Variable refresh rate is a game-changer - but it has its limits.
V-sync judder didn’t happen, screen-tearing would (by and large!)
But let’s be clear: VRR is not a cure-all.
It’s not a saviour for poor game performance.
Let’s talk about VRR basics.
Displays have a native refresh rate - whether it’s 60Hz, 120Hz, 165Hz or whatever.
Without VRR you have limited options for smooth, consistent play.
First of all, there’s the idea of matching game frame-rate to the screen’s refresh rate.
Every display refresh gets a new frame.
In this case, every other refresh receives a new frame from the source hardware.
When a new frame completes rendering on the GPU, it triggers a refresh on the monitor.
I say, “tear-free gaming” - but there are limitations and caveats.
Every display has a VRR range: 48Hz to 60Hz or 48Hz to 120Hz are common examples.
If game performance is above or below the range, things get a little tricky.
Some displays exhibit flicker when rapidly moving through variable refresh rates.
In these scenarios, VRR cannot deliver good, smooth, consistent performance.
We often see stutters in the 30ms range and upwards.
Running flat out at 120Hz, you’re at 8.3ms.
At 240Hz, it’s 4.17ms per frame.
you’re free to’t fail to notice those longer frames.
Stuttering can also manifest in less problematic - but still noticeable - ways.
If you’re running nicely in a 200-240fps window, that’s a variation of around 0.8ms per frame.
That’ll be a 2.1ms variation.
Despite what looks like a vast chasm in frame-rate, VRR can still work well.
The utility of VRR lessens dramatically here as the technology cannot smooth over relatively large stuttering effects.
So what does this all mean?
For me, this means VRR is not a magic bullet.
We cannot excuse a game’s issues now that VRR screens are becoming ever more common.
VRR cannot fix a game.
