35. Tomnnn

    Tomnnn

    Joined:
    May 23, 2013
    Posts:
    4,137
    Frames on matter with games where devs tie certain things directly to framerate. Ever see those videos of games running above their locked framerate and then enemy animations are way too fast and sometimes even sound effects are at a higher pitch?

    Not to be racist, BUT... supposedly it's a common practice / issue with japanese games / devs.
     
  36. Tautvydas-Zilys

    Tautvydas-Zilys

    Unity Technologies

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2013
    Posts:
    7,477
    Never lock frame rate. Neither 30, nor 60. You never know what kind of refresh rate your user has - if you lock it to either 30 or 60, your game will look stuttery on any monitor that has refresh rate that's not multiple for it (for example, 75 Hz). If you want to limit framerate from going as fast as it can, use VSync. It will ensure you're locking the framerate to correct number without having to hardcode it.
     
    Trexug, Ryiah, Tomnnn and 2 others like this.
  37. hippocoder

    hippocoder

    Digital Ape Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2010
    Posts:
    26,727
    Yep although vsync off is a bit smoother when you're traversing 55-60 or whatever... so vsync off is a valid dev choice but I would for sure have an option for it in the menu (not on console though).
     
  38. Soul-Challenger

    Soul-Challenger

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2010
    Posts:
    152
    Funny, I'm thinking of dropping the framerate from 60 to 30, as 30fps better conveys the sense of speed in my driving game. I mean, driving interactive thing.
     
    Last edited: Sep 26, 2015
  39. Xenoun

    Xenoun

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2015
    Posts:
    201
    Look at the difference between 30 and 60 fps, 30 fps updates every 33 ms, 60fps is every 16.7ms. The average reaction speed for a human is 200 ms. So you're telling me updating twice as fast has a noticeable impact on input lag when the average human can't react anywhere near that fast anyway? The frame rate is more about what we're seeing rather than how it's reacting to our inputs. If we take 200ms to react to something and tell the game to do something and it then takes 33ms extra as opposed to 16ms does it really matter?

    If you look at the entire sentence I wrote there instead of paraphrasing:

    "To me 60 fps is required more when you're playing a first person shooter or similar game with tight controls and a lot of reflex moves, having that smoother movement from higher frame rate helps it look more visually appealing."

    I was meaning tight controls in the context of smoother movements (rendering). If the controls are slow and sloppy to begin with then running at 60fps isn't going to make it feel any more visually appealing than 30fps would. If the controls are slow to begin with frame rate is going to be the last concern anyone has.
     
  40. AcidArrow

    AcidArrow

    Joined:
    May 20, 2010
    Posts:
    6,882
    Reaction has little to do with it. It's the time from when player inputs action and action happens. Adding more ms to it is generally bad, makes it feel less responsive.

    Maybe it's easier to understand with sound. If there's 33ms delay between pressing a button and hearing a note, it's noticeable.

    If that's significant or a valid reason in itself to want 60fps is another matter.
     
  41. jpthek9

    jpthek9

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2013
    Posts:
    944
    Depends on what kinda game. With an authoritative or lockstep server, your inputs get sent every X times a second (let's say 16) so having 60 vs 30 fps won't do anything about the input delay. That's not to mention the time it takes to press the button and the time it takes for the keyboard to register the press and send it to the computer. In the end, users running at 60 fps receive nothing except a higher chance of stutters.

    For locally asynchronously simulated games, the input delay difference between that of 30 and 60 fps is negligible because nobody plays those games competitively.

    Then again, a lot of features of games are just illusions so make 'em feel better about being rich! Show them the framerate * 2 on the GUI and make everyone happier.
     
  42. ShilohGames

    ShilohGames

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2014
    Posts:
    2,808
    What networked game runs at 16 tick? When I played Counter Strike Source competitively online, I could tell the difference between 60 tick and 100 tick servers. A 30 tick server was always uncomfortably laggy. I cannot imagine any game intentionally using a 16 tick network model, at least not any first person shooter style game.

    And I can definitely tell a massive difference in smoothness between 30 fps and 60 fps even in a local (non-networked) game. In fact, 60 fps with v-sync on feels choppy compared to hundreds of fps with v-sync off.
     
  43. jpthek9

    jpthek9

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2013
    Posts:
    944
    I highly doubt any AAA game asks you to send 100 packets per second. 30 per second is stretching it but I can believe that depending on the circumstance.

    I don't even know how to respond to the rest of your post.
     
    Last edited: Sep 26, 2015
  44. GarBenjamin

    GarBenjamin

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2013
    Posts:
    7,442
    There is no doubt games look smoother with much less (to even no perceptible) motion blur especially 2D games when running at 60 fps instead of 30 fps. Back on the C64, Amiga and DOS I always liked the way 60 fps games looked (just sharper basically).

