EDIT 2025-01-24: We are willing to help fund an official blind test scientific study as a collaboration on this. We already have 30+ citations in peer reviewed research papers. Please contact us.
240+ Hz Not Just For Games: 4x & 8x Geometrics for Mainstream Win
Human visibility of refresh rates are massively amplified with OLED. Many of us in the industry have noticed the mainstream sees 120fps 120Hz LCD versus 480fps 480Hz OLED much more clearly than 60Hz-versus-120Hz.
Unlike old myths of a “refresh rate cutoff” of human visibility, it’s a geometrics behavior similar to a camera shutter (1/120sec) versus (1/480sec). Bigger geometrics are more human visible. This avoids the useless effects of refresh rate incrementalism, like comparing a 1/144sec camera shutter versus 1/165sec camera shutter.
Pursuit Camera Photographs (Moving Camera = Simulate Tracking Eyes)
We did pursuit photography of TestUFO Ghosting Deluxe (Motion blur from eye tracking of moving objects).
Here is a comparison of 120Hz LCD versus 480Hz OLED, using a pursuit camera, a peer reviewed technique that produces honest photographs (WYSIWYG) of perceived display motion blur.
The combination of GtG=0 and the 4x frame rate increases, produces a shockingly human visible difference that is very mainstream. You simultaneously get flicker-free and blur-free, with CRT motion clarity. Newer 240 Hz+ desktop OLEDs do not use PWM, unlike some smartphone AMOLEDs, which also makes them more ergonomic as well.
GtG Needs Be Zero. GtG Under Refreshtime Is Not Enough.
Remember Grey-to-Grey (GtG) pixel response times is not the same as Moving Picture Response Time (MPRT). See our GtG versus MPRT article, which covers other nitty gritty details like GtG 0%->100% and GtG 10%->90%. However, let’s focus on the ball of mainstream humankind benefits:
To understand pixel response better, here’s a camera shutter analogy:
- GtG behaves similarly to a shutter slowly opening / slowly closing.
- MPRT behaves similarly to a shutter already fully open.
In fact, this analogy is very accurate for LCDs, since LCD subpixels are essentially light valves (shutters!) blocking/unblocking light from a backlight. When you track eyes on TestUFO Moving Photo, you get:
For best sample-and-hold performance, you want lowest GtG and MPRT.
- Fastest MPRT requires high Hz and high framerate. (MPRT = frametime)
- Fastest GtG occurs with GtG practically zero, like OLED can do. (GtG = 0.00ms)
This is why refresh rate increases on OLED is much more human-visible than on LCD.
Turning Niche Gamer Improvements Into Mainstream Improvements
There is a long-term slow mainstreaming of 120 Hz, arriving in televisions, consoles, phones, and tablets. Over the long-term, 120 Hz filters down to mainstream products.
You scroll and pan many apps. Browser scrolling. PDF/Word scrolling. Map panning. 480Hz helps ergonomics!
240 Hz & 480 Hz OLED Surprisingly Helps Office Productivity
Despite worries about burn in (remember, LCD can degrade too, according to RTINGs), modern OLEDs are becoming spectacular help to office productivity, as Blur Busters has been dogfooding OLED for office use.
TechSpot agrees too:
The 240Hz refresh rate at 4K is much better than I was expecting for productivity work
The few brave mainstream reviewers remarked that OLED appeared to bring CRT motion clarity to their office work, without the ergonomic problem of flicker or strobe backlights creating eyestrain.
Framerate-Based Display Motion Blur Reduction is Spectacular on OLED
We love LCD strobing, especially as LightBoost / ULMB helped birth Blur Busters. That being said, not everyone can stand flicker (e.g. eyestrain & latency).
It is easier to use impulsing techniques for lower frame rates (CRT, plasma, BFI, strobe backlights), because framerate-based motion blur reduction requires frame rates formerly considered as insanity:
- Display motion blur is pulsetime on strobed. (Assumptions: squarewave strobe, framerate=Hz, GtG=0)
- Display motion blur is frametime on sample-and-hold. (Asumptions: GtG=0)
One difficulty of framerate-based motion blur reduction is GPU framerate or the pick-poison decision of 4x+ framegen (etc). This means users need a choice of framerate-based motion blur reduction, or strobe-based motion blur reduction. These are the two main methods of reducing display motion blur.
Slow 120Hz Mobile LCDs With Nonzero GtG Hides Benefits of High-Hz
Battery life of 120Hz+ LCDs is no longer a problem in recent Microsoft Surface and Apple MacBooks, both of which can last over ten hours. However, most 120 Hz is still a slow-GtG mobile LCD with no overdrive tuning.
- 60-versus-120 on overdriveless laptop LCD: As little as ~1.1x difference.
