not seeing any non negligible difference between 60 and 120 Hz, am I weird?
Just got a new phone (OnePlus Nord 3), turned refresh rate HUD in developer settings and I see some parts of the system and some apps display 120 Hz but I have problem noticing any difference, same with my wife’s Redmi Note 12, i have to look very carefully and maaaybe I notice some different, not sure
After reading all the comments I’m thinking it really comes to what you’re able to see. If you see no difference between 60 and 120, good for you, set it to 60 and save some battery. If you’re able to see the difference, like I do, you’ll just enjoy the extra smoothness. I’ve always seen the difference between 60 and 90/120. I think it also comes to the content. For me it’s like this:
For videos, whatever refresh rate is ok as long as that was the intent of whoever created it.
For games 30 is playable, 60 is good, 120 is beautifully smooth. The type of game will also play a role here. An fps will benefit more from higher refresh rates.
For moving UI elements 30 is unusable, 60 is ok, 120 is really comfortable.
TL;DR Some people will see it, some people won’t. Do whatever works best for you.
120 is about latency more than anything else. When you play a game in 120 you notice how fast the reaction to your controller presses are making gameplay super smooth. On a phone, I can’t imagine that being as noticeable for day to day use.
Haha definitely possible. Maybe compare side by side and see if you can learn to appreciate it a bit if you’re interested. It’s kinda nice to be able to tbh
In fact, scrolling is the main difference to me. App opening/closing animations also appear smoother, but I find you get used to those much easier if you go back to 60 Hz after having used 120 Hz. Scrolling, however, isn’t the same…
Guessing not much content goes above 60 fps on mobile, except interface, played with describing long lists up and down, still barely noticed any difference
Same. The 120hz feature is nice and maybe mostly good for games, but for daily use the battery life is worth more than the small smoothness upgrade at least for me.
on a phone for me its not a useful feature. i notice it mainly when scrolling. meh. its fine on 60hz imho. maybe if i did more gaming on me phone or whatever id care more but just watching videos and browsing the web its fine.
What kind of apps? I don’t think you’d really see much change with simple 2D interfaces. But video or things rendered in 3D real time will most definitely be noticable.
On a 2D interface, the most noticable thing would be scrolling. Scrolling is much smoother with a higher refresh rate. Just scroll through these comments switching between 60 and 120. Guarantee you’d notice.
That is true. Sports are sometimes digitslly broadcast at higher frame rates, though. I’ve seen some Sharks games at 90+ and now it just looks awful when I see hockey at 60 or less on TV.
for me it’s painfully obvious when a phone is 60hz vs 120hz, i run mine at 120 and my wife doesn’t care and runs at 60… so yeah obviously some people just do not care or can’t see it, others like me need it to be high refresh haha
I remember on crt’s there was a massive difference between 60hz and 85 hertz, but my laptop has a 120 hertz screen and I really don’t see much of a difference between it and 60 hertz and it at 120 hertz, there is some work out there by some people that suggest that it’s because the CRT is just structured in such a way that you’re going to notice improved frame rates better and it’s going to look less blurry to your eyes.
For me the biggest difference between 60 and 85 Hz on a CRT was that one gave me a massive headache and nausea within a few hours, and the other didn't.
Modern displays work differently though, especially LCDs which only really flicker if the backlight flickers. CRTs only display a small sliver of the image at any given time, while the rest is black or fading away until the next frame is drawn.
(Though I do see a big difference between 60 and 85 fps these days; 85-95 is where I start to find FPS games to not feel downright choppy, but there's still a big, big difference between 95 and 165.)
Higher refresh rates make a bigger difference when physically larger portions of the screen are changing at once, and when there’s fast movement on the screen. That’s why it has a more noticeable effect on FPS games, where the entire screen changes when you move the mouse, and when you want to quickly move your aim to specific points. It’s much more noticeable on a large display than it is on a phone screen, for example.
Yes, indeed. But I find it very, very noticeable when just moving the mouse pointer too. Looks horrible on a 60 Hz screen.
The most important thing I think is movement speed. Extremely slow movements would look the same at 10 fps as 1000 fps (think a movement of 10 pixels per second, for example), while large movements look choppy at lower framerates. That's also (part of) why it's more important to have a high framerate in Quake/Unreal Tournament-style games than it is in e.g. first person puzzle games, latency being the other big one.
I turned mine from 120hz (default) to 60hz to save battery. Probably the only reason I noticed is because I knew it was 120hz. The battery hit wasn't worth the subtle difference.
That’s not unusual, imo high refresh rates on phones are a bit of a marketing tactic bc they don’t really have the computation power to support it when it counts (no one really cares if a static GUI is shown at 120 Hz but it is a waste of battery, you want it for gaming, videos, etc)
No, you want it for scrolling. Scrolling feels much more responsive at 120Hz. It does drain battery more but not by enough to be a deal breaker for most people.
Add comment