Skuzzy ?

[Ack-Ack]

A little tidbit about 3DMark 06, it's more of a "marketing tool" then a true benchmark as both AMD and Nvidia will tweak their drivers to give a higher "artificial" score than what a person would really get.

The most accurate benchmarks are those that come included with the game as these benchmarks are used to determine if your hardware is capable of running the game.  All 3DMark does is give ATI and Nvidia another artificial marketing selling point for their video cards.

ack-ack

[skribetm]

thats why its called benchmarketing.  not only on GPU's, but also on CPU's.

but you are exactly on target ak, there is no substitute for the actual software/workload.
hopefully we get a standardized AH2 benchmark so that we can do consistent hardware comparisons.

but i'd rather get a Ki-21, Ki-27 & Ki-43 instead before that, for an AVG-scenario!

[Tigger29]

A little tidbit about 3DMark 06, it's more of a "marketing tool" then a true benchmark as both AMD and Nvidia will tweak their drivers to give a higher "artificial" score than what a person would really get.

The most accurate benchmarks are those that come included with the game as these benchmarks are used to determine if your hardware is capable of running the game.  All 3DMark does is give ATI and Nvidia another artificial marketing selling point for their video cards.

ack-ack

This kind of reminds me of cars.  Their computers are programmed to recognize when they are being driven by the EPA for emissions certifications so they can run real clean regardless of performance.  There is a very specific 'drive cycle' that is used for EPA testing (The IM240 drive cycle that some states use for Emissions testing is an abbreviated version of that).  This can vary greatly from real life performance.

[MADe]

First off,
I felt I was given the mere stock answer, so I pushed for more.

Second,
I will not accept chastizement because, I WILL NOT accept chastizment. Not for this anyways.

Thirdly,
I do have a basic understanding, already. But there ain't nuthin wrong wit get'in som-ta-others ide'ers. Yes!
So I ask questions.
Educated in America and still learning.

SONY Bravia XML 52" has a MHz refresh of 250MHz. The pic is sweet.

thanx to those that gave info in post

[guncrasher]

Made that monitor will display 250 fps, assuming your system can handle that many, with vsync on.

With vsync off system may show a higher fps, but the monitor will only display 250 max.

Semp

[BoilerDown]

SONY Bravia XML 52" has a MHz refresh of 250MHz. The pic is sweet.

Ok I didn't correct you the first time, because I knew what you meant, but you keep doing it so...

The refresh rate would be 250 Hz, not 250 MEGA Hz.  And I would hazard a guess that they use some trickery to achieve that 250Hz figure, and that its not comparable to a true computer monitor refresh rate. (But I don't know that for a fact.)

I highly recommend you educate yourself a bit more.  For starters read this: http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=39226 , particularly the parts on Response Time and Input Lag.  The thread is getting a little long in the tooth, but still is a good starting place to understand how LCD computer monitors work.

[BoilerDown]

One more thing, if you can stand the arguing, this is an OK thread on the potential of 120Hz monitors that are just starting to come out over 60Hz: http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2120265

I'm still very skeptical that your 250Hz television will do anything close to that hooked up to a computer.

[TilDeath]

If your trying to have a "private" discussion perhaps you should try email. By posting on an open board you'll get all kinds of answers from all kinds of people.

My post was only pointing out that you had already got the answer. Rephrasing the question isn't going to change the answer. Perhaps you asked the wrong question?

oh and by the way, you have "paid" to play the game, the boards are free. 

x 2

[Vulcan]

There are just so many things that can go wrong with vertical sync disabled, from rubber bullets to screen tearing, to jerky motion, it is silly to consider disabling it.  Your monitor cannot display anything faster than its vertical sync rate will allow.

Believe it not skuzzy I have to turn vsync off with my setup (3D Stereoscopic headset with dual OLED displays).

If I don't I get screen tearing and the jerkies, especially with the head tracking. Don't ask me why...

[Tigger29]

First off,
I felt I was given the mere stock answer, so I pushed for more.

If you still want to push for more, then try doing so via EMAIL!  Don't post something on the boards and then throw a fit when others chime in.

Second,
I will not accept chastizement because, I WILL NOT accept chastizment. Not for this anyways.

You will accept anything we want to give you because you have NO POWER to delete or change our posts.  Stop being so full of yourself!

Thirdly,
I do have a basic understanding, already. But there ain't nuthin wrong wit get'in som-ta-others ide'ers. Yes!
So I ask questions.
Educated in America and still learning.

Still learning, yes.  Less dense, no.

SONY Bravia XML 52" has a MHz refresh of 250MHz. The pic is sweet.

I just checked its specs.. it's 240 not 250.  It's also Hz, NOT MHz.  One Hz (Hertz) is ONE CYCLE PER SECOND.  A display that is 240Hz is able to show 240 images per second, OR 240FPS.  Have you read my video settings guide?

