Quote Originally Posted by boxleitnerb View Post
You don't speak for everyone and you cannot possibly define what is generally noticeable and what is not.
It isn't me who is defining "noticeable". Read any article or scientific paper about perceptive latency and you'll likely come to the same conclusion.

When I make a statement, don't think for a second that I haven't researched it to an extensive degree.

Links to some of said papers:

http://www.stuartcheshire.org/papers/LatencyQuest.html

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16639613 (link to PDF @ source)

http://www.perceptionweb.com/abstract.cgi?id=p240749

If you have an account @ Sciverse / Science Direct, there are several other articles in their archives which discuss the same thing. Unfortunately, I can't post links to them due to copyright terms but you'll quickly get the idea after Googling a bit.

However, I will distill it down into plain speak: In extensive lab tests with and without human subjects, a time of 48 frames per second (ie: 20.83ms) was deemed to be the threshold at which the majority of people anbd test instruments saw completely smooth display images or refreshes.

One test actually went so far as to rapidly flash a lightbulb at variable speeds in order to demonstrate when people would see it "flicker". That threshold for 95% of the participants was at 50 flashes per second (ie: exactly 20ms).

Not sure how much more information anyone could be looking for here....