>BTW, remember, most people still have 60hz monitors. Min latency can only be 16.6ms, and "fast as possible" is just going to vary inbetween 16.6 and 33.3ms.
No the minimum will be 0ms, since if the signal arrives just before the monitor refreshes then it doesn't need to wait. This is why people disable VSync/FPS caps in videogames - because rendering at higher than <60FPS> means that the latest frame is more up-to-date when the <60Hz> monitor refreshes.
The maximum monitor-induced latency would be 16.6ms. Which puts the average at 8.3ms. Again, not counting CPU/GPU latency.
33.3ms would be waiting about two frames, which makes no sense unless there's a rendering delay.
The article is about testing actual user experienced latency, and Mutter still buffers 1 frame. Actual observed latency is going to be between 16.6ms and 33.3ms before the user can see anything hit their eyeballs.
No the minimum will be 0ms, since if the signal arrives just before the monitor refreshes then it doesn't need to wait. This is why people disable VSync/FPS caps in videogames - because rendering at higher than <60FPS> means that the latest frame is more up-to-date when the <60Hz> monitor refreshes.
The maximum monitor-induced latency would be 16.6ms. Which puts the average at 8.3ms. Again, not counting CPU/GPU latency.
33.3ms would be waiting about two frames, which makes no sense unless there's a rendering delay.