The PTR is currently down and is being updated to a new build, but in the mean time Blizzard has updated the PTR Patch Notes!
http://www.wowhead.com/?patchnotes=3.3.3-ptr
Included in this new build are several changes to some classes, such as Mangle's debuff duration increased from 12 seconds to 60 seconds. There are also other class changes for Mages, Rogues and Warriors.

Another little gem was added in this build was the ability to your frame rate to an eye blistering 200 frames per second.
Read on after the break for all of the changes!
Blizzard said:

Druids Talents

Feral Combat
Mangle: The debuff from this talent now lasts 60 seconds, up from 12 seconds.


Mages Talents

Fire

Empowered Fire: This talent now also applies to Pyroblast damage.

Torment the Weak: This talent now also applies to Pyroblast damage.


Rogues Talents

Subtlety

Serrated Blades: This talent now allows the rogue to ignore up to 3/6/9% of the target's armor, rather than a fixed amount of armor ignored per level of the rogue.


Warriors Talents

Arms

Trauma: The debuff from this talent now lasts 60 seconds, up from 15 seconds.

Protection

Improved Revenge: This talent can no longer trigger a stun, and instead causes Revenge to strike an additional target for 50/100% of Revenge's damage.


Items

Druids : Glyph of Mangle: This glyph now provides 10% increased damage done by Mangle instead of increasing the duration of the debuff.

Priest Tier-10 4-Piece Healing Set Bonus: Redesigned. This bonus now increases the effectiveness of the caster's Power Word: Shield and Renew spells by 5%.

Technical


Frame Rate: A maximum capacity of 200 frames per second has been added.




am i ok?

This post has been edited by xiaopuyo: Mar 4 2010, 11:14 PM

you dumb?

1) you can already do that (i did it with TBC, i mean, my pc, yeah)

2) ur eye can only detect aproximately 30ish frames/sec. remainders are typically use for buffers, or plain epeen

Are you sure 30? i can tell the diff between 30 fps and 60 fps++

go wiki it.

yes our eyes cant perceive anything faster than that threshold. 100fps or 200 its not difference to your eyes.

http://www.100fps.com/how_many_frames_can_humans_see.htm



another interesting read
http://www.daniele.ch/school/30vs60/30vs60_3.html

This post has been edited by VonDrake: Mar 4 2010, 02:48 PM

Woo! Druid/Warrior buff!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frames_per_se...uman_eye_see.3F

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persistence_of_vision

difference yes, while it varies from each individual, the baseline of what average person can distinguish is around 30ish.

heres a fine example: movies are in 24fps (like ur avatar awsm 3D movies), you wanna tell me it lags now?
granted, video games and movies are rendered differently and the amount of motion and visual effects (like how a movie from cinema is projected and tends to be softer vs a direct lcd view and having a bunch of special effects like glow/shaders rendered live directly) will affect the result.

Sorry for being dumb ok?

This post has been edited by xiaopuyo: Mar 4 2010, 03:51 PM

y u /thread

I can tell the difference between a 30fps game and a 60fps game. Naturally, 60fps looks way smoother. Which is why enthusiasts buys high-end graphics: to crank up all detail, resolution and effects while achieving optimum performance of not lower than 60fps.

The human eye can detect more than 300fps. That is a plain fact. People who has seen the 240fps custom Gran Turismo PS3 demo(using 4 PS3s linked to render 1080p@240fps) claimed that it looked like reality-smooth.

link: http://kotaku.com/5093592/gran-turismo-5-p...2160-resolution

And Quazacolt, you can't always trust Wikipedia. The last bit at the bottom of the page that asks "how many frames per second can the human eye see?" does not even has any citation or reference.

This post has been edited by lamusiqa: Mar 4 2010, 04:33 PM

1) you calling wiki, or the links vondrake posted are lies?

2) fact? aside the entry title, kotaku posted nothing in regards to the actual specs of claimed 240fps, which is easily exaggerated from 120 fps interlaced as the commenter below mentioned. ctrl + f "fps"

in *FACT* (ooh strong word) an optician who posted in that comment said that a human may be able to see the difference between 60-240 fps, but he will not be able to see all the frames. which was my point exactly. 300 fps? haw haw.

U DUN QUESTION QUAZ...
cause he can™

why, of course i can: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persistence_of_vision

1/10 for decent effort though. thread was saved from xiaopuyo

I'm calling Wiki as not a definitive source for answers as some details does not even has references or proof to back up the claims.

If you noticed the link at the bottom of the Kotaku article, you'd realize that it will redirect you to gran-turismo.com where it details on how the game achieved 240FPS at 1080p. Not interlaced. Here, I'll make it easier for you: http://www.gran-turismo.com/sg/news/sp/d6230p2.html

I agree with your point, but the smoothness of 300fps which is closer to reality is an advantage any rich bloke would indulge in. He might not see all the frames, as how we dont see all movement of a fast moving object but the smoothness(lack of flickering) is worth the justification.

If I have all the money in the world, I would want a 240fps display and a graphic card to run my games at that speed. Wouldn't you?

anyways from my understanding, most games developers would aim for a constant 60fps...

OT: GoW3 is just OMFG AWESOME

Well, yes. 60fps with all intended details is considered as the holy grail performance spot.

http://www.100fps.com/how_many_frames_can_humans_see.htm

/thread

referring to my link, it does have references and other citations, also referring back to that same link, particularly on "video systems"

and based on your link, its merely using 4x 60fps synced over that sony FED tv that is cable of 240hz (again, not exactly the same thing as 240frames) which, depending on how good the synchronization can go, decoupling is likely to occur especially based on the picture diagram that was provided. though one cant be certain on that as nothing negative/technical was mentioned outside the standard omgwin praises and few pictures.

well, like i said, epeen, and thats enough justification. my WoW ran over 200 fps back in TBC, now it runs merely 50-80fps post WOTLK/enhancements etc etc. difference are close to none until heavy activity goes on screen (like spam aoe on WG lol) and i wouldnt have enough buffer frames to cope with it.

---

Added on March 4, 2010, 6:31 pmthat and vsync also uses that mark to prevent tearing on high resolution displays

---

Added on March 4, 2010, 6:31 pmJULY

---

Added on March 4, 2010, 6:32 pmlate.

This post has been edited by Quazacolt: Mar 4 2010, 06:32 PM

but kratos said he'll be out faster than fermi

anyway... after last nite experience with Sarah Palin, the bayonetta b!tch witch... i was forced to listen over and over again a track named 'ST01 The Falling Military Transport'...

i leave those console games to me brother... well, except for RPG...

its coming out 16 march dude