Optimisation

[WarGod45]

but beyond 60 FPS you're just doing it for the bragging rights.

As an owner of a 144Hz screen, I disagree. 144 FPS is quite the experience, and it's fairly noticable for me when a game runs at only 60.

Agreed, it`s a totally different experience.

[Yuhaney]

but beyond 60 FPS you're just doing it for the bragging rights.

As an owner of a 144Hz screen, I disagree. 144 FPS is quite the experience, and it's fairly noticable for me when a game runs at only 60.

I haven't experienced 144Hz myself, but I'd still bet that I can see some (if not most) of the frames. In other words, it's going to be similar experience as going from 30 to 60 but even better due to the extra 24Hz.

According to a test I read about, trained professionals are able to distinguish refresh rates up to about 250-300 before they no longer notice any difference. But I wouldn't say it's impossible for a human to see more than 300 "FPS" considering eyes don't work with frames per second.

I remember reading this somewhere too. Yet to be seen in the future. I've also come across some EIZO's 240Hz monitor, but I'm not sure how much of those Hz's are actually some tricky marketing bullshit to make us buy their product. Another thing I'm waiting to see is the "maximum" resolution for monitors and other devices. Saw some people complaining that VR devices had too small resolution, as they could see the lines between the pixels. Waiting for a VR device with a 8K monitor per eye.

[cantremember]

Do we know what kind of definition human eyes can more or less distinguish?

Resolutions are still ever increasing, but for audio for example we've seemingly reached the threshhold of human ears as audio sampling quality hasn't really increased since the early 90'ies and the only current improvements aren't in the audio quality itself but in the amount of channels and speakers they use to make it surround.

[Mudbill]

Different people can hear different frequencies but in general the human ears are limited from 0 to 20,000 Hz I believe. As for eyes, I'm not really sure what you'd measure it in. Frames per second kinda works, but isn't very accurate since eyes don't see in frames, but more like "waves" iirc. Purely organic of course.

[Noneatme]

To get back to topic:

I run the game on Linux with a R9 390 Nitro & AMD FX 8350. No problems with > 60 FPS using the amdgpu driver.

Cheers

[Caterpillar]

My system is made of

• AMD Phenom II X4 965
  
• 16 GB RAM
  
• AMD Radeon RX480 on 4.8.12 Linux kernel + Mesa 12 and amdgpu driver
  

the game at 1680x1050 has a FPS range of [35-60]. Instead on Windows the frames are capped a 60 FPS and never change. I wonder if this is due not yet mature amdgpu Linux drivers