120hz is a myth.
Upvote
Upvoted
0
Downvote
Downvoted
60hz vs 120hz
posted in
TF2 General Discussion
In my experience, lightboost 120Hz > 144Hz for scout vs scout. When it comes to other areas of the game, which is superior is not so clear to me.
When are we gonna get strobed 144Hz??
In my experience, lightboost 120Hz > 144Hz for scout vs scout. When it comes to other areas of the game, which is superior is not so clear to me.
When are we gonna get strobed 144Hz??
When are we gonna get strobed 144Hz??
myself and most people I talk to personally, find lightboost to cause too much lag to be worth the extra clarity. I would pick motion blur over input lag any day, even if it is only a single frame of input lag
myself and most people I talk to personally, find lightboost to cause too much lag to be worth the extra clarity. I would pick motion blur over input lag any day, even if it is only a single frame of input lag
shruggermyself and most people I talk to personally, find lightboost to cause too much lag to be worth the extra clarity. I would pick motion blur over input lag any day, even if it is only a single frame of input lag
This. Lightboost is nice and all but the input lag is a problem and I don't like that the monitor is so dim.
[quote=shrugger]myself and most people I talk to personally, find lightboost to cause too much lag to be worth the extra clarity. I would pick motion blur over input lag any day, even if it is only a single frame of input lag[/quote]
This. Lightboost is nice and all but the input lag is a problem and I don't like that the monitor is so dim.
This. Lightboost is nice and all but the input lag is a problem and I don't like that the monitor is so dim.
shruggermyself and most people I talk to personally, find lightboost to cause too much lag to be worth the extra clarity. I would pick motion blur over input lag any day, even if it is only a single frame of input lag
So lightboost increases input lag? I thought the whole idea was that each frame is divided, causing no motion blur AND no input lag. There is even a graph of how 60hz creates 16 ms delay but lightboost 120 creates 2 ms. Are you sure it really creates input lag?
I'm actually wondering myself because I'm considering paying the extra bit to get a lightboost enabled monitor
[quote=shrugger]myself and most people I talk to personally, find lightboost to cause too much lag to be worth the extra clarity. I would pick motion blur over input lag any day, even if it is only a single frame of input lag[/quote]
So lightboost increases input lag? I thought the whole idea was that each frame is divided, causing no motion blur AND no input lag. There is even a graph of how 60hz creates 16 ms delay but lightboost 120 creates 2 ms. Are you sure it really creates input lag?
I'm actually wondering myself because I'm considering paying the extra bit to get a lightboost enabled monitor
So lightboost increases input lag? I thought the whole idea was that each frame is divided, causing no motion blur AND no input lag. There is even a graph of how 60hz creates 16 ms delay but lightboost 120 creates 2 ms. Are you sure it really creates input lag?
I'm actually wondering myself because I'm considering paying the extra bit to get a lightboost enabled monitor
tornados2111shruggermyself and most people I talk to personally, find lightboost to cause too much lag to be worth the extra clarity. I would pick motion blur over input lag any day, even if it is only a single frame of input lagSo lightboost increases input lag? I thought the whole idea was that each frame is divided, causing no motion blur AND no input lag. There is even a graph of how 60hz creates 16 ms delay but lightboost 120 creates 2 ms. Are you sure it really creates input lag?
I'm actually wondering myself because I'm considering paying the extra bit to get a lightboost enabled monitor
[quote=tornados2111][quote=shrugger]myself and most people I talk to personally, find lightboost to cause too much lag to be worth the extra clarity. I would pick motion blur over input lag any day, even if it is only a single frame of input lag[/quote]
So lightboost increases input lag? I thought the whole idea was that each frame is divided, causing no motion blur AND no input lag. There is even a graph of how 60hz creates 16 ms delay but lightboost 120 creates 2 ms. Are you sure it really creates input lag?
I'm actually wondering myself because I'm considering paying the extra bit to get a lightboost enabled monitor[/quote]
http://forums.blurbusters.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=16
So lightboost increases input lag? I thought the whole idea was that each frame is divided, causing no motion blur AND no input lag. There is even a graph of how 60hz creates 16 ms delay but lightboost 120 creates 2 ms. Are you sure it really creates input lag?
I'm actually wondering myself because I'm considering paying the extra bit to get a lightboost enabled monitor[/quote]
http://forums.blurbusters.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=16
freakintornados2111http://forums.blurbusters.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=16shruggermyself and most people I talk to personally, find lightboost to cause too much lag to be worth the extra clarity. I would pick motion blur over input lag any day, even if it is only a single frame of input lagSo lightboost increases input lag? I thought the whole idea was that each frame is divided, causing no motion blur AND no input lag. There is even a graph of how 60hz creates 16 ms delay but lightboost 120 creates 2 ms. Are you sure it really creates input lag?
I'm actually wondering myself because I'm considering paying the extra bit to get a lightboost enabled monitor
Very interesting read, thanks for the link. I however find "way too much input lag" maybe an over exaggeration since it's 4 ms. I'm not saying that you can't feel the difference, but is it really true that making 0 motion blur just won't help at all and won't outweigh the 4 ms?
Anyone else got experience with this?
