Try 30 fps on a large display like a 55 inch 4K TV, Then you will see how smooth it really is. 

Edited April 2, 20242 yr by RJC68

VERY noticeable. I can also see if something is running at 60 or much more (say 90 or 120). If three monitors are running the same program at 30, 60 and 90 fps i can see differences between them.

Now if you ask me if i can see the difference between 90 and 120... Probably not, that's way way harder for me. The higher the FPS, the bigger jump is required for me to notice anything.

yes I can

I don't see the difference, but I'm getting up there in age. It wouldn't surprise me if the ability to successfully perceive higher frame rate speeds is somehow related to age and other factors associated with human physiology. IRL not everyone is suited to become a fighter pilot or to hit a curve ball, either. Normally I run my system around 30-40 fps, but can achieve 60 fps with less demanding aircraft and locations. I prefer higher detail and higher dynamic ranges rather than frame rates, but I'm sure others will think differently.

VR and desktop monitor environments might also account for some of the difference in user reports. I would expect that the former would not look very good at lower frame rates, for example. Others might feel differently, but I'm not going to spend thousands of bucks for upgraded equipment so I don't see any blur while scanning around the cockpit on a 27 inch monitor, but I love the thought that there are some among us who will.

I was going to say watch a YouTube video at 30 FPS and 60 FPS and tell me again there's no difference. The research suggests however there is actually no difference for some people. Wow.

I absolutely can tell 30fps from 60.  It is super noticeable in things like action video games.  Although, I do have friends who either can't tell or don't notice.  I can't even play those action games on 30 fps, it is just too slow, especially any game that requires timing. 

I was a decent athlete back in the day, including a lot of time as a hockey goalie, so maybe there's something to the reaction time thing.  Even now that I'm older, I still have very good reaction times.  My body has slowed way down, but I don't feel like I've lost much in the way of reaction time.  I'm no worse at video games now than I was in my 20s. 

I know that top tier first person shooter players want to run 240fps.  I think you get into diminishing returns the higher you get, but I still think there's a definite difference. 

12 minutes ago, threexgreen said:

The research suggests however there is actually no difference for some people. Wow.

Yep, some people just can't see it. My wife doesn't see a difference between 30 and 144 (my monitor's max) and i was surprised she couldn't see what was so obvious to me "right there in your face" lol.

I believe that the question is poorly phrased and may result in unnecessary debates. At 30FPS, we have 30 images per second, while at 60FPS, we have 60 images per second. A higher frame rate per second (FPS) makes the image or video appear smoother. However, there are a few factors to consider that may affect our ability to detect the difference, such as our eyesight, the size of the screen (larger screens make the difference more noticeable), and the type of content we are viewing, such as sports or video games.

Lets just say that anyting less then 50 fps i get motion sickness when panning around with head tracking. So i would say yes. Night and day difference. 

4 minutes ago, Nuno Pinto said:

Yep, some people just can't see it. My wife doesn't see a difference between 30 and 144 (my monitor's max) and i was surprised she couldn't see what was so obvious to me "right there in your face" lol.

I'm having a lot of fun with my videos filmed on real flights at 60 FPS with my phone, enjoying the smoothness of the aircraft going past everything. The fact that others don't see it the same way blows my mind right now.

Absolutely.

The awareness really comes when one moves or pans the view around, especially with track ir or VR etc.  

If all you do is fly straight on AP in a jet, and never pan the view, then yes, I find it difficult.

I can easily tell the difference, and 30 FPS is not tolerable for me now.

Some people don't understand though.  This is not about looking forward out of the cockpit with a fixed view, where there is hardly any noticeable difference then, but there is when panning around. 
I have a head tracker so I need 60 FPS when panning around or it is simply too jerky / stuttery.

I think is is quite obvious there are differences between individuals, just like with normal muscular reactions.  That is why Astronauts etc. get measured on their response times.

So when people say 'there is no difference", what it really means is that there is no difference for them. 
And the statement (myth) that the human eye cannot see more than 30 FPS has been disproved so many times, anybody repeating it is basically just a troll or a flat-earther type. 

Hopefully this latest study will help end the debate.  I am not out to convince anybody.  If you are happy with 30 FPS anyway, good for you, I really don't care beyond that.

Edited April 2, 20242 yr by bobcat999

1 hour ago, RJC68 said:

Try 30 fps on a large display like a 55 inch 4K TV, Then you will see how smooth it really is. 

That is probably the crux of the matter, and precisely why I prefer to stick to 1080p resolution on a 24" monitor

Maybe you can add a poll in the first post for curiosity.

 

Between 30 and 60 yes, absolutely a very noticeable difference, more from that yes too, though not so noticeable. You can observe that in a monitor of 165Hz like mine, and move the cursor over a fixed screen image, and between 100Hz and 165Hz (Hz= times per second) I can notice clearly the more smooth cursor movement, not the noticeable huge difference like 30 and 60, though. The minimum acceptable for me in a game is 60fps, though I have played too in the past at the un-natural 30 for hardware and Sim reason, and was "acceptable" and "happy" too.

April fools has come and gone!