I've got an odd issue while playing certain xbox 360 games on my 120hz Samsung LCD tv. I've only seen this problem on a very small amount of games such as Mafia 2. During game play every few seconds you will get what looks like a drop in framerate and the game will appear to "lag". This happens on such a small amount of games that at first I thought it was the game itself until I switched over to a 60hz tv and the "lag" went away. I've gone through the menu system on the tv a few times and turned off everything I've found related to motion enhancements, etc. but the issue still occurs. At this point I may have to stay on the 60hz tv but I would prefer to use the 120hz tv if this is fixable as it is my only 1080p tv.
Solution
anwaypasible
Distinguished
- Oct 15, 2007
- 718
- 0
- 19,010
now we are so far zoomed in..
its not fair to say a CRT has a refresh rate.
the same way that its not fair to say an LCD has a refresh rate.
you have to open up each and every individual model of CRT monitors to know how the circuit board handles the electron gun and the video input.
it can very well be that the electron guns simply POURS onto the screen.
whether the rate of pouring onto the screen actually changes is debate well served to each design choice.
see.. if the electron gun is pouring onto the screen, what does it pour onto the screen when there isnt any video input?
usually its pouring a shade of black.
the pouring continues and as pixels are input into the electron gun, they simply spit out.
where they need to go requires thinking.
the thinking process would be the first place that needs a 'rate'
because as long as the electron gun is pouring onto the screen without any blank spots.. the screen stays solid.
theres no reason for the electron gun to change ANYTHING except the pixels.
and that raises the question 'how fast can the electron gun brain receive pixels without choking or slowing down?'
that is a bandwidth theory.
its only a theory because each frame is a picture.. and that picture has a constant x / y resolution.
so therefore, you have to cap the bandwidth with a variable.
the variable is KNOWING each picture (frame) is going to have the same x / y resolution.
based on the bandwidth available.. how many pictures (frames) can be sent before the bandwidth reaches its maximum speed?
that is why CRT's have a refresh rate.
its more simple to say the CRT can accept 120 frames per second
compared to
the CRT's electron gun brain can process _____ vertical pixels per second, and ______ horizontal pixels per second.
the refresh rate is supposed to be capped close to the bandwidth maximum.
when you know the frame has x / y resolution.. you can clearly see that either X or Y is close to the vertical or horizontal pixel per second maximum.
you might be able to squeeze some more resolution out of the other direction, because the electron guns brain isnt close to its bandwidth maximum.
but without a video processor to tell those extra pixels where to go.. they simply cannot be sent to the CRT.
do i have to go into detail about an LCD having a refresh rate?
the same thing can be said about the brain in the LCD television.
it can only accept and process _____ vertical pixels per second, and ______ horizontal pixels per second.
KNOWING that each frame has x / y resolution.. you can take either X or Y and divide it to the maximum number of pixels the brain can receive per second.
the result tells you how many frames per second can be accepted and processed by the brain.
that is a refresh rate.
but dont think the lcd screen has a response time fast enough to keep up with the brain.
if the brain is faster than the liquid in the screen.. you arent going to get an increased frame per second by hacking the lcd.
crts can put the electricity onto the screen and leave it there.. constantly pointed, no?
why not?
if it can touch once for a brief moment, why cant it simply stay there?
its gonna be back again in a very short while.
you seem to think the electron gun is like a paint brush that touches the screen line after line.
that isnt fair to the CRT that simply pours electricity, making constant contact with the screen.
the electron gun doesnt have to 'update' anything that doesnt move.. it simply holds it there.
and just because one thing moves.. for example, just because the cursor is blinking as i type.. that doesnt mean the entire screen has to refresh itself.
yes, the entire screen might get updated as a whole ... but it doesnt have to.
once you realize how solid the connection can be, any movements or changes can simply be communicated by their respected x/y coordinates.
you dont have to resend all of the x/y coordinates when nothing has moved or changed.
dare i say interlaced or progressive ??
lcd's are the same way, unless the liquid has to remain in movement to keep the liquid/crystals from aging (or becoming stuck/ajar).
