Had this reflection that 144hz screens where the only type of screen I knew, that was not a multiple of 60. 60 Hz - 120hz - 240hz - 360hz

And in the middle 144hz Is there a reason why all follow this 60 rule, and if so, why is 144hz here

  • r00ty@kbin.life
    3·
    1 year ago

    Just to point out. I had 120hz on a CRT monitor back in the late 90s/early 2000s. The resolution was terrible though (either 640x480 or 800x600). At good resolutions (1024x768 or 1280x960) you were generally stuck with 75 to 90 at best.

    60hz LCD screens were one of the reasons there was resistance among game players to move to LCD. Not to mention earlier units took a VGA input and as such the picture quality was usually bad compared to CRT and added latency. People buying LCDs did it for the aesthetics when they first became available. Where I worked, for example only the reception had an LCD screen.

    Also, on a more pedantic point. 50hz is the power line frequency in the majority of the world.

    • astraeus@programming.dev
      1·
      1 year ago

      On your pedantic point, I can’t argue. However, I can say 60Hz power cycles are what set in stone the 60Hz standard. This is in spite of the fact that a lot of countries didn’t even have 60Hz screens until screen controller clock rates were decoupled from power line frequencies.

    • Meho_Nohome@sh.itjust.works
      11·
      1 year ago

      That proves that the USA is 10 better than the rest of the world.

      (Except American Samoa, Anguilla, Antigua, Aruba, Bahamas, Belize, Bermuda, Brazil, Canada, Cayman Islands, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guam, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, South Korea, Mexico, Micronesia, Montserrat Islands, Nicaragua, Okinawa, Palmyra Atoll, Panama, Peru, Philippines, Puerto Rico, St. Kitts & Nevis Islands, Saudi Arabia, Suriname, Tahiti, Taiwan, Trinidad & Tobago, Venezuela, Virgin Islands, and western Japan)