|
60 Hz matches the refresh rate of many LCD screens and TVs (PAL/NTSC stuff aside). If the game presents a full new frame for every screen refresh, things are smooth. If it presents a frame every second screen refresh, things are also reasonably smooth. Anything else can feel kind of jittery and unpleasant (with vsync) or gives bad screen tearing (without vsync). Thus 30 and 60 fps as standard targets. Computer CRTs towards the end tended to run at higher refresh rates, like 75 or 85 Hz, and you ideally wanted your games to run synced to that - there's nothing special about 60fps except its ubiquity. Oh, and I assume you are all trolling, but just in case: Your eyes don't have a refresh rate, and their response time depends on what exactly you measure.
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2016 15:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 01:41 |
|
|
I think the problem with 5.1 is so few people know how to mix it well. You get movies which use the rear speakers for a crowd noise in 2 scenes and an airplane going overhead in another, and that's that. Or, the volume balance is off and the surround channels are significantly quieter, so it's impossible to tell if they're doing anything cool. When I come across a movie that shows obvious love and care in the surround mix, I'm bound to like it more than one with a poor mix, even if the movie is better. I know there's the desire to aim for the widest audience and downsampling can cause issues if you have prominent surround sounds that you don't want in the main mix, but IMO it's a cool thing and should be utilized well. My friend's dad is pretty much the top 5.1 mixing engineer for music (he's got a bunch of Grammys for his work), but I guarantee practically no one has heard his work, because who's going to buy an SACD player or seek out audio DVDs?
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2016 15:53
|
|
|
If you're not happy with your FPSes and your 5.1s you should buy some Monster cables, they make everything so much better.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2016 15:56
|
|
|
hey get a load of THIS old computer relic http://www.somethingawful.com pffff wow what a dinosaur lol <- (lauging out loudly) also guys who remebers this gem???  its got tubes right wow ancient computer stuff is ancient and old its been around for maybe like thirtyfive whole yeaers?????
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2016 16:01
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TFCuE5rHbPA
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2016 16:04
|
|
|
Police Automaton posted:Blame the NTSC standard and the USA's AC being 60 Hz. It does not really have any bearing on how things are now and is basically a legacy thing. Is it? I thought the reasons for the NTSC and PAL standards were that power is most efficient at approximately 55Hz, but the problem with 55 is that it can only be factored 5 or 11 times, both of which are pretty low numbers. To remedy this, some regions went with 50 and some went with 60 because both are more divisible.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2016 16:18
|
|
|
G sync and free sync are the best now, as long as you are above 30 fps it's smooth with no tearing or jitters. However without it it sucks
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2016 16:20
|
|
|
Mak0rz posted:Is it? I thought the reasons for the NTSC and PAL standards were that power is most efficient at approximately 55Hz, but the problem with 55 is that it can only be factored 5 or 11 times, both of which are pretty low numbers. To remedy this, some regions went with 50 and some went with 60 because both are more divisible. NTSC is actually 59.94hz Pal is 50hz
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2016 16:22
|
|
|
Mak0rz posted:Is it? I thought the reasons for the NTSC and PAL standards were that power is most efficient at approximately 55Hz, but the problem with 55 is that it can only be factored 5 or 11 times, both of which are pretty low numbers. To remedy this, some regions went with 50 and some went with 60 because both are more divisible. To clarify, as the US' power net runs also at 60 Hz it made things a lot more simple to have the tube's refresh rate run at the same frequency as the power source, just in order to be more resilient to it's interference or that of other big power sources which you would've else had in your picture. Also as the 60 Hz the power net delivers are a fairly solid timing source (in a time where it was rather complicated to produce exact timing sources) this was also good for live recording, and the syncing/splicing of different broadcasting sources. Even many years later the Amiga (or at least some of them) system I like to mention so often actually exploits this too and has it's power source deliver the power net's AC frequency from the power supply as usable timing base which is priceless for the various video hardware it also has. These old style radio clocks, clocks in old ovens etc. some of you might still know actually also exploited the power net's AC frequency as else these clocks would have drifted quite terribly with time (using a different, crystal oscillator based approach) and it made them also quite a bit simpler. Maybe some people remember having an old computer in the 80s and 90s and this computer having a clock which drifted by quite a few seconds over relatively short time. theultimo posted:NTSC is actually 59.94hz In order so the chroma (color) carrier would interfere less with the audio carrier. The original NTSC standard didn't even have color in mind, only luma. (brightness = black & white) EDIT: Now we're in relic country. Isn't it funny how some things just sorta carry over? Police Automaton has a new favorite as of 16:59 on Mar 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2016 16:56
|
|
|
Mak0rz posted:Is it? I thought the reasons for the NTSC and PAL standards were that power is most efficient at approximately 55Hz, but the problem with 55 is that it can only be factored 5 or 11 times, both of which are pretty low numbers. To remedy this, some regions went with 50 and some went with 60 because both are more divisible. There isn't a single best power frequency, really. Lower frequencies are, to a point, more efficient for long-distance transmission and better when you are driving motors (which is why Norwegian train lines were standardised at and still use 12.5Hz), but higher frequencies make for smaller transformers and steadier lights. These days you can work around most of these problems by throwing solid-state electronics at them, but even a hundred years ago I doubt the difference between 55 and 60 Hz mattered much. The 50-60 Hz region was just where the different power consumers found a compromise after decades of running different frequencies for different uses. Computer viking has a new favorite as of 17:27 on Mar 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2016 17:09
|
|
|
Same with the timing, such fancy trickery is absolutely pointless nowadays.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2016 17:13
|
|
|
Police Automaton posted:I limit my framerate on the PC (with a $300 graphics card nonetheless) to 30 FPS on purpose. Saves power, keeps the temperatures/noise down, and doesn't make a heck of a difference for the game. How do you do this? I did a quick Google and it mentioned NVIDIA Inspector. Is this what you use?