makes me think of the difference between an 'electron gun tube' and a 'cathode ray tube'
one of them might be drawing line by line to keep the screen from melting.. but the other one is constantly touching the screen.
see the difference if your television is a CRT or really a EGT
remember.. those types of televisions can also be used as a video camera.
thats how the nintendo video game 'duck hunt' works.
the tip of the gun fires a light into the screen.. and by taking those x/y coordinates from the light, that is how the game knows if you shot the duck or not.
drawing line by line helps the television become a video camera.
constantly pouring onto the screen needs logic to read 'feedback' or changes to the pixel output, picked up by the gun (or a video camera itself)
i really like how the entire screen doesnt have to refresh or update when not necessary.
but its not fair to not give credit to all of those who have helped develop LCD's into what they are today.
i seen an LG television at best buy last week.
the screen claimed to be 3D capable.
and when i was watching the demo without any glasses.... sure enough, the video had depth.
it wasnt solid 3D.. but it was depth.
and to me, that is the same difference.
3D is popping out of the screen.
depth is sinking deep into the screen.
more and more high definition video is starting to show depth.
you can see depth on a daily basis, even if its a commercial.
LCD's had to get the color accuracy right so that they could compete with CRT's in the high definition era.
you cant have depth without using many shades of colors.
CRT's had to master the phosphorus screens to get the color accuracy.
LCD's had to master chemistry to get the colors accurate and last a long time.
there are more chain of events taking place between the television's pixel brain and the video input.
but after realizing how and why the entire screen doesnt need to be updated, you dont have to interpolate the frames.
its a stupid concept when its just easier to involve more frames per second.
otherwise you have video processing logic that detects movement and interpolates that movement to try and make the frames per second appear as if they are higher than what they really are.
recording video at higher frames per second is more satisfying and more revealing.
and it helps remove obnoxious needs to interpolate low frames per second.
simply increasing the standard frame per second rate will solve the biggest problem with these new televisions.
that is where all of the war is at.
color accuracy and actual amount of colors available has always been the choice of design.. its what makes one television better than the other.
but now they are trying to interpolate the frames per second to make them appear as if there are more frames than there actually is.
you see price wars because of 60hz and 120hz and 240hz
and then we get complaints in the forum that the higher amounts of interpolation arent even working correctly.
i wonder how long this will go on for.
its not fair to say a CRT has a refresh rate.
the same way that its not fair to say an LCD has a refresh rate.
you have to open up each and every individual model of CRT monitors to know how the circuit board handles the electron gun and the video input.
it can very well be that the electron guns simply POURS onto the screen.
whether the rate of pouring onto the screen actually changes is debate well served to each design choice.
see.. if the electron gun is pouring onto the screen, what does it pour onto the screen when there isnt any video input?
usually its pouring a shade of black.
the pouring continues and as pixels are input into the electron gun, they simply spit out.
where they need to go requires thinking.
the thinking process would be the first place that needs a 'rate'
because as long as the electron gun is pouring onto the screen without any blank spots.. the screen stays solid.
theres no reason for the electron gun to change ANYTHING except the pixels.
and that raises the question 'how fast can the electron gun brain receive pixels without choking or slowing down?'
that is a bandwidth theory.
its only a theory because each frame is a picture.. and that picture has a constant x / y resolution.
so therefore, you have to cap the bandwidth with a variable.
the variable is KNOWING each picture (frame) is going to have the same x / y resolution.
based on the bandwidth available.. how many pictures (frames) can be sent before the bandwidth reaches its maximum speed?
that is why CRT's have a refresh rate.
its more simple to say the CRT can accept 120 frames per second
compared to
the CRT's electron gun brain can process _____ vertical pixels per second, and ______ horizontal pixels per second.
the refresh rate is supposed to be capped close to the bandwidth maximum.
when you know the frame has x / y resolution.. you can clearly see that either X or Y is close to the vertical or horizontal pixel per second maximum.
you might be able to squeeze some more resolution out of the other direction, because the electron guns brain isnt close to its bandwidth maximum.
but without a video processor to tell those extra pixels where to go.. they simply cannot be sent to the CRT.
do i have to go into detail about an LCD having a refresh rate?
the same thing can be said about the brain in the LCD television.
it can only accept and process _____ vertical pixels per second, and ______ horizontal pixels per second.
