← Back to context

Comment by AnthonBerg

2 hours ago

Agreed.

If they INSIST that it MUST be 60 Hz, I'd accept the consolation/compromise of 60 Hz but 0ms-ish latency. (Maybe they already do it that way.)

As in waiiiiit until the 16.67ms between frames is almost up while sampling inputs, then bam!, render quicky, bam!, transfer it over a link that could carry more than 60 frames per second, bam!, fast OLED display. Each frame fresh and close to input.

To the why?-sayers: Because the difference is noticeable. We can get all philosophical and discuss whether it's a competitive advantage for someone to not notice the difference, or vice versa. Why the why?, why not just… take us difference-noticers on our word? Like… we're not taking your 60Hz 16.67ms crunchiness away from you?