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2016 17:13
|
|
|
drguildo posted:How do you do this? I did a quick Google and it mentioned NVIDIA Inspector. Is this what you use? Depends on whatcard you have. With NVidia one of the vsync-settings lets you set it to half the refresh rate of your screen in the graphics card/driver settings. With AMD you can set the framerate freely in the drivers. I've found the nvidia way to work more consistently, with AMD you'll end up roughly in the ballpark +/- a few frames. Maybe there's a trick to it, I didn't look much into it yet. Police Automaton has a new favorite as of 17:21 on Mar 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2016 17:18
|
|
|
Jesus Christ posted:Did they even bother doing Hobbit 2 and 3 after the garbage of the first? They actually made about the same amount on both trilogies (~$3 billion). There was a slight drop-off from Hobbit 1 to 2 & 3 but it was much more balanced than LOTR where everyone saw Return of the King and not as many saw Fellowship.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2016 17:25
|
|
|
Police Automaton posted:Depends on whatcard you have. With NVidia one of the vsync-settings lets you set it to half the refresh rate of your screen in the graphics card/driver settings. With AMD you can set the framerate freely in the drivers. I've found the nvidia way to work more consistently, with AMD you'll end up roughly in the ballpark +/- a few frames. Maybe there's a trick to it, I didn't look much into it yet. Thanks. I think I managed to find the appropriate setting in NVIDIA Control Panel. Somewhat more on-topic: are hacking zines still a thing? I used to think stuff like Phrack, BoW, ~el8, b4b0 etc. was the coolest poo poo back in the day. Also RCN which was more about the  scene and was notable for being distributed as a DOS executable.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2016 17:39
|
|
|
drguildo posted:Somewhat more on-topic: are hacking zines still a thing? 2600 is still going strong.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2016 22:10
|
|
|
I used to care a lot about sound and picture quality but now i realize it is pretty stupid and largely impractical. I have a nice stereo system which i appreciate but usually just listen in my car or on headphones at work
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2016 23:58
|
|
|
Police Automaton posted:To clarify, as the US' power net runs also at 60 Hz it made things a lot more simple to have the tube's refresh rate run at the same frequency as the power source, just in order to be more resilient to it's interference or that of other big power sources which you would've else had in your picture. Also as the 60 Hz the power net delivers are a fairly solid timing source (in a time where it was rather complicated to produce exact timing sources) this was also good for live recording, and the syncing/splicing of different broadcasting sources. The dependence of clocks on grid frequency even today is a big deal: operators of the electric grid keep track of the accumulated deviation of the power grid frequency from the 60 Hz reference over 24 hours. Essentially, the difference between actual frequency and 60 Hz is integrated over 24 hours. That number is TC, or time correction. The goal is to keep daily average frequency within a few ppm of 60 Hz. TC is an indicator of how much grid frequency should be raised/lowered via generation control so that everyone's clocks run true.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2016 00:00
|
|
|
My first smart TV with 3D and interpolation (which made people's faces detach from their bodies) only lasted 3 years before it died. I have a lower-end one now without 3D, it's "smarter" because it has "apps" but I frequently have to go into the network settings and turn the network off and on again, otherwise all the apps show no content from the net. Back when I was young your TV just did one job and did it well..  (every morning I wake up and open palm slam the top of my TV in the hope that I can watch chronicles of riddick on it)drunk asian neighbor posted:I've never even seen the 3rd one because the first 2 were so bad. You made the right decision. I hung in there in the hope it'd get better but I think it got worse. At least you can still dream that maybe in the end the franchise was saved from evil, I know it wasn't.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2016 04:08
|
|
|
If you thought Atmos was overkill.... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/22.2_surround_sound quote:22.2 or Hamasaki 22.2 (named after Kimio Hamasaki, a senior research engineer at NHK Science & Technology Research Laboratories in Japan) is the surround sound component of Super Hi-Vision (a new television standard with 16 times the pixel resolution of HDTV). It has been developed by NHK Science & Technical Research Laboratories. It uses 24 speakers (including two subwoofers) arranged in three layers.[1] Who needs doors! 
