off-topic sectiont2na wrote: ↑Yesterday, 11:56
Completely agree with this, it's a the shame at the moment with console's sitting more consistently at the 60fps mark than the 120fps mark. Hopefully with the newer generation of consoles moving to some form of vcache support on the CPU side we'll see higher fps because ULMB2 on these Pulsar monitors at 120fps is genuinely so enjoyable to use.
I've been playing Ghost of Yotei recently on the Pro and at 60hz ULMB2 the motion clarity is really great - but it's almost 'ruined' because every time I pull up the map the flicker almost sends me to another dimension. It's fine outside of that but the map is really a struggle to use with the flicker.
I know consoles consoles consoles... but I do still prefer playing all my single player/story titles on a console for some reason and every FPS game on PC!
Bad news, I'm afraid. There are rumors suggesting Sony was dumb enough to NOT go for the obvious path - v-cache option. It may be PS4 all over again- a potato tablet CPU with absolutly horrible performance. I'm seriously scared it may be just half way between PS4 and 7800X3D when it comes to gaming performance. There are good signs too, like dedicated core for OS and non-gaming tasks, but if it's just the low-power Zen 6c core with not even 24MB of cache as the rumors suggest - then that'll be a huge downer.
About the future - they're going for ray tracing, path tracing. Expect a step backwards to 40fps instead of moving from 60 to 120. The trends are sadly still directed the wrong way. And PS6 will have a potato version - a mobile console with horrible limitations. I'm afraid the chance for getting something really good, like 85-90% of 7800X3D performance in worst case scenarios, is comparable to winning a lottery.
About flicker on strobed displays
About the bright image being painful with flicker - if you're using a PC, then maybe you could create some mod, shader mod or whatever, which would detect the map and lower the brightness for the duration of the map being on screen? If the game supports it, it would help if you switched from full screen to like 1/4 window. If you had a black background on your desktop, it would give your eyes the much needed relief, just like smaller sized TVs were not a problem for us at 50Hz in 16-bit era - because they didn't cover much of our FOV. The more you see - the bigger flikcer problem is.
Or maybe a script turning the strobing on and off?
About playing on console instead of PC
And if you prefer console over PC while being able to afford a decent PC, maybe hook it up to your TV so you can get the same comfort as on the console. Or if you want to keep using the monitor, move your couch or buy a very comfy chair?
From my experience, like 90% of my friends who say "they can't do that" are just too lazy to drill a small hole through a wall, or too stingy to buy a 40$ HDMI 10m cable. Or too scared to talk with their wife about it. Or too lazy to switch from big case to something very small so the wife doesn't complain as much. Cables can be hidden. Wireless tech for controllers exists. You can even get driving wheel stands which are designed so you can turn the driving hardware into drivinghardware.rar in less than a minute. People just create artificial barriers for themselves for no good reason. Don't be that guy
Arguably.
60Hz - I could agree to a point. But there's just too much awesome games capped at 60fps (that includes emulation)
What's acceptable sits somewhere between 75 and 120, with my opinion being that 85Hz is acceptable for majority of people (not perfect, just acceptable for short and medium sessions, not saying it's ok for 4 hours without a break) while 100 or even 120fps being unacceptable for a tiny fraction of gamers, maybe less than 1%.
But 85fps is where the 9800x3D ends in many of the Unreal Engine games are, so I'd argue 85 or 90Hz is very, very useful. In my opinion frame generation in games have no place below 100fps target framerate, unless it's a slow side scrolling game or a game of Chess
I wouldn't hold my breath. Current state of gaming hardware, little to no good games being worth spending a lot, sky high prices of SSDs, RAM etc. and very strong competition from OLEDs - combined with my recent finding that super good promotion for Pulsar monitor in Poland lasted for days - so nobody was interested in getting one even at 2/3 of the launch price - suggests the Pulsar tech will be abandoned by Nvidia, just like 3D and VR washammelgammler wrote: ↑Yesterday, 15:30Maybe I should rather wait for the second generation of pulse monitors,
Maybe many years into the future, if self-emmisive displays get bright enough. But for LCD, I think "it's dead, Jim"
I used FW900 as long as I could. I'm allergic to motion blur, but since Benq XL2411Z I'm fine with what properly strobed LCDs can do. You wait a decade already. Maybe get Pulsar or other monitor with correctly implemented strobing - for a test. If you don't like it, you can sell it losing just a few dollars. Or find someone who has it and go for a test. Just don't wait for perfect display as we're getting old already and you don't want to end up waiting till 2035. I waited for OLEDs since 2005. They were supposed to be mainstream by 2010-2015. Look where I'd be if I kept waiting.
And I'm already old enough that it impacts my gaming a lot - and my eyes are now burned out so I can't see anything in very dark areas as I have a circle around where I look at, in which I don't see nothing at nights. With age, our eyes degrade. Don't wait till you're very old cause you might find that perfect monitor no longer is for you as your eyes add the flaws you hated for decades, like degraded blacks, contrast etc. If you play with v-sync, 120Hz will never be lag-free in FPS games which can achieve low latency (some single player games can't)MSIfanboy wrote: ↑Today, 02:20
The pulsar 120hz ulmb2 is really clear, but the mouse feels delayed, and obviously not look as smooth, so you sure have a clear image in motion, but a more delayed input , maybe its more amazing in other types of games
I'm looking forward to a 1000hz monitor with pulsar, than I will get the best of both worlds I assume
But I was just turning v-sync off on my XL2411Z for multiplayer shooters like CS:GO or Battlefield 4 and while the motion quality gets ruined, it's still much, much better than without strobing. In some FPS ranges, it was sometimes even close to v-sync on, while the latency didn't bother me at all (although I'm old and can't play like 20 years ago, so a tiny bit more of latency won't significantly change my scores)