- 60-versus-120 on desktop gaming LCD: Approximately ~1.5x difference.
- 60-versus-120 on fast OLED: A full perfect 2x like camera shutter.
The Blur Busters Law (double Hz & framerate = half display motion blur) becomes fully accurate at GtG=0. Not many people (especially executives) know about the secret major upgradefeel achieved by using large geometrics (4x+ Hz) and instant pixel response (GtG=0) such as 240Hz OLEDs.
The above 120Hz pursuit camera image is from the world’s most common 120Hz LCD from a big-name laptop vendor that also sells a very common premium smartphone that competes with Android. So, the upgradefeel is actually more like 1.1x better than 60Hz, all the way to 8x better than 60Hz! Even if you have a gaming 120Hz LCD, the upgradefeel is still large, 1.5x better than 60Hz to 8x better than 60Hz, still a ginormous upgradefeel. This article is intentionally written for the mainstream who’s only seen bad 120Hz LCDs.
High Refresh Rates Is an Office Accessibility Feature To Some Of Us
Some people get motion sick from display motion blur from scrolling/panning. In this sense, high refresh rates (GtG=0 and extreme Hz) becomes an Accessibility Feature for some of us who get motionsick from stutters or motion blur.
We can use strobing to eliminate motion blur. Unfortunately, flicker is also an eyestrain trigger for some people. The only way to eliminate both motion blur and flicker, is to use ultra-high Hz at GtG=0.
To be fair, low refresh rates (e.g. DELL office monitor at 24 Hz) are also an Accessibility Feature like Apple’s “Reduce Motion”, but some of us need high refresh rates to solve our headaches. Users need choice of both. The same 1000Hz blurless OLED should support 24Hz + GPU Motion Blur too, as everybody gets motion sickness differently.
We currently expect 1000 Hz OLEDs to hit the market by 2027, possibly being demoed by 2025-2026.
In year 2001, the first 4K monitor (the IBM T-221) cost as much as a car. Refresh rate doesn’t have to stay expensive forever, as even a laptop GPU can scroll office and browser apps at 480fps 480Hz now too (a mere midrange Surface or MacBook M1 can).
EEVBlog: The world’s first 4K display for the price of a car. Now a Walmart Boxing Day Special.
Just like 4K Costing As Much As a Car, Higher Hz Becomes Cheaper In Future
While not all of us need 1000Hz, we didn’t need 4K initially either. We lost CRT motion clarity a long ago, but most of us hated the flicker of CRT tubes. Finally, we can have our flickerfree cake and blurlessly eat it too.
- Office ergonomic benefits, as simple pans / scrolls are easy to do on midrange GPUs.
- Lower latency for low fps. No 16.7ms scanout lag. Even 60fps frames refresh in 1/480sec at 480Hz!
- Display simulators such as our brand new CRT electron beam simulator (now in RetroArch!) and our future Plasma subfield simulator shader for future 480-600Hz+ OLEDs. Large native:simulated Hz ratios enables getting much closer to 60fps CRT motion clarity on high-Hz OLED.
The cake is not a lie. You don’t need 480 fps+ in gaming to benefit from 480 Hz+ ergonomics.
Properly Designing A Scientific Human Visibility Blind Test For 120 vs 480
Goal: People off the street observing 120Hz vs 480Hz OLED is more human visible than 60Hz vs 120Hz.
We aim to prove mainstream humankind benefits of ultra high Hz, while considering error margins (e.g. game optimization, mouse optimization, etc), while focussing on more mainstream situations (e.g. scrolling a web browser).
We have now successfully completed an internal blind study (not yet published) that shows 120-vs-480 is more human visible than 60-vs-120. We are now looking for partners (contact us) to fund an official public blind study on this.
We have determined the necessary correct scientific variables to do a successful confirmation using mere people off the street, using the following more mainstream study criteria:
- Use a large-FOV display of minimum 30-50 degrees FOV
Therefore, use a desktop monitor rather than a mobile device, such as 480Hz OLED
Wider FOV gives more time for a human to detect imperfections in motion. - Use GtG=0.00ms or as close as technologically possible
Therefore, use OLED rather than LCD which diminishes Hz differences.
- Use high-Hz blurless sample-and-hold
Therefore, use 480Hz+ OLED. 480fps sample-hold has less motion blur than early strobe backlights. - Use framerate=Hz
Therefore, avoid games that run at erratic/low frame rates - Use common use cases: Simple scrolling/panning
Therefore, test using a productivity application or web browser that does smooth scrolling, not a fluctuating game. Current 2020s-era GPUs easily scroll at 480fps nowadays. - Use motion speeds several times faster than max Hz
Therefore, use ~2000 pixels/sec scrolling speed for 480fps 480Hz OLED.
