Yet there are several possible reasons. I think they lack quality debugging tools to pinpoint the problem.
Wake up dude…Valve is just a company selling products like any other VR company.
Be smart and go read white papers from LCD manufacturers (not from Wikipedia tough…), then return here after at least a month of study and I’ll be glad to have a SERIOUS discussion with you or anyone else…
In another thread we talked, someone even linked a paper from EIZO who confirmed that and more, but neither the poster or you had took the time to read and study it…clearly…not a wise move…
One thing is repeating the things read on the net, from any source, like just a parrot, another is trying to get some understanding of the things you love and talk about in life…
LCD’s are most definitely capable of high refresh rate (Hz)
What you seem to be talking about is response time (usually measured in ms) which is something totaly different.
Edit: And yeah as @sjefdeklerk says, please provide links to at least one of the white papers you keep mentioning, shouldn’t be hard when you keep iterating that argument
Well, YOU are the one claiming here that LCD can’t reach 90 hz, so if you want people to take you serious, then you should at least post some proof here, instead of some vague comments on how we should do research.
Wait… u mean my 144hz gaming LCD isn’t really 144hz!!!
Totally different ? wow…
It’s the response time that let’s you how many times you can change the pixel in a given time (1 second in this case) and just do the math , 20ns response time, how many refreshes (FPS) can you get in 1 second…
Wow this thread is stupid.
NOT ME…but tech white papers on LCD’s…go read some real ones, and find the other thread where we already discussed this shit in a deeper way…I will not repeat myself.
You’re free to believe to the tech mumbo-jumbo…this is one reason you will be cheated into believing false things, and buying useless products, over and over again…
True it could be simply gpus’ are not able to drive it &/pr dp cable actial limits vs theorectical. Bit maim thing we do know it starts b4 scaler/displays.
I will not…just beacuse to this point I’m convinced it makes no difference, if someone really want to understand something, he will make anything necessary to find what he looks for.
Go google it, find it…it will make no difference if I repeat the things I already said, people don’t want to know things, they just want a lunch served…(and even if you give them proof, they just discard it…)
Yes how old are the white papers & have they speced newer technology lcd or clpl displays? (The clpl of course is highly doubful).
Like i said remember lcd will never supercede plasma. So if thats true where is plasma now? Virtuslly extinct.
Spoken like someone who can’t post simple links to validate your points(if not outdated that is)
Sure googled it. Found absolutely nothing verifying your claim. You just keep repeating your opinions as facts without any backing on them. It is still in your court
'Cmon…such a mixed soup of nonsense tech things don’t even deserve an answer…you pretty much showed your level of understanding of some things, I’m out of this…
And XabbuSwe must win a prize…he did the effort of searching the net in the next 3 minutes and rushed to reply “found nothing…” , see why I say it makes no difference if you explain things or give links to stupid people ?..
Ok at this point we can safely ignore you. Wild claims and then a ‘Google it’ as proof haha how old are you?
The link was posted by someone telling me I was wrong about the subject I was triying to explain, go and find the thread, not so much difficult since you’re a moderator…and even that, that link only confirmed what I was saying, totally contradicting who linked it presuming to contest what I was trying to explain…
Only proves the dumbness of some people here…
You have showed you don’t understand display tech at all so I recommend that you read up on the terminology, here is a good place to start.
Reminds me of the Hillary vs. Trump discussions on Reddit.
No puppet. No puppet. No you are the puppet
Again…that article confirms what I’m saying, plus…it lacks various explanations on LCD physics tech, and mostly talks about the algorithms driving these display, quoting it: “The vast majority of LCD monitors will run at a refresh rate of 60Hz under their native resolution.” That is the TRUE physical limit these displays can reach in real world.
Vast Majority! Not to be confused will all. Thank you for validating your tech awareness.
So gaming Monitors 144hz, my old lcd monitors at 75hz native etc. So not true of all or newer tech.
How’s the unreplacable plasma holding up?