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2016 04:08
|
|
|
When you sell someone one of these systems, you just know you're also going to be able to sell them 24 oxygen-free gold-plated Monster cables to go with it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2016 04:17
|
|
|
Buttcoin purse posted:My first smart TV with 3D and interpolation (which made people's faces detach from their bodies) only lasted 3 years before it died. I have a lower-end one now without 3D, it's "smarter" because it has "apps" but I frequently have to go into the network settings and turn the network off and on again, otherwise all the apps show no content from the net. Back when I was young your TV just did one job and did it well.. if you don't care about the apps then what's the problem nearly every tv is a smart tv now anyway. it costs the manufacturers a pittance to throw some janky android hardware in there and the marketing value of having netflix on a tv without switching to another input is pretty big, though not much of a differentiator any more
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2016 04:54
|
|
|
TheWhiteNightmare posted:if you don't care about the apps then what's the problem The problem is that "smart" TVs seem to generally feel slower than old "stupid" TVs and have stupid limitations. For example, on my brand new TV I can't change the input source for like 15 seconds after I turn it on. Who knows what it's doing that takes that long.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2016 05:02
|
|
|
My folks have a "smart" Sony TV and it takes several seconds to turn on, and the "smart" features don't get used - everything happens through the cable box or Roku attached to it. At home I have a "dumb" LG TV and just use a Chromecast and an old cellphone - it works beautifully. I have an old "smart" blu-ray player attached to it, but since it hasn't had any firmware updates in over a year the thing is janky as hell when it comes to Netflix whereas the Chromecast is just perfectly slick.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2016 07:21
|
|
|
Humphreys posted:Who needs doors!
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2016 08:04
|
|
|
oohhboy posted:I am disappointed that there aren't any floor speakers. The entire floor is actually a subwoofer.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2016 12:58
|
|
|
mng posted:The entire floor is actually a subwoofer. And the ceiling.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2016 15:13
|
|
|
That picture isn't very good at conveying useful information.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2016 15:18
|
|
|
How long until we just live inside a speaker, with the inside surface covered in screen?
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2016 15:29
|
|
|
I'd love to actually talk about internet and computer relics, not contemporary smart TVs. Consider the humble fax machine, or barring that, the Tandy
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2016 15:39
|
|
|
I agree. If you want to discuss older tv tech that is fine but shut up about smart (more like dimb amiritr) tvision
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2016 15:40
|
|
|
My contribution (maybe shared before?): I have to use a fax machine quite often at work dealing with legal documents and electronic signatures and whatnot, and gently caress faxes. My company uses Right Fax, so most of the time I can fax right from my computer but Jesus wept I hate faxing 
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2016 15:53
|
|
|
Captain Yossarian posted:My contribution (maybe shared before?): I have to use a fax machine quite often at work dealing with legal documents and electronic signatures and whatnot, and gently caress faxes. My company uses Right Fax, so most of the time I can fax right from my computer but Jesus wept I hate faxing Rightfax is a god send, no more replacing toner! My dad has a sweet rear end old phone/fax combo that uses the heat transfer paper rolls. It's absolutely ancient, weighs a ton and I'm sure the company hasn't been around for 20 years. He keeps it because he has calling card minutes programmed into it and has lost the cards. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2016 15:56
|
|
|
The Gasmask posted:I know there's the desire to aim for the widest audience and downsampling can cause issues if you have prominent surround sounds that you don't want in the main mix, but IMO it's a cool thing and should be utilized well. My friend's dad is pretty much the top 5.1 mixing engineer for music (he's got a bunch of Grammys for his work), but I guarantee practically no one has heard his work, because who's going to buy an SACD player or seek out audio DVDs? Me-- I'm the guy. Your friend's dad is supercool. All the Porcupine Tree mixes are incredible. I will never give up my SACD/DVD-A collection.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2016 17:30
|
|
|
Bovril Delight posted:Rightfax is a god send, no more replacing toner! Oh agreed, whenever I have to manually fax anymore I make sure to glare and loudly sigh as much as possible
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2016 18:07
|
|
|
Captain Yossarian posted:My contribution (maybe shared before?): I have to use a fax machine quite often at work dealing with legal documents and electronic signatures and whatnot, and gently caress faxes. My company uses Right Fax, so most of the time I can fax right from my computer but Jesus wept I hate faxing I am legitimately astonished that fax is something that still loving exists. It needs to die.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2016 19:13
|
|
|
Mak0rz posted:I am legitimately astonished that fax is something that still loving exists. It needs to die. I think the fact that faxes are the only acceptable "legal" formats some entities accept outside of physical originals will keep faxes going. My experience anyway
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2016 19:18
|
|
|
In practice it's not uncommon for the send to use an email to fax software, while the receiver uses fax to email. We still have a physical fax in the office for whatever reason, all we get on it is spam.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2016 19:24
|
|
|
Ive gotten some good deals on travel to the bahamas from random faxes, seems legit.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2016 19:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 01:41 |
|
|
pastis posted:Me-- I'm the guy. Your friend's dad is supercool. All the Porcupine Tree mixes are incredible. I will never give up my SACD/DVD-A collection. I wouldn't have the audio gear to appreciate it but any sound engineer that Steven Wilson trusts must be a master of the craft so IMO this is pretty cool
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2016 19:36
|
|
