I have a shitty walled garden phone and turned the refresh to 60 and cut down motion and my battery life went from a few hours to a day. It really drained the battery for a bit of smoothness
Comment on Apple’s engineers carefully designing the last 60 Hz OLED screens on the planet
balsoft@lemmy.ml 2 days ago
I have never bought and will never buy an apple thing (because its’ a super-enshittified walled garden), but honestly I’m just fine with 60Hz. My phone supports 120Hz and I have switched it back to 60Hz because it gives me a couple extra hours of battery. I can tell the difference but it doesn’t bother me one bit. I’d even be OK with 30Hz if it was an option and had a significant battery life advantage.
amgine@lemmy.world 2 days ago
RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 1 day ago
I didn’t even realize the 60Hz option existed. I’ve trimmed all functions on the phone, like background refresh, to lower battery usage, but the refresh rate is a new one. TYM.
warm@kbin.earth 1 day ago
Latest phones have screens that go to 1Hz when nothing is moving. So you can get, nearly, the best of both worlds.
Fmstrat@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Interesting, I will never go back. I notice the difference easily now. Most newer phones also have variable refresh rate now, too, so the battery savings doesn’t apply as much on them since they run at 1hz a huge chunk of the time.
balsoft@lemmy.ml 20 hours ago
Ah, interesting. I don’t think my phone does that. Then again it’s a cheapy chinese one.
If I could get 120Hz with no perceivable difference to battery life I might indeed keep that on.
Funkt4st1c@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Id rather 144hz at 1080p than 60hz at 4k. My eyes arent good enough and my brain isnt quick enough to see those tiny details you lose at 1080p, but god i hate low framerates.
I hate interpolation even more, and upscaling makes me wanna kill a guy. Just rawdog 1080p 144 times a second please
Junkers_Klunker@feddit.dk 2 days ago
I’m with you on this one. 1080p is perfect for me, higher might technically be better but I’m not sitting close enough for that to matter. What does matter though is framerate, but I will rather settle for a low fps if it is stable rather than high fps with low 1%.
meekah@discuss.tchncs.de 1 day ago
1440p is the sweet spot for me for a 27 inch screen. Agreed on the need for high refresh ratez though
warm@kbin.earth 1 day ago
Nothing scales right at 1440p. 1080p was standard for so long that everything was made for it. Then 1440p comes along, 33.3333333333333333333...% bigger and it cant scale, so everything ends up bigger or smaller than intended.
4K is at least 100% bigger, so its just a better definition 1080p.
For games, there's no reason we cant have 4K and high framerates with current hardware, well... except for money, publishers/developers dont want to spend the time.
meekah@discuss.tchncs.de 1 day ago
I’m not scaling anything on my 1440p monitor, though I see your point.