does the cpu/gpu have to constantly draw still imagery on the screen every frame i.e if you're just sitting at your desktop doing nothing or do the images stay on the monitor as is until something tells it to do otherwise? i assume it's the latter because of the nature of freezes/hangs, but i could be wrong
>>55219820
>File: 854.gif (2 MB, 500x374)
What's thet from? I know it's based on Ed Edd and Eddy, but more exactly?
to not go into too much detail;
the gpu contains the contents of the screen (the pixels) in a segment of memory called the framebuffer, this framebuffer is drawn to the screen constantly (related to "refresh rate", which i imagine you're familiar with)
freezes/hangs occur elsewhere, and has to do with when software changes the contents of said framebuffer, if software stop updating the framebuffer, the image on-screen appears to stop, but the framebuffer is still being sent to the screen consistantly
if the gpu stops sending the framebuffer, even momentarily, the display will lose sync, and will blank or show garbage (this doesn't happen unless your gpu is really fucked)
>>55220197
and to try to make an analogy;
imagine a camera pointed at a whiteboard
now imagine the camera is the display, and the whiteboard is the framebuffer
the camera is constantly sampling the whiteboard, and will mirror anything drawn on the board (by software)
if the person/software stops drawing to the board, that doesn't prevent the camera from sampling the board, even though the picture didn't change
>>55220233
I'm not OP but this was a great explanation. Thanks.
>>55220244
np, and if you're wondering, this method probably comes from how CRT's work
with a crt, you want things to be drawn for at a consistant rate, so things appear with consistant brightness and flicker, driving a display like this using the cpu directly takes a lot of resources, and if the software can't provide the right pixel at the right time, requires a framebuffer anyway (so at least the old pixels are there when the time comes)
way back in the day this was a thing, for example, the Atari 2600 has no framebuffer, as the cost of RAM chips was considered too high for a cheap video game console (yea, making a game on that must have been a lot of fun...)
these days you could build a display that has an internal framebuffer, and requires only updates to be sent to it, but legacy and familiar and all that kept it all the same
freesync/gsync deviates from this somewhat, though i don't know much about the technical side of those
>>55220369
>the cost of RAM chips was considered too high
to clarify, the cost of including enough RAM for a framebuffer was too high, the system does have some RAM
>freesync/gsync deviates from this somewhat
deviates from the current norm, that is
>>55219820
They don't freeze, the images are constantly rendering. If it was like that, then everytime you stopped using the mouse the screen would turn black.
>>55220369
funny thing to point out;
have you ever wondered why some atart 2600 games have a pattern of black lines on the left hand side?
the reason for it is that the cpu is processing something else (game logic) during those periods, the developers couldn't quite get the game logic to fit only in the periods of time around each visible line
