Headphones

[Harrison]

Interesting, but peddling 360Hz output and displays is just a ploy to sell more expensive hardware.

Did you know that in recent studies they have now proved the human retinal image has a maximum observable rate as 50–90 Hz. With the average person bring very close to 60 fps.

But a separate line of research has reported that fast eye movements known as saccades allow simple modulated LEDs to be observed at very high rates.

What it means is that the human eye can only see an average of 60fps, but that the brain can spot faster motion in our peripheral vision that we notice when it's not right. This is what is going on when games say it is much smoother at higher refresh rates. It isn't use watching the higher framerate, but instead tricking the brain into thinking its correct as motion moves quickly.

The study concluded that this observable high framerate in our periphery is up to 500Hz. But for gaming this is only really applicable to FPS games where the motion is very fast movement. I.e. multiplayer online fps games.

[Kin Hell]

Wow fancy stuff. And here's me watching videos of people dicking about and using a printer as a display, or installing a gaming PC in a toilet or using stupid things like kids toys, wiimotes, or Donkey Kong bongos as controllers

Loved the Gaming chair!

Interesting, but peddling 360Hz output and displays is just a ploy to sell more expensive hardware.

Did you know that in recent studies they have now proved the human retinal image has a maximum observable rate as 50–90 Hz. With the average person bring very close to 60 fps.

But a separate line of research has reported that fast eye movements known as saccades allow simple modulated LEDs to be observed at very high rates.

What it means is that the human eye can only see an average of 60fps, but that the brain can spot faster motion in our peripheral vision that we notice when it's not right. This is what is going on when games say it is much smoother at higher refresh rates. It isn't use watching the higher framerate, but instead tricking the brain into thinking its correct as motion moves quickly.

The study concluded that this observable high framerate in our periphery is up to 500Hz. But for gaming this is only really applicable to FPS games where the motion is very fast movement. I.e. multiplayer online fps games.

Possibly H & I wouldn't want to argue about it.

However, it's almost as bad as saying, "I cant see any difference between 60Hz & 120Hz". - Of course you can if you know what to look for. - I already know that 360Hz is going to scroll sideways much slicker than my 165Hz is currently.
Bring it on!

[J T]

Undoubtedly it is better, but the questions really become 'how much better' followed by 'will it really make much difference to me' and then finally 'is it worth the extra ca$h'

As I am pretty bad at fast paced online shooty bang clicking-on-heads-simulators, i'm really not the target audience.

- - - Updated - - -

Wow fancy stuff. And here's me watching videos of people dicking about and using a printer as a display, or installing a gaming PC in a toilet or using stupid things like kids toys, wiimotes, or Donkey Kong bongos as controllers

Loved the Gaming chair!

I also enjoyed when he installed a whole bunch of malware and then called tech support for help, stupid, pointless, yet amusing.

[Stephen Coates]

I'm rather liking using my Bluetooth headphones. The lack of a cable is actually quite nice. It sucks having to charge them though, and sometimes the Bluetooth connection drops when there's no audio for a period. I don't know if that is an issue with the headphones or an issue with Windows 7's bluetooth driver.

I'd happily upgrade to some better ones at some point, but I don't think I'd get one without an optional cable as not everything has Bluetooth.

As for what we can see... I'm currently using a CRT monitor at 60Hz and whilst the flicker is definitely perceivable, I don't really notice it. I notice the convergence and focus issues more as I think this particular monitor has seen better days.

[Harrison]

It would have surprised me more of you were not using a CRT.

A lot of higher end headphones support both Bluetooth and wired. It's more likely the device or OS dropping the connection than the headphones. Never had an issue between My phone or most other device's and My headophones. But my car sometimes refused to connect to my phone. I actually have to turn the car off, wait until it's fully off, then restart it to reset the bluetooth.

[Stephen Coates]

Unfortunately my 24" LCD broke last year, and my 21" CRT conked out again a couple of years ago, and I haven't got round to repairing it yet. So, 17" CRT with intermittent fault to the rescue!

I really should get Linux installed on the laptop so I can try the Bluetooth headphones with that.

[Harrison]

Your Dell? That's a shame.

[J T]

I'm rather liking using my Bluetooth headphones. The lack of a cable is actually quite nice. It sucks having to charge them though, and sometimes the Bluetooth connection drops when there's no audio for a period. I don't know if that is an issue with the headphones or an issue with Windows 7's bluetooth driver.

I'd happily upgrade to some better ones at some point, but I don't think I'd get one without an optional cable as not everything has Bluetooth.

I got my first pair of true wireless earbuds almost 2 years ago. Before that I'd had one of the 'earbuds wired to a little neckband'

It's really nice having zero wires and they're pretty good for video calls too. But I have come close to losing them a couple of times.

I also have a cheap set of aldi 'over ear' wireless headphones. It took a lot of messing about with EQ to get a sound that I was happy with - but they were very cheap.