[Yeul]

I play videogames and I can tell the difference between 60 and 120herz screen. Always amused me that a so called premium device had worse hardware than a flagship killer. Apple apparently finally caught up with their latest phone?

[sho_hn]

Almost anyone can tell the difference between 60 and 120 Hz.

Seriously, if you haven't upgraded your desktop PC to a higher refresh rate screen yet: It's the biggest "feels like a new computer!" upgrade since we swapped HDDs for SSDs and the days when your new CPU was 2.5x as fast as the old one. There is no turning back after having experienced the buttery smoothness, and the impact is IMHO higher during regular usage than during games.

[Sohcahtoa82]

I upgraded to 144 hz on my primary monitor in 2016 and it's absolutely noticeable and makes things feel so smooth.

Last week I went to 240 hz and while it's noticeably even smoother, it wasn't nearly the upgrade, so there's certainly diminishing returns. Though I did go from IPS to OLED and THAT is really nice.

This is usually the point where someone will chime in and say something dumb like "The human eye can't see more than X frames per second" which is just hogwash. It's not about individual frames, but the fluidity of motion. At 60 fps, an object moving across the screen is moving 4x as many pixels per frame as 240 fps. When you get used to 240 fps, 60 fps feels like it's strobing.

[sho_hn]

I recently bought a 240 Hz OLED monitor as well, but to my dismay the 80 Gbps data rate mode is actually optional in DisplayPort 2.1a. Even though I have a DP2.1-capable GPU (9070 XT) and monitor, it's not possible to do 4k 10bit HDR at 240 Hz with DSC off. Since I don't want compression to be on I've compromised to sticking with 180 Hz, which as you say due to the diminishing returns above 120 is still plenty.

Still quite frustrating that the display industry did it again in specifying a standard that makes most of what's interesting about it optional, so everyone can print it on their boxes without delivering the expected value.

[phonon]

Why do you need DSC off?

[sho_hn]

Psychology more than anything, to be honest. I know it's supposed to be visually lossless, but it does touch and nudge many pixels, and I just want the raw image. I do dabble in graphics and UI frontend at times, and I don't want to take chances. It's something that spending a little more time digging into the algorithmic details of DSC might address for me, but I haven't so far.

[phonon]

DSC has Rate Control, so the very minimal compression needed to go from from 180 Hz to 240 Hz will be negligible except in artificial scenarios like random noise. DSC is intended to be visually lossless up to 3x compression levels.

[brailsafe]

Meh, I turned back. While 120+hz is nice, there are more compelling attributes of a monitor that I wouldn't compromise on in the name of refresh rate. Aspect ratio, size, resolution, picture quality, and viewing angles are all things I personally value more than refresh rate. If I could get my exact monitor that quite nicely meets all of those criteria, but with 120+hz, I still wouldn't value it so highly that I'd pay more than $500 to replace it, but I would pick it over 60hz if needing a new screen and everything else was already matched or better.

It's an impactful and noticeable upgrade in addition to everything else being awesome, but for me it doesn't come close to being the the most important. If all else was equal or better, and I had to pick between 6k resolution or high refresh rate, I'd have a hard time picking refresh rate, but I'd prefer both.

[cosmic_cheese]

High refresh on its own is not enough to constitute a better screen. While Apple could certainly stand to bump the minimum refresh rate to 120hz across the board, I wouldn’t want that to come at the expense of the other more important specs as has been common outside of the Apple sphere, particularly on budget devices. If one has to choose, a color accurate screen is preferable to a fast but less accurate one in most circumstances for instance.

[TexanFeller]

Apple phones have had ~120hz screens for many years now. Only on the Pro models though, not the cut down economy models, that’s how they force people with disposable income to buy the Pro.