Reply 
Page 1 of 7 1 2 3 ... Last>>
Results 1 to 15 of 93

Thread: 120Hz VS. 240Hz

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    13,680

    Default 120Hz VS. 240Hz


    I should know what this is, but have blanked out.


    Can someone be so kind as to give me a "for dummies" explanation?

    Thanks in advance!
  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    632
    faster response time? Less motion blur? I think. I thougt 120hz was suppose to be the shit. Perfect 24p playback and all.
  3. #3
    I'd argue that it gives perfect 24p playback. I have a 1st gen 120Hz Samsung and for some reason, it looks better when I play movies at 60p. I did comparisons on a few movies, both HD DVD and Blu Ray, and it was pretty much unanimous that 120Hz struts it's stuff at 60p. Now I haven't seen 240Hz in action, so maybe 240Hz does it better?
    Samsung LN-T4069F 40" 120Hz HDTV
    Pioneer VSX-820K
    Fronts: Yamaha NS-A738 x 2
    Center: Yamaha NS-AC40X
    Rears: Klipsch KSP-S6 x2
    (<100) - Toshiba XA2 - (37) - Panasonic DMP BD65P-K
    I learned everything I needed to know frm G.I. Joe!
  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by bettzysdaddy View Post
    I'd argue that it gives perfect 24p playback. I have a 1st gen 120Hz Samsung and for some reason, it looks better when I play movies at 60p. I did comparisons on a few movies, both HD DVD and Blu Ray, and it was pretty much unanimous that 120Hz struts it's stuff at 60p. Now I haven't seen 240Hz in action, so maybe 240Hz does it better?
    Turn off Auto Motion Plus to get true 24 FPS playback. AMP's effect is more noticeable with a 3:2'd 1080p60 signal than with a 1080p24 signal.

    Faster response times? I don't think so. The electronics' refresh rate (240 Hz) doesn't aide the liquid crystals with their slow response time. It's all just buzzwords now, and silly frame interpolation brought on by things like Sony's Motion Enhancer and Samsung's Auto Motion Plus. These generate so many artifacts that it makes me sick to see it become the next "big thing" in TVs.

    Motion blur? Yes, the frame interpolation tries to defeat some of the motion blur that is caught in 24 Hz film, but again why would you want to alter the source? Also, it still does nothing for the motion blur inherent in liquid crystal based displays.
  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    13,680
    The upper end Samsung's and upper end Sony Bravia's have the 240Hz feature.
  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,256
    My Sony TV has the "motionflow" feature, and i ended up turning it off because it made everything film wise look half-sped up and weird looking. Seemed to go fine with video games and the odd sports thing on TV though.
  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    13,680
    Quote Originally Posted by Lone_Gunmen View Post
    My Sony TV has the "motionflow" feature, and i ended up turning it off because it made everything film wise look half-sped up and weird looking. Seemed to go fine with video games and the odd sports thing on TV though.


    I've noticed that "motion flow" nonsense and I don't like it.
  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,256
    Quote Originally Posted by cheez avenger View Post
    I've noticed that "motion flow" nonsense and I don't like it.
    Yeah it's pretty overhyped and crappy. I saw it when i got my TV home from the shop, hulked out about it, then turned it off in the settings
  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    13,680
    Quote Originally Posted by Lone_Gunmen View Post
    Yeah it's pretty overhyped and crappy. I saw it when i got my TV home from the shop, hulked out about it, then turned it off in the settings


    My GF's mom has two SOny Bravias, and I calibrated them both; when we were watching Sin City, I noticed the "motion blur" and turned it down. I think it was at 120Hz, so I tweaked it to a lower Hz setting.



    I just want to know what makes 240Hz so special.
  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Irvine, CA
    Posts
    280
    120Hz vs 240Hz isn't going much more than a marketing gimmick. To have higher refresh rate simply means more frames in a second. That honestly doesn't mean squat if the TV's response time, for LCD's specifically, are not up to par. A lot of TV's run from 4ms-8ms. There are a couple that are at 2ms, but that's very rare. A lot of TVs are in the 8ms or higher range, which coupled with a refresh rate of 240Hz, still means you are going to get motion lag regardless.

