Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 15:35:35 -0500
Message-Id: <199902192035.PAA01466@envy.delorie.com>
From: DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com>
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <7ak89i$2bn$1@holly.prod.itd.earthlink.net> (vpoko@earthlink.net)
Subject: Re: Allegro and dirty rectangles and fps
References: <Pine DOT SOL DOT 3 DOT 95 DOT 990217080711 DOT 2544A-100000 AT uxmcc8> <36CB8E75 DOT 3599 AT club-internet DOT fr> <MPG DOT 11364a01a0b45ebf98a4a9 AT news DOT freeserve DOT net> <7ak89i$2bn$1 AT holly DOT prod DOT itd DOT earthlink DOT net>
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com


> Also, just to add to this thread, any framerate over 60fps is unrealistic
> because the human eye, on average, only refreshes 60 times per second.

If your software can handle fast enough refresh to match the refresh
rate of your monitor, that's the rate you want.  While the eye can't
really detect change faster than 50-60Hz, it *can* integrate a number
of too-fast frames into a single motion-blured image, which would
*appear* smoother.

If you can't refresh as fast as your monitor refresh, chances are
you're refreshing every other displayed frame (if you're vsync'd), so
a 72Hz monitor would refresh at 36Hz - too slow to simulate fluid
motion.