On 10/26/07, Greg Ewing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> And even if you were doing something, unless you have
> a 900fps monitor to go with that, it doesn't do you
> any good at all.
No, because if your framerate is 900fps, but your refresh rate is 60fps,
then every 60th of a second, the most up-to-date frame to that point is
drawn. At 900fps, then, at max, the frame was rendered 1/900th of a second
ago. If, however, your frame rate is 60fps, like your refresh rate, the
frame was rendered 1/60th of a second ago. That's 15 times the delay. So,
if you're moving an object across the screen at a constant speed, you'll
get, every 60th of a second, with 900fps/60fps refresh time, a frame that
shows, at worst, where the object was 1/900th of a second ago. With
60fps/60fps refresh time, you'll get, at worst, a frame which shows where
the object was 1/60th of a second ago. I'd opt for the one which shows more
precisely where the object is. True, a small difference, but a difference.
With motion blurring, one can do that with OpenGL; it's called
"Fullscreen Antialiasing". So it is possible. Of course, because this
lowers the framerate again, I often don't include it with my programs.
Ian
