480Hz Monitor Display Panel Prototype Spotted

Be really interesting to see the difference, though I don't think the jump will be like going from 60 to 144hz... but would be interesting the studies I found on it from before did find that jet pilots were able to see images that were only on the screen for 1/300 of a second, though even beyond this surely the latency of the frames would also be lower making it great for pro gamers at least.

Personally I'm still waiting for movies and tv to leave 24hz... action films have just become a blur of mess

 

This will be really useful if you have a habit of gaming with your favourite housefly.

Or if you turn into a Brundlefly yourself.

 

Call me crazy but CSGO pros and the wannabe pros will be eager to try it. And quake players even more so. You can get over 500fps on average on any of those competitive fps games at 1080p and they may play at lower resolutions. A niche market? Ok, but you know, the " "insert name of a player" uses it then its clear if I buy it I will be equally as good" logic runs strong.

 

I think these kinds of refresh rates make more sense when you think of it in terms of latency until a refresh is possible and not about whether or not your system can provide a new frame for every refresh cycle. I don't care if I can't reach 480fps, but I do care that when my system has new information to show me, it reaches my eyes as quickly as possible.

It's never a bad thing to be pushing the limits of technology!

 

Doesnt matter if its overkill.. its a higher number and as we all know moar is better in marketing. Cant wait for the 960hz to come out, just to see all the drooling and money thrown at it. .

 

Reaching 480fps is pretty much impossible/really hard, also a bit pointless. 144hz monitors cost 200-250$, for 240hz we have to pay $500+. And we are talking about 1080p TN monitors. Paying 1000$ for 480hz 1080p TN monitor would mean someone is insane. Not to mention pros in Quake and CSGO don't even rely on vision that much but the smallest movement and prediction of enemy peeking.

 

60Hz is optimal for any joystick game.

But for first person games (like PUBG FPS) where you have a huge view distance, it's not optimal at all. Because when you scroll your mouse, you see too much information (hundred of objects, like trees, mountains, houses, shrubberies) passing thru the screen.

Now I don't think 240Hz or 480Hz is THAT necessary for this kind of games.

I think that with 144Hz your are done. But I don't have experience. I only know that 60Hz is not enough for this types of games, but is still perfectly playable. So I leave the optimal for 100Hz-144Hz.

Right now I have 4K because I prefer to have that resolution in both games and non games apps, like Google Chrome, Office or Dark Souls 3. (I play with G-Sync so I'm ok even in FPS and heavy games).

But I'll upgrade for a 4K with more than 60Hz as soon as they are released at a justifiable price. Not to play Dark Souls or some 3rd person games. Just to play better the first person ones.

 

the Hobbit tried 48fps and looked crap so its not happening to soon.

 

Crysis at 480 FPS?

Not even 100 years from now...

 

I love progress, but I'm happy with my 60fps, thank you.

 

Completely useless for current gpu/cpu tech ... and beyond.

 

Most people couldnt tell difference between 144hz and 240hz. Difference could be told only bu flicking mouse in fps shooters and still not all noticed during blind test.

While 480hz is amazing, difference is much less comparing to 60hz -> 144hz

 

From 60hz to 120hz I see a huge difference. From 120hz to 144hz I hardly notice a thing. 240hz, again just feels the same as 120hz/144hz so I highly doubt I'd see the benefit of 480hz.

 

60hz is bs and I hate it. I'm currently at 75hz freesync but will jump up as soon I can.
Above 120/144 I think there will be diminishing returns plus GPU's need to pump the frame rate to take advantage of it.

 

Noice.

 

I guess there´s a very specific market for these monitors as always, but damn this is insane. I´m pretty sure 144hz is enough.

 

Man i just bought my first 144Hz monitor and people are already talking about a 480Hz one...

 

The movie looked fine. Too bad the movie, as well as the rest of the trilogy, was otherwise pretty bad.

 

Yeah I feel like this is definitely in the 'diminishing returns' category.
I can feel a huge difference from 60 to say 80-100FPS, but above that it becomes less 'important'.

If I'd have to rate the differences it would be like this:
60 -> 80 VERY noticeable
80 -> 100 strongly noticeable
100 -> 120 fairly noticeable
120 -> under-144 is somewhat noticeable (quite little though), however I found that it feels smoother once your FPS is over the 144 mark on a 144Hz monitor. A GSync monitor probably wouldn't have this behaviour.

Considering the diminishing nature, after 144Hz I'm assuming you need at least 200Hz to notice a slight difference.
From 240 to 480 I'm sure there's a difference but at that point it becomes extremely cost inefficient and the use case will be limited to a handful of competitive games.

Lastly, personal perception is REALLY important. I've seen people who say there's a big difference between 60 and 144 but don't notice much difference after 100.
I believe some people are more sensitive to the difference.