This is because persistence motion blur is the pixel step per frame on sample and hold at GtG=0.00. - Avoid jitter/stutter error margins
Therefore, don’t benchmark using mouse-driven movements that can be erratic due to mouse Hz, mouse jitter, mouse pad imprecision, mouse sensor imprecision. Instead, benchmark using automatic smooth scrolling.
NOTE: Mouse benchmarks are useful, but they require full researcher understanding of the jitter error margins in a computer mouse. They simply distract from the known humankind-benefits of high Hz, as a known error margin well-understood by Blur Busters. We successfully convinced researchers to cover the humankind benefits of 8000Hz mice, even though game performance sometimes lag behind them. However, for this specific blind study, we focus on isolating the display Hz humankind benefits first.
One suggested scientific blind test to satisfy skeptics (i.e. equivalent of a microphone-drop) is the following:
- OLED of at least 480Hz or more, of at least 27 inches or bigger;
- Field of view no less than 30 to 40 degrees, representative of desktop computer use;
- Three refresh rates compared;
- Middle Hz point (e.g. 120Hz) that is at least somewhat above flicker fusion threshold;
NOTE: It helps to understand the stutter-to-blur continuum; look at 2nd UFO for 20 seconds. - Lower comparison pair has smaller geometric (e.g. 60Hz vs 120Hz is 2x difference);
- Higher comparison pair has bigger geometric (e.g. 120Hz vs 480Hz is 4x or more difference);
- Therefore, 60 vs 120 vs 480 is recommended;
- Therefore, 1920 pixels/sec is recommended (e.g. speed about 2x to 4x max Hz).
Note: This is because the pixel step is the sample-and-hold persistence blur. We want to go somewhat beyond this level to amplify motion blur differences between 60 vs 120 vs 480 in an eye-tracking panning/scrolling test. - Suggested demo or similar, in full screen mode, with all overlays disabled:
TestUFO Panning Map Test at 1920 pixels/sec + Configurable Frame Rate
Note: Upon request, we can modify the TestUFO to be more efficient with the blind study, like an automatic hotkey randomization between a given set of frame rates. - Randomize A/B blind test (single monitor)
– First pass: [60fps, 120fps, 480fps] randomly chosen framerate demo of Panning Map;
– A slight delay or changing rooms (to prevent user from directly witnessing framerate transition);
– Second pass: [60fps, 120fps, 480fps] randomly chosen framerate demo of Panning Map;
– Ask user to inspect the map, try to read street map labels, this causes user to judge motion clarity;
– Ask user which screen (1st or 2nd viewed) was clearer, or same. - Randomize A/B comparisions (2 monitors side by side)
– [60fps, 120fps, 480fps] randomly chosen framerate on screen #1;
– [60fps, 120fps, 480fps] randomly chosen framerate on screen #2;
– Ask user to inspect the map, try to read street map labels, this causes user to judge motion clarity;
– Ask user which screen is better, and by how much (no difference, slightly better, much better).
Expected scientific result: In both blind test and in comparisions, 120fps vs 480fps shows to be more human visible than 60fps vs 120fps, when these specific scientific variables are correctly optimized this way, with common smooth scrolling/panning use cases.
As long as the scientific variables are mutually agreed, we are willing to help fund this cost of an off-the-public-street scientific study; please contact us. The immediate goal is to raise awareness of mainstream humankind benefits of high Hz.
The test is optimized in a way to intentionally highlight humankind benefits of very high display refresh rates in mudane situations that are unrelated to gaming. The test is also metaphorically equivalent to the temporal version of more dramatically comparing 480p-versus-4K instead of 720p-vs-1080p of today’s refresh rate incrementalism. It was observed at DisplayWeek 2024 convention, nigh all attendees could clearly see differences on the 480Hz OLED at VESA’s booth.
The longer-term goal is increased popularity of high Hz. Another long-term goal is once the definite mainstream humankind benefits of Hz are shown without weak links, more software (games) & computer hardware (mice) will be better optimized for high Hz in a way that is more visible to the mainstream outside of niche gamers.
Other Reading
Mark Rejhon, the founder of Blur Busters is cited in over 30+ peer reviewed papers (Google Scholar).
- Blur Busters Area 51 Research Portal – Founder’s pick of the very best Blur Busters content.
- The Stroboscopic Effect of Finite Frame Rates – Another artifacts of low frame rates and refresh rates.
- Frame Generation Developer Best Practices – Spacewarp reprojection without double images.
- GtG versus MPRT – Understanding the difference of different pixel response benchmarks.
- 1000 Hz Journey – Chief Blur Busters’ famous 2018 article on his prediction of 1000 Hz displays.