what if i get a 200Hz TV and play overwatch at 1440p? Are there

>>62327635
TVs are horrible for playing desktop games.
They have a lot of input lag so everything will be delayed, and their pixels are usually huge because of their physical size.

File: perfect.jpg (424KB, 1276x1653px) Image search: [Google]

424KB, 1276x1653px

>>62327635

Can the tv really accept 200hz? Because most that are advertised at that high a hz are only capable of doing it with trumotion/smoothing/soap opera filter.

Also hips > everything else

>>62327666
basically this. the pixel size issue isn't as much of a problem if you're playing games (versus using the TV for reading, writing, etc... you know, anything computer-specific), but the input lag in particular will fuck you.

you're not good enough to make a 200Hz monitor the deciding bottleneck in the video games you play.

3DPD cancer
sage

>>62327682
um, hello. more/source?

>>62327682
I think 100/120Hz televisions are a thing but I just tried to look up specs of some TVs on LG's and Samsung's sites and they literally don't even mention refresh rates. I'm quite upset right now.

>>62327908
tons of tvs are sold with their refresh rates as leading specs. i don't know what you're doing but the problem is on your end.

File: no hz.png (69KB, 969x650px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 969x650px

>>62327917
yeah, no

File: monitors.png (991KB, 2376x4018px) Image search: [Google]

991KB, 2376x4018px

>>62327957
you've successfully pointed out 1 television that doesn't list the refresh rate. that doesn't disprove the claim that tons of TVs list their refresh rate prominently.

>>62328021

Not OP, but those aren't the top input refresh rates. Most of that is the top rate with frame interpolation.

File: Untitled.png (128KB, 813x723px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 813x723px

>>62328021
>240Hz
>480Hz
It's clear this is not actually the refresh rate but simply marketing talk.
I see sensible values in pic related but then when I look up the official spec sheets it's talking about things like "motion rate" at best and actual refresh rates aren't mentioned at all, so I can't verify if there's TV's with legit 100 or 120Hz panels.

>>62328039
that's fair, but to a large extent that's going to be mediated by the input itself, and whatever the device pushing frames is capable and willing to push. you can set your laptop to push 30Hz if you want to make using the computer miserable. if you're using DP 1.1 you can get 4k video, but not better than 30Hz unless you use two cables and use MST or something (protip: don't)

>>62328062
this is like telling me that the power draw rates are inaccurate. of course, but not being able to trust the specs sheets is an entirely different problem from what you're alleging.

if a company wants to lie through their teeth and tell you they do 120Hz on >>62327957 when in reality it does 60, you wouldn't have made this complaint in the first place, would you? or at the very least, your complaint would've been more nuanced and accurate.

>>62327682
ARE WE STILL SERIOUSLY NOT GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE SOURCE FOR THIS GIRL?

>>62328113

http://www.imagefap.com/pictures/6212929/Reddit-Mrs-Mourinho

>>62328113
she's worst girl in thread

>>62328157
you're "worst girl in thread".

>>62328157
>insane hip to waist ratio
>retardedly long legs
>bad

>>62328100
I have no idea what you're even on about. They plain don't list their vertical refresh rate, that is my complaint. You said they did, and I showed they don't. I don't care if they use a million fancy marketing terms as long as they also put the real number.
>if a company wants to lie through their teeth
But they can't, which is probably why they had to invent marketing terms to begin with. If their specs had said "Vertical Refresh Rate: 120Hz", I trust that would've been correct.

>>62328202
Yes anon, extreme proportions only work in 2d

>>62328202
being the worst doesnt mean bad it just means you're worse than someone else

>>62327635
TV panels aren't 200Hz.
Just some interpolated trash that makes it (((look))) like 200Hz

>>62327635
Unless the server tick-rate is 200+Hz, why do you need all those extra frames?

>>62328238
because there's still a benefit due to your ability to better see the 60hz increments during the important moments

>>62327682
this. If it's a real 200hz tv, sure. but I havent seen one, they are probably quite expensive.

Also, it will look bad due to upscaling from 1440p to 4k, unless it's small/you sit real far away

pretty much ALL TVs are 50Hz or 60Hz.

Then it gets software interpolated to multiples of that like 100/120/200/240/400/480 and so on.

>>62327635
>>62327682
thank mr. skeltal

>>62327635
TVs can have truly abysmal input lag, which is the last thing you want for an FPS.

http://www.rtings.com/tv/tests/inputs/input-lag