[quote=freakin][quote=tornados2111][quote=shrugger]myself and most people I talk to personally, find lightboost to cause too much lag to be worth the extra clarity. I would pick motion blur over input lag any day, even if it is only a single frame of input lag[/quote]
So lightboost increases input lag? I thought the whole idea was that each frame is divided, causing no motion blur AND no input lag. There is even a graph of how 60hz creates 16 ms delay but lightboost 120 creates 2 ms. Are you sure it really creates input lag?
I'm actually wondering myself because I'm considering paying the extra bit to get a lightboost enabled monitor[/quote]
http://forums.blurbusters.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=16[/quote]
Very interesting read, thanks for the link. I however find "way too much input lag" maybe an over exaggeration since it's 4 ms. I'm not saying that you can't feel the difference, but is it really true that making 0 motion blur just won't help at all and won't outweigh the 4 ms?
Anyone else got experience with this?
So lightboost increases input lag? I thought the whole idea was that each frame is divided, causing no motion blur AND no input lag. There is even a graph of how 60hz creates 16 ms delay but lightboost 120 creates 2 ms. Are you sure it really creates input lag?
I'm actually wondering myself because I'm considering paying the extra bit to get a lightboost enabled monitor[/quote]
http://forums.blurbusters.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=16[/quote]
Very interesting read, thanks for the link. I however find "way too much input lag" maybe an over exaggeration since it's 4 ms. I'm not saying that you can't feel the difference, but is it really true that making 0 motion blur just won't help at all and won't outweigh the 4 ms?
Anyone else got experience with this?
hoolibearodactyldo you actually have one? There is a noticable difference in smoothness with 120 to 144, but its not nearly as noticable as lightboost imo. everything is so much clearerI have tried both for extended periods of time (months) and 144 hertz is vastly superior for the application of fast-paced gaming. You, like many others who talk about this topic, are confusing image clarity with responsiveness. You tell me, nevermind the method of how the image is rendered, which is more responsive; 120 hertz or 144 hertz? As an advocate of the scientific method I invite you to play with 144 hertz for a day, assuming you get a minimum of 144 fps, and come back to us with your conclusion.
that isnt scientific stoppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppp
[quote=hooli][quote=bearodactyl]do you actually have one? There is a noticable difference in smoothness with 120 to 144, but its not nearly as noticable as lightboost imo. everything is so much clearer[/quote]
I have tried both for extended periods of time (months) and 144 hertz is vastly superior for the application of fast-paced gaming. You, like many others who talk about this topic, are confusing image clarity with responsiveness. You tell me, nevermind the method of how the image is rendered, which is more responsive; 120 hertz or 144 hertz? As an advocate of the scientific method I invite you to play with 144 hertz for a day, assuming you get a minimum of 144 fps, and come back to us with your conclusion.[/quote]
that isnt scientific stoppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppp
I have tried both for extended periods of time (months) and 144 hertz is vastly superior for the application of fast-paced gaming. You, like many others who talk about this topic, are confusing image clarity with responsiveness. You tell me, nevermind the method of how the image is rendered, which is more responsive; 120 hertz or 144 hertz? As an advocate of the scientific method I invite you to play with 144 hertz for a day, assuming you get a minimum of 144 fps, and come back to us with your conclusion.[/quote]
that isnt scientific stoppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppp
like #7 said, you have to get a 120hz monitor to truly experience the difference. in the mean time, try watching a video on 30fps and a video on 60fps
in my personal experience, lightboosted 120hz is great when you focus on one specific target (tf2), but not very good when you have to look at the entire screen (dota) as everything else sort of blur out, ignoring input lag.
click here for a demonstration (just turn your lightboost on and off)
like #7 said, you have to get a 120hz monitor to truly experience the difference. in the mean time, try watching a video on [url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ENruOrM01CQ]30fps[/url] and a video on [url=http://tornproductions.org/movies/tp-fanom-10k.mp4]60fps[/url]
in my personal experience, lightboosted 120hz is great when you focus on one specific target (tf2), but not very good when you have to look at the entire screen (dota) as everything else sort of blur out, ignoring input lag.
click [url=http://www.testufo.com/]here[/url] for a demonstration (just turn your lightboost on and off)
in my personal experience, lightboosted 120hz is great when you focus on one specific target (tf2), but not very good when you have to look at the entire screen (dota) as everything else sort of blur out, ignoring input lag.
click [url=http://www.testufo.com/]here[/url] for a demonstration (just turn your lightboost on and off)
Dont wanna quote that shit above me but, that first picture is 60hz (not 144hz) and second one is 120hz + lightboost...
Edit: OKAY i was still on the first page, derp its for #30
Dont wanna quote that shit above me but, that first picture is 60hz (not 144hz) and second one is 120hz + lightboost...
Edit: OKAY i was still on the first page, derp its for #30
Edit: OKAY i was still on the first page, derp its for #30
I played and watched a friend play on a 120hz screen after that i always got so frustrated when playing on my shit 60hz screen and played generally bad, when i got my 120hz everything felt soo much smoother and i felt so much more relaxed while i played and improved a lot.
I played and watched a friend play on a 120hz screen after that i always got so frustrated when playing on my shit 60hz screen and played generally bad, when i got my 120hz everything felt soo much smoother and i felt so much more relaxed while i played and improved a lot.
Please
sign in through STEAM
to post a comment.