Blur Buster's 1000hz journey ending at 650hz OLEDs?

[tong]

Now that we've seen what high refresh OLEDs are capable of when it comes to motion clarity, it's evident that thanks to the near-instant response times, the blur is lower compared to LCDs at the same refresh.
TFTCentral states that a 360hz OLED looks like an LCD at 540hz:
https://tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/dell-a ... e-aw2725df

An OLED has an approximate 1.5 to 1 ratio of motion clarity to an LCD screen, and you can see that the 360Hz OLED panel is close to the 540Hz LCD overall (i.e. 360 x 1.5 = 540).

So, does that mean the 1000hz clarity journey is now actually a 650hz journey for OLEDs?

[hart]

then, the journey to maintain 650fps without drops will start

[Supermodel_Evelynn]

1000 FPS is NOT a realistic goal even with computers coming out 30 years into the future we will all long be dead by the time a PC can maintain 1000 FPS in any AAA title

LCD Strobing or OLED BFI and brightness needs to improve so we can maintain realistic goals

I have a decent PC and I can barely maintain 60 FPS in Warhammer 40K Darktide even on 1080P medium settings in chaotic fight scenes.

There is hope with GSYNC pulsar but that isn't 1000 HZ

[ssamowo]

persistence still gets reduced the higher the hz, regardless of framerate, doesn't it? only strobing needs framerate to = hz, to avoid double images. 1000hz would not have this issue presumably so 60hz games would still have great motion clarity on 1000hz monitors, is what i believe the case would be.

[RealNC]

persistence still gets reduced the higher the hz, regardless of framerate, doesn't it? only strobing needs framerate to = hz, to avoid double images. 1000hz would not have this issue presumably so 60hz games would still have great motion clarity on 1000hz monitors, is what i believe the case would be.

Nope You need high FPS and high Hz to get lower motion blur. If the game runs at 60FPS, then 60Hz, 280Hz, or 480Hz (or 1000Hz if that ever appears) will have the same motion blur.

[jorimt]

persistence still gets reduced the higher the hz, regardless of framerate, doesn't it? only strobing needs framerate to = hz, to avoid double images. 1000hz would not have this issue presumably so 60hz games would still have great motion clarity on 1000hz monitors, is what i believe the case would be.

Nope You need high FPS and high Hz to get lower motion blur. If the game runs at 60FPS, then 60Hz, 280Hz, or 480Hz (or 1000Hz if that ever appears) will have the same motion blur.

Yup, no further motion blur reduction, but less visible tearing and overall latency at 60 FPS (or any framerate) the higher the physical refresh rate with G-SYNC or no-sync at least though.

[thatoneguy]

1000 FPS is NOT a realistic goal even with computers coming out 30 years into the future we will all long be dead by the time a PC can maintain 1000 FPS in any AAA title

That is where Framegen comes in. You render 100fps and framegen the rest to a 1000fps.
AI will also play a role.

[Supermodel_Evelynn]

1000 FPS is NOT a realistic goal even with computers coming out 30 years into the future we will all long be dead by the time a PC can maintain 1000 FPS in any AAA title

That is where Framegen comes in. You render 100fps and framegen the rest to a 1000fps.
AI will also play a role.

Yes if you love blur and artifacts and a frame gen tech that only works in 0.1% of games then yes frame gen is good for 1000 FPS

[JimProfit]

Yes if you love blur and artifacts and a frame gen tech that only works in 0.1% of games then yes frame gen is good for 1000 FPS

I'm the first to say that at this point frame-gen isn't perfect and not yet a fully viable replacement for LCD backlight strobing (wherein 1ms MPRT is possible).
However I wouldn't say it is as bad as you suggest.
The toolbox that Lossless Scaling provides is very compelling, for reasons other than frame-gen too, and it works for every game on basically any GPU that can provide a solid base.
And Nvidia appears pretty much dead set on pushing that technology forward with every new architectures.

It is THE solution when we want to conjugate both HDR brightness levels and clear motion, in the future when we get no-compromise high-refresh panels. Hopefully it does gets its artifacts sorted out in due time.

[Purpose]

persistence still gets reduced the higher the hz, regardless of framerate, doesn't it? only strobing needs framerate to = hz, to avoid double images. 1000hz would not have this issue presumably so 60hz games would still have great motion clarity on 1000hz monitors, is what i believe the case would be.

The relationship is nuanced is all I can say for sure from personal experience.

I hooked up my FW900 CRT, created a 150hz resolution that pushes 500fps in low res on Delta Force Blackhawk.

60hz looks good but the refresh is so choppy. I’m used to my 240hz G9 OLED.

But at 150hz, when the frames stay over 300, it eliminates or at least hides perceived screen tearing, motion blur, absurdly low input latency. (No wonder I used to snipe so good in CS in 2002)

This is kind of the reverse argument to what you’re saying since I’m talking about frames above refresh and your talking about refresh above frames

BUT.. like I said in the beginning.. you FEEL the refresh rate regardless of whatever else is going on.

Like I can’t even function on a 60hz monitor.. barely at 120hz even on the desktop.

My 240hz is drastically better feeling than my 165hz screens.

So I’d rather have 480hz no matter what on anything other than CRT



Nope You need high FPS and high Hz to get lower motion blur. If the game runs at 60FPS, then 60Hz, 280Hz, or 480Hz (or 1000Hz if that ever appears) will have the same motion blur.

Yup, no further motion blur reduction, but less visible tearing and overall latency at 60 FPS (or any framerate) the higher the physical refresh rate with G-SYNC or no-sync at least though.