    The limiting factor for LCDs is still the millisecond response time. When I had my Sony XBR5, even with 120Hz refresh rate, the motion resolution was still not up to my expectations. There was still an issue with the trailing and slower response time that smeared images especially when it came to faster paced scenes.

    "Motion Enhancers", or frame interpolations, are a whole other thing, too. I really, REALLY don't like them for film based material. They make things look "half-sped up" or worse yet, like a home video. Some may like that look, but I definitely am not one of them. On top of that, as good as the "guessing" algorithm is to try to figure out what to fill the missing frames with, there's still too many times when it guesses wrong and introduces adverse digitized defects in the picture. That was more distracting even beyond the home video look for me.
    TV: Pioneer Elite Pro-151FD
    Pre/Pro: Denon AVP-A1HDCI
    Amplifier: D-Sonic M2500-7
    Blu-ray/DVD Player Oppo BDP-83
    Speakers: GR-Research X-Voce, LS-9's, AV-1RS (x4)
  11. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Irvine, CA
    Posts
    280
    Cheez, what you are 'turning down' isn't the refresh rate, it's the frame interpolation. LCDs have a single native refresh rate, which is why 120Hz was such a big deal because it was easily divisible by 30/60, for video based material and then 24 for film based material. As I said in my post above, 240Hz is really not much more than just additional frames per second.

    When it comes down to it, with frame interpolation turned off, the TV will simply multiply each frame to get to the necessary refresh rate, 120 or 240. So film based material will have each frame multiplied five times, video either two times for 60fps content or four times for 30fps content to fill the 120 frames needed to match the 120Hz refresh rate.

    For frame interpolation, instead of simply just multiplying the individual frame, it will try to figure out what information/image should go in between each of the real frames.
    TV: Pioneer Elite Pro-151FD
    Pre/Pro: Denon AVP-A1HDCI
    Amplifier: D-Sonic M2500-7
    Blu-ray/DVD Player Oppo BDP-83
    Speakers: GR-Research X-Voce, LS-9's, AV-1RS (x4)
  12. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    13,680
    Quote Originally Posted by Jon Liu View Post
    Cheez, what you are 'turning down' isn't the refresh rate, it's the frame interpolation. LCDs have a single native refresh rate, which is why 120Hz was such a big deal because it was easily divisible by 30/60, for video based material and then 24 for film based material. As I said in my post above, 240Hz is really not much more than just additional frames per second.

    When it comes down to it, with frame interpolation turned off, the TV will simply multiply each frame to get to the necessary refresh rate, 120 or 240. So film based material will have each frame multiplied five times, video either two times for 60fps content or four times for 30fps content to fill the 120 frames needed to match the 120Hz refresh rate.

    For frame interpolation, instead of simply just multiplying the individual frame, it will try to figure out what information/image should go in between each of the real frames.


    Gotcha, that's what it was.


    Thanks John. This really helps me in my search for a new tv. It won't be such a big deal anymore.
  13. #13
    They're getting ready for the PS4 which will do 2160P at 240FPS.
  14. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Posts
    14,885
    Quote Originally Posted by Lone_Gunmen View Post
    My Sony TV has the "motionflow" feature, and i ended up turning it off because it made everything film wise look half-sped up and weird looking. Seemed to go fine with video games and the odd sports thing on TV though.
    That's because the feature is really more designed for video games and Sports broadcast... it's not meant to be used with Film, or at least it's best not to. By all means turn the feature on when watching football, I'm sure you'll be happier since the sorce is HD Cam anyway, but turn it off when you pop a bluray in.
    Toshiba 55" 55HT1U LCD (1080p@24fps) w/Tivo HD, Harmony 880
    HDM Players: Toshiba HD-A30, Samsung BD-P2500 (wow! reon!)
    Onkyo TX-605SR, F Polk Monitor 50s bi-amped, C CS1, Yamaha sur & sub
    X-Box 360, Wii, DreamCast, DS
    HDM Count - Hopless
    Wii: 0774-4826-1902, Disney: Guest13971, WB: crazzeto Uni: Locutus4657 Sony: crazzeto

    *view pictures of my home theater and movies (out dated)
  15. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Allentown PA
    Posts
    1,499
    What about 600 HZ sets? I've seen them only in plasma's. How much better are they than 120 HZ and 240 HZ sets, which I've primarily seen in LCD's?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts