Anything over 60 fps in gaming (or in general). Is it just a meme? I don't have anything over 60 Hz, so I've never seen it for myself. Can't decide if it's worth it.
I'm going to build a PC soon but I'm not sure about the 60+ fps meme. Sticking to 60 Hz/60 fps I can save hundreds. Going above and beyond would be nice, but is it a game changer or just a shekel sink?
>>334640436
Responsiveness increases significantly past 60
Every argument for 60 over 30 can apply to 120+ over 60.
More important than raw FPS is stability of the frame rate and what the software does when it starts to run into slowdowns.
>>334640605
which is why I'd probably rather have a constant 60 fps over something that runs at 120 fps most of the time and slows down other times
>>334640436
frame times are twice as fast at 120
its like 8 ms at 120 and 6.7 at 144
i bought a 144 hz monitor for Freesync to avoid tearing and the extra hz is nice
Over 30fps you start to get dimishing returns on noticeable improvement with each frame. The difference between 30-60 is fairly noticeable and I would always reccomend hitting 60 at least. 60-144 is a fraction of the improvement 30-60 is, so only go for the 144 meme if your epeen is worth the extra money to you.
The bigger (or rather faster) is obviously better here, but yes, it sort of starts going in to the diminishing returns territory when you target 120hz.
I'd say that it's worth it if you play games that demand fast reaction times and are easy to run (CS as an obvious example), but trying to target +120hz in most modern games is just too damn expensive for what it's worth.
>>334645817
I see that as only necessary in the competitive scene
for my purposes I think I can get fast enough reaction times out of 60 frames
seems that in order to do 120 fps in most modern games you'd need a 980 Ti, which as you say is just too damn expensive
I've used 60 Hz and 144 Hz monitors in a """Professional""" setting (local CS LAN tournies) and I felt a perceived difference. Eyes don't really run at an FPS so to speak, technically it's infinite. But after 144 Hz or even 60 Hz you start to get diminishing returns in terms of what your brain can perceive.
The science isn't really available yet, and is full of asterisks, but if you want to save a couple hundred bucks, 60 is perfectly fine. If you want to get into a professional or semi pro scene, that 84 Hz can help a lot. It's all personal preference. I suggest trying it out on different games before you buy, if you know someone. Rocket league, CS:GO, shit like that.
It's better to have a game locked at 30 or 60 FPS. If it fluctuates, it ruins the experience quite terribly.
>>334649050
Why settle?
I play competitive counter-strike and need 144 hz. It also looks really nice for other games and I would say it's worth the extra money but if you're not playing a competitive game it's totally just personal opinion.
It is actually quite a difference. Even using the mouse felt laggy in 60 fps after using 120.
