If they INSIST that it MUST be 60 Hz, I'd accept the consolation/compromise of 60 Hz but 0ms-ish latency. (Maybe they already do it that way.)
As in waiiiiit until the 16.67ms between frames is almost up while sampling inputs, then bam!, render quicky, bam!, transfer it over a link that could carry more than 60 frames per second, bam!, fast OLED display. Each frame fresh and close to input.
To the why?-sayers: Because the difference is noticeable. We can get all philosophical and discuss whether it's a competitive advantage for someone to not notice the difference, or vice versa. Why the why?, why not just… take us difference-noticers on our word? Like… we're not taking your 60Hz 16.67ms crunchiness away from you?
[–] oceanplexian 2 days ago
[–] vitaflo 2 days ago
[–] UltraSane 2 days ago
[–] xattt 2 days ago
Sounds like you'd buy the RapidWipe 120 wipers. Much smoother sweep, but you'll go through a windshield a week.
/s
[–] jve 3 days ago
You didn't convince me.
[–] AnthonBerg 2 days ago
It's extremely interesting, and I'll be frank here, that people who just can't tell the difference are usually judgy and kind of status- and comparison-oriented towards people. In my experience. Others may not notice that difference.
Like, is the battery running out or is a setting misconfigured somewhere? I won’t spend a dime buying any device that can’t hit at least 90-100hz+