    So for looks I agree although 3D games really don't seem to have the issue nearly as much as 2D games at least for me. Still this is all for just how the game looks, the sharpness etc not the actual responsiveness or gameplay.

    I think it is more likely if a game running at 30 fps feels sluggish that is down to more of poor design for the input checking and handling rather than the game being limited to reacting to input (visually) at 30 fps. A game running at 30 fps rendering wise may or may not be running at 30 fps update wise. So it could actually be checking for input 60 fps or even 100 fps and updating the game state accordingly.

    What people experience with some 30 fps games that feels like input lag could actually just be a poor input design period. Maybe the game is only checking for input 2 times per second for example. All I know is if it checks for input at 30 times per second it should not be feeling unresponsive.

    It is pretty easy for anyone to test this themselves. Start hitting keys, controller buttons or clicking your mouse and see how many you can get in 1 second. I'd say you will find your human limit is around 15 per second at best. There may be some exceptions that can hit 20 on a regular basis during a game and I think they would be few.

    If the game is designed right so it reacts (visually and state wise) the next update to your input then all will be well. If it instead kicks off short animation with the active part at the end that may feel sluggish. A lot of it is just based on how the game is programmed to react. What does it do when it detects the input. Does it respond immediately and attack or whatever? Or does it start an animation running over the next 10 frames that finally at the end actually "counts".
     
    jpthek9 likes this.
  45. jpthek9

    jpthek9

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2013
    Posts:
    944
    Yup. SC2 players using all 10 fingers hit at most 1000 apm (16 actions per second). 50% of those actions are just to keep the fingers warm and get culled out.
     
  46. ShilohGames

    ShilohGames

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2014
    Posts:
    2,808
    The input lag is one issue with low frame rates. The other major issue with low frame rates in first person shooters is the precision lost. Mouse and joystick inputs are multiplied by Time.deltaTime, in order to spread movements across multiple frames. When fewer frame are available (like at 30 fps), movements (strafing and aiming) feel more coarse.

    For example, let's say the player could turn completely around in exactly one second. At 30 fps, each movement would be 1/30 of a rotation or about 12 degrees. At 300 fps (v-sync off with fast PC), each movement would be 1/300 of a rotation or about 1.2 degrees.

    Up to a certain point, users with low fps can try to compensate using lower mouse sensitivity. However, that also compromises the speed of rotation the player can achieve. The most competitive hardcore PC first person shooter gamers will use a high fps PC combined with a very high resolution mouse with a lot of sensitivity. That grants serious gamers fast precise control.
     
  47. ShilohGames

    ShilohGames

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2014
    Posts:
    2,808
    There are games that let the server admin set the network tick rate. For example, it was fairly common to see Counter Strike Source servers running 100 tick, especially if the servers were being used for competitive clan matches (usually 5v5 player with a solid dedicated server). There were tons of public Counter Strike Servers running 66 tick back then. This tech was already commonplace 10 years ago, so there is nothing bleeding edge about it. I am not sure why you consider 30 network frames per second a stretch. With Counter Strike Global Offensive, server admins typically choose between 64 tick and 128 tick.
     
  48. AcidArrow

    AcidArrow

    Joined:
    May 20, 2010
    Posts:
    6,882
    Personally, I think something like 45fps would be ideal. But we are stuck with stupid 60hz monitors. My CRT monitor was doing 120hz a decade+ ago.

    Hopefully something like GSync (or GSync itself) becomes pretty commonplace soon.
     
  49. Tautvydas-Zilys

    Tautvydas-Zilys

    Unity Technologies

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2013
    Posts:
    7,477
    That's nonsense. While input delay might not actually get noticed due to frame rate unless it gets ridiculously low, that isn't the reason why one would want higher framerate.

    The biggest reason why higher FPS is better (and when I mean higher, I don't mean stopping at 60 FPS), is because higher FPS gives you higher information rate you receive from the game. For example, in a racing game, if you're driving at 250 km/h, every second the car will advance 69.4 meters. At 30 fps, you'll see the car teleport ahead 2.31 metres every frame, while at 90 fps you'll see the car teleport ahead 0.77 meters every frame. That means you'll get three times more information regarding position of your car. Personally having experienced both of those, I can say with full confidence that I highly prefer the latter.

    That's also exactly the reason why VR solutions like Oculus aim for least 90 FPS (that is a compromise of going as high as possible while still remaining realistic about todays graphics hardware). Our perceived reality isn't tied to a particular frame rate; the data rate that we receive through our vision is much higher than whatever data rate that is tied to framerate is possible today in computer games. Therefore, it means that the higher framerate we have, the closer we get to making the players fully immersed.
     
  50. Eric5h5

    Eric5h5

    Volunteer Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Posts:
    32,244
    Way too choppy.

    You can get 120Hz and 144Hz monitors today.

    --Eric
     
unityunity