For those that are not seeing the bigger picture, I’ll be gracious and magnanimous. As with all monitors and tv’s there is the vertical and horizontal refresh rates. When viewing 60fps on the vertical refresh, for example, walking in a straight line or driving in the straight line you will not readily see the 60fps vertical refresh and it will be seen as smooth as the image is moving along the vertical plane, backwards and forwards. But when you put 60 fps on the horizontal refresh, IE moving the screen left or right is were the issue lies as this, the horizontal refresh rate can easily be seen. This why we have 200+mhz monitors so when the fps are high enough on the horizontal refresh rate the images moving left or right appear like “GLASS”. Case in point, FH5 I get 189fps pinned. I have a 200mhz monitor, my horizonal frame rate is 189fps, like glass. 60 FPS is a chunky cow and this is why people are complaining. I have a $12,000 PC and they want me to run as if it were a console is absurd and obviously unfair. I hope that explains things a bit better.
First of all its nonsense. I have high end pc too i7 12700 4080 rtx 10 tb ssd nvme etc. But i still use 60hz 4k monitor because its enough. High hz monitors for online game play and especially for First person shooting games for example if you are playing Call of Duty its for your advantage to have above 60hz monitor. This is single player Racing game and nobody needs 120 165 240 260 hz monitor etc.
I’ve been doing video footage myself. To get natural horisontal movement you also have to do like eyes do, have slow enough shutter speed.
- this created blur in each frame but this is how eyes find natural
When doing to fast shutter speed, it looks unnatural.
Typical example is waterfall, and how unnatural it looks if using fast shutter speeds.
Game suffer from this also, they create all clear images where in nature would be blur meating the eye.
So if games more emulated the eye, we would see less sharp images and not seeing refresh of screen as you mentioned.
I experimented some with doing 25p fps progressive or doing 50i interlaced. So 50i look better when a lot of horisontal movement.
And you based this on a Quora post that 2 people responded to? You can say whatever you want, but this isn’t just a single player game and yes, there is absolutely a difference between 60 Hz and 120 Hz and above.
No go search all of the internet its is like this. And probably i have more experience about pc than you. Because i have been using and searching all news about pc since 1995. So if you dont believe me go search. If it is worth to buy above 60hz monitor you can be sure i would buy it no matter price is. So i dont believe you and you dont believe me too there is nothing to discuss. Dont forget to ask all monitor and Pc retailers. I dont have to prove anythging to you.
There’s a hardly perceptible visual difference, but the biggest gain is in response.
IMO T10 should’ve aimed for 120 fps. Can’t believe they chose RT over that, probably they thought RT would be a bigger selling point, conveniently forgetting this isn’t Horizon and isn’t as casual friendly. Provided they nerfed the graphics enough, it would’ve been possible for even the XSS to hit 120 fps, as the XSS has a powerful CPU (for the time it was released).
This focus on RT over 120 fps helps fuel console wars (as main competitor GT7 doesn’t have it), but not the game.
Slow down there champ, I was working on computers long before that. The first computer I built personally was to play Chuck Yeager’s Air Combat (1991).
It’s always the same, immediately get offended and sling insults…Predictable…
I’m one who can notice a clear difference between 60Hz and 144Hz, after that I don’t notice much difference and to save anyone getting upset over discussing this on a Forum I’ll post this interesting article
How many frames per second can the human eye really see?
There is No scientific Fact so it’s up to the individual
What are the specs of this $12,000 PC? I don’t even see how that is even possible. What did you build the Maximum PC dream machine? That’s the only things I’ve seen that cost that much.
It’s $9k of fans, $3k computer
It’s actually closer 14 grand if both Acer x35 monitors are included, rtx 4090, Gigabyte Aurous master, PC $6000, 2x monitors 8 grand and not including full race cockpit setup 5x buttkickers, Logitech Pro DD wheel, wind simulation, Fanatec pedals, Thrustmaster hand brake and shifter with custom transducers…I’ve been reading every bodies posts, it’s the horizontal 60fps that is the problem, thank you for all comments. (My thoughts, Seems like a waste of money on a high end PC if the performance of the app will be that of a console. Again thank you for your comments. All good, stay safe,
Cheers
Ok, you added all the racing gear. Nice setup. Unfortunately Forza is not a game that would take advantage of all that.
Pretty fair to say you’re not their core target market.
Interesting, I have about 8k invested in mine, including dual OLED monitors, that’s without any racing gear. Even if I upped my card to the 40 series, I still wouldn’t get to 12k…lol. Chasing some of the new tech is moot cause as soon as you upgrade, the next BIG thing is announced. I build for about a 10 year window, and will upgrade if necessary. I still shiver at the cost of the racing kit I want. It’s to the point of real used car money, and not a crappy car either…lol.
TBH, I can’t see the difference between 72 and 144 fps. I see better looking game on high resolution and larger screen.
One little thing to consider, the 60fps only in multiplayer. All other aspects of the game are unlocked.
I’m running a 43" 144Hz @ 4k on a RTX2080Ti
The difference is massive from 60Hz and could never go back… Never
With all that is what it is I’m still looking forward to the next installment… even if it’s not this and that I’m sure T10 didn’t sit around.
I’ll be interested to hear your impressions on 5/10 and hope it scores better 
Sorry, I got lost in this line.
The whole point of who spend more on hardware deserves to be faster is pure trash.
Anyone knows the benefit of higher framerate like input lag. From my point of view locking 60fps in multiplayer makes a fair field for all.
The thing is, depending where you look, you end up questioning any input lag and if there’s any significance. Sure, things run smoother so it can SEEM that there is, but the jury is out over whether there’s actually a benefit of any significance in that respect. Marginal, maybe, but the leaning is more to “perceived” than “actual”
And the “I spent that much on a supercomputer to play a game” is, as you say, irrelevant. My bottom line is “If you don’t like it, nobody forces you to play it, you have a choice” because things have to be catered for ALL and not what is a small number spending that sort of money.