Your eyes/brain can NOT distinguish the difference between 60FPS and more.  Some people claim to be able to and maybe some can, but really once you hit 100FPS really it's all the same.  So why does a 120Hz TV have a smoother picture than a 60Hz TV?  BECAUSE TELEVISION/MOVIES IN THE U.S. ARE BROADCAST AT ONLY 24Hz!  That's right!  24Hz... or 24FPS.. however you want to word it!  The reason a 120Hz display looks smoother is because it is!  Translating 24FPS for a 60Hz display results in showing one frame three times... then showing the next frame twice... then showing the next frame three times... then showing the next frame twice.  This results in a little bit of choppiness with every other frame being shown a slightly longer time than the next.

With a 120Hz display, a frame is shown five times... then the next five times... then the next five times... then the next five times.  Since every frame lasts the same amount of time, it looks much smoother.

So then you might ask.. WHAT IS THE POINT OF A 240Hz display?  Well I'm glad you asked.  For the most part it's simply a marketing gimmick.  For regular television/movies you would not be able to distinguish a difference between it an a 120Hz display, as it is really only showing 24FPS anyway (it's just each frame is repeated TEN times on a 240Hz display).  The ONLY POINT to using a 240Hz display would be for 3D.  PERIOD.  With 3D, each eye is shown every other frame so with a 240Hz display with active 3D glasses, each eye would see the display as a 120Hz display.

For use as a gaming display, a 240Hz monitor will show NO IMPROVEMENT over a 120Hz monitor, and a 120Hz monitor would show LITTLE IF ANY IMPROVEMENT over a 60Hz monitor.

thanx to those that gave info in post

Vulcan, no body ever said that you would FOR SURE have issues running VSync OFF, we're just saying that the possibility exists, and since there is nothing to gain by doing so then why take that chance?

[SIK1]

I'm wondering if Vulcan has to run vsync off because his set up displays two separate images simultaneously.

[Tigger29]

I'm wondering if Vulcan has to run vsync off because his set up displays two separate images simultaneously.

Yes I seem to recall hearing about SLI forcing Vsync to be turned off.  That might apply with multiple displays as well <shrug> If that is the case then you have no option obviously.

[Knite]

MADe,

Be careful when you are assuming a 240Hz tv can actually do 240Hz refresh rate from a video signal. MOST of the time, this just isn't true.

Most TV manufacturers are advertising Hz rates of 120, or 240Hz for LCD and 600Hz for Plasma, but what they don't tell you is, that's what they support for OUTPUT. INPUT (as in, the signal you're sending to the TV) is most often still limited to only 60Hz. So even if you're using a 240Hz Bravia TV, your refresh rate is still a maximum of 60Hz.

So why would TV manufacturers do this?
There's a few reasons.
#1. Marketing. 240 is bigger than 60, so looks better on a spec sheet.
#2. Enhancement features. Today's TVs attempt to "enhance" what you are actually seeing. For instance, because of the way LCDs typically work, if you are watching a fast paced sport, you'd used to see an "afterimage" which would make the game look kinda blurry during heavy action. By increasing the Hz of the TV, and loading it with certain image enhancers, that "afterimage" is reduced dramatically, and can make things look very sharp, even with a lot of motion going on.
There's other reasons too, but I'm not going to go into a monster AV post.


So here's what happens when you turn off V-Sync.... you send signal faster to the tv/monitor, than the tv/monitor can handle. It attempts to keep up by displaying things as quickly as it can (usually 60Hz in the case of LCD), but since a computer (and console)'s framerate can fluctuate, what you wind up with is the screen starting to display 1 frame of animation, and finishing by displaying a 2nd, or even a 3rd one, making the picture look weird.

Stick with V-Sync on.

[Vulcan]

I'm wondering if Vulcan has to run vsync off because his set up displays two separate images simultaneously.

could be something to with the Stereo 3D Driver, with sync on if I'm looking around I get huge tears across the screen and occasional wierd pauses.

[Skuzzy]

But Out,
I am trying to have a discussion about something with Skuzzy. Your personal inferences are un-necessary and unwanted. Maybe you are a yes man, I'm not!
I have paid for the right to ask such questions of AH.

I answered your question.  I did not give you a "stock" answer.  I was very specific.  Others re-affirmed the answer.  If you want a private discussion with me, then email me or PM me, but putting it on a public bulletin board immediately allows anyone to respond to it.

If you want to know more, then you might listen to what the others are saying.  If the information is incorrect, I will say something.

If your monitor claims a 240Hz refresh rate, then you either have an NVidia card, with the driver bug that does not deal with refresh rates higher than 120Hz, or you have not loaded the INF file for the monitor you are using, or the video control panel has been specifically set to 60Hz and you need to manually change it to 240Hz.

Right now, there is no such thing as a true 240Hz monitor, from anyone.  It really is a 120Hz refresh rate that has some tech applied to it to give it a pseudo doubling of the refresh rate.