this post was submitted on 06 Jun 2025
124 points (98.4% liked)

No Stupid Questions

41249 readers
956 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Like I'm not one of THOSE. I know higher = better with framerates.

BUT. I'm also old. And depending on when you ask me, I'll name The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask as my favourite game of all time.

The original release of that game ran at a glorious twenty frames per second. No, not thirty. No, not even twenty-four like cinema. Twenty. And sometimes it'd choke on those too!

.... And yet. It never felt bad to play. Sure, it's better at 30FPS on the 3DS remake. Or at 60FPS in the fanmade recomp port. But the 20FPS original is still absolutely playable.

Yet like.

I was playing Fallout 4, right? And when I got to Boston it started lagging in places, because, well, it's Fallout 4. It always lags in places. The lag felt awful, like it really messed with the gamefeel. But checking the FPS counter it was at... 45.

And I'm like -- Why does THIS game, at forty-five frames a second, FEEL so much more stuttery and choked up than ye olde video games felt at twenty?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Lojcs@lemm.ee 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

First time hearing that about OLEDs, can you elaborate? Is it that the lack of inherent motion blur makes it look choppy? As far as I can tell that's a selling point that even some non-oled displays emulate with backlight strobing, not something displays try to get rid of.

Also the inherent LCD latency thing is a myth, modern gaming monitors have little to no added latency even at 60hz, and at high refresh rates they are faster than 60hz crts

Edit: to be clear, this is the screen's refresh rate, the game doesn't need to run at hfr to benefit.

[–] tomkatt@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

I don’t understand all the technicals myself but it has to do with the way every pixel in an OLED is individually self-lit. Pixel transitions can be essentially instant, but due to the lack of any ghosting whatsoever, it can make low frame motion look very stilted.

Also the inherent LCD latency thing is a myth, modern gaming monitors have little to no added latency even at 60hz, and at high refresh rates they are faster than 60hz crts

That’s a misunderstanding. CRTs technically don’t have refresh rates, outside of the speed of the beam. Standards were settled on based on power frequencies, but CRTs were equally capable of 75, 80, 85, 120Hz, etc.

The LCD latency has to do with input polling and timing based on display latency and polling rates. Also, there’s added latency from things like wireless controllers as well.

The actual frame rate of the game isn’t necessarily relevant, as if you have a game at 60 Hz in a 120 Hz display and enable black frame insertion, you will have reduced input latency at 60 fps due to doubling the refresh rate on the display, increasing polling rate as it’s tied to frame timing. Black frame insertion or frame doubling doubles the frame, cutting input delay roughly in half (not quite that because of overhead, but hopefully you get the idea).

This is why, for example, the Steam deck OLED has lower input latency than the original Steam Deck. It can run up to 90Hz instead of 60, and even at lowered Hz has reduced input latency.

Also, regarding LCD, I was more referring to TVs since we’re talking about old games (I assumed consoles). Modern TVs have a lot of post process compared to monitors, and in a lot of cases there’s gonna be some delay because it’s not always possible to turn it all off. Lowest latency TVs I know are LG as low as 8 or 9ms, while Sony tends to be awful and between 20 and 40 ms even in “game mode” with processing disabled.

[–] moody@lemmings.world 3 points 1 day ago

That’s a misunderstanding. CRTs technically don’t have refresh rates, outside of the speed of the beam. Standards were settled on based on power frequencies, but CRTs were equally capable of 75, 80, 85, 120Hz, etc.

Essentially, the speed of the beam determined how many lines you could display, and the more lines you tried to display, the slower the screen was able to refresh. So higher resolutions would have lower max refresh rates. Sure, a monitor could do 120 Hz at 800x600, but at 1600x1200, you could probably only do 60 Hz.

[–] Lojcs@lemm.ee 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Standards were settled on based on power frequencies, but CRTs were equally capable of 75, 80, 85, 120Hz, etc.

That's why I specified 60hz :)

I see that you meant TVs specifically but I think it is misleading to call processing delays 'inherent' especially since the LG TV you mentioned (which I assume runs at 60hz) is close to the minimum possible latency of 8.3ms.

[–] tomkatt@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

True, but even that is higher than the latency was on the original systems on CRT. My previous comments were specific to display tech, but there’s more to it.

Bear in mind I can’t pinpoint the specific issue for any given game but there are many.

Modern displays, even the fastest ones have frame buffers for displaying color channels. That’s one link in the latency chain. Even if the output was otherwise equally fast as a CRT, this would cause more latency in 100% of cases, as CRT was an analogue technology with no buffers.

Your GPU has a frame buffer that’s essentially never less than one frame, and often more.

I mentioned TVs above re: post processing.

Sometimes delays are added for synchronizing data between CPU and GPU in modern games, which can add delays.

Older consoles were simpler and didn’t have shaders, frame buffers, or anything of that nature. In some cases the game’s display output would literally race the beam, altering display output mid-“frame.”

Modern hardware is much more complex and despite the hardware being faster, the complexity in communication on the board (CPU, GPU, RAM) and with storage can contribute to perceived latency.

Those are some examples I can think of. None of them alone would be that much latency, but in aggregate, it can add up.

[–] Lojcs@lemm.ee 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

The latency numbers of displays ie the 8-9 or 40ms include any framebuffer the display might or might not have. If it is less than the frame time it is safe to assume it's not buffering whole frames before displaying them.

Your GPU has a frame buffer that’s essentially never less than one frame, and often more.

And sometimes less, like when vsync is disabled.

That's not to say the game is rendered in from top left to bottom right as it is displayed, but since the render time has to fit within the frame time one can be certain that its render started one frame time before the render finished, and it is displayed on the next vsync (if vsync is enabled). That's 22 ms for 45 fps, another 16 ms for worst case vsync miss and 10 ms for the display latency makes it 48 ms. Majora' mask at 20 fps would have 50ms render + 8ms display = 58 ms of latency, assuming it too doesn't miss vsync