KNOWING that each frame has x / y resolution.. you can take either X or Y and divide it to the maximum number of pixels the brain can receive per second.
the result tells you how many frames per second can be accepted and processed by the brain.
that is a refresh rate.
but dont think the lcd screen has a response time fast enough to keep up with the brain.
if the brain is faster than the liquid in the screen.. you arent going to get an increased frame per second by hacking the lcd.
crts can put the electricity onto the screen and leave it there.. constantly pointed, no?
why not?
if it can touch once for a brief moment, why cant it simply stay there?
its gonna be back again in a very short while.
you seem to think the electron gun is like a paint brush that touches the screen line after line.
that isnt fair to the CRT that simply pours electricity, making constant contact with the screen.
the electron gun doesnt have to 'update' anything that doesnt move.. it simply holds it there.
and just because one thing moves.. for example, just because the cursor is blinking as i type.. that doesnt mean the entire screen has to refresh itself.
yes, the entire screen might get updated as a whole ... but it doesnt have to.
once you realize how solid the connection can be, any movements or changes can simply be communicated by their respected x/y coordinates.
you dont have to resend all of the x/y coordinates when nothing has moved or changed.
dare i say interlaced or progressive ??
lcd's are the same way, unless the liquid has to remain in movement to keep the liquid/crystals from aging (or becoming stuck/ajar).
makes me think of the difference between an 'electron gun tube' and a 'cathode ray tube'
one of them might be drawing line by line to keep the screen from melting.. but the other one is constantly touching the screen.
see the difference if your television is a CRT or really a EGT
remember.. those types of televisions can also be used as a video camera.
thats how the nintendo video game 'duck hunt' works.
the tip of the gun fires a light into the screen.. and by taking those x/y coordinates from the light, that is how the game knows if you shot the duck or not.
drawing line by line helps the television become a video camera.
constantly pouring onto the screen needs logic to read 'feedback' or changes to the pixel output, picked up by the gun (or a video camera itself)
i really like how the entire screen doesnt have to refresh or update when not necessary.
but its not fair to not give credit to all of those who have helped develop LCD's into what they are today.
i seen an LG television at best buy last week.
the screen claimed to be 3D capable.
and when i was watching the demo without any glasses.... sure enough, the video had depth.
it wasnt solid 3D.. but it was depth.
and to me, that is the same difference.
3D is popping out of the screen.
depth is sinking deep into the screen.
more and more high definition video is starting to show depth.
you can see depth on a daily basis, even if its a commercial.
LCD's had to get the color accuracy right so that they could compete with CRT's in the high definition era.
you cant have depth without using many shades of colors.
CRT's had to master the phosphorus screens to get the color accuracy.
LCD's had to master chemistry to get the colors accurate and last a long time.
there are more chain of events taking place between the television's pixel brain and the video input.
but after realizing how and why the entire screen doesnt need to be updated, you dont have to interpolate the frames.
its a stupid concept when its just easier to involve more frames per second.
otherwise you have video processing logic that detects movement and interpolates that movement to try and make the frames per second appear as if they are higher than what they really are.
recording video at higher frames per second is more satisfying and more revealing.
and it helps remove obnoxious needs to interpolate low frames per second.
simply increasing the standard frame per second rate will solve the biggest problem with these new televisions.
that is where all of the war is at.
color accuracy and actual amount of colors available has always been the choice of design.. its what makes one television better than the other.
but now they are trying to interpolate the frames per second to make them appear as if there are more frames than there actually is.
you see price wars because of 60hz and 120hz and 240hz
and then we get complaints in the forum that the higher amounts of interpolation arent even working correctly.
i wonder how long this will go on for.
Similar threads
- Question
Facebook
Twitter