I've played in 60hz my whole life. Will switching to 144hz blow my mind?
I've done research and I don't quite understand the difference between the two.
>>342470938
Probably not
Seem you havn't done enough research.
>>342471154
Why?
>>342470938
144 is a bit smoother but the difference is less noticeable than the jump from 30 to 60.
You'll notice it but it won't blow your mind like the transistion from 30 -> 60 did. 1080p to 1440p on the other hand will blow you away and I'd suggest trying to get a monitor that does 1440p144
The transition blew my mind, OP, even from the first moment I moved my mouse about the desktop and noticed how infinitely smoother the movement was.
You'll be able to max out any older game to 144FPS. I did this with Max Payne and I had so much fun, but if you have a beefy enough setup, you'll be able to achieve it with modern games too. I finished Hard Reset Redux (that'll max out on even a toaster) playing at 144hz and it was a joy.
Even modern games that won't reach the full 144FPS will still benefit. I hover around 100-120 on Battlefield 4 maxed out and it makes a huge difference.
>>342471279
>I'd suggest trying to get a monitor that does 1440p144
Those are really really expensive for me and I keep hearing horror stories about them about backlight bleeding and lots of returns.
Also, doesn't high resolution just give more screen real estate? What other benefits does it have?
>>342471465
>The human eye can't percieve more than 60 fps anyway
nice meme
>>342471474
Do you have adaptive sync? Is it worth it?
>>342471665
what? no, resolution does not give more screen real estate, that's just the size of your monitor
>>342471769
Oh. What are the benefits of higher resolutions then in gaming?
Sorry about this, I am new to buying monitors. I am currently on a generic 720p I got as a gift.
I heard that if you have a 144hz display and watch a 60 fps youtube video or something it will be stuttery because 60 is not a multiple of 144. Any truth to this?
>mfw when a toaster and a xbox360 are my current set up
>mfw i haven't played a game in 60 fps since 2007/2008 when i had a slightly powerfull PC.
At least when i get a gaming rig my dick will explode with the high quality/60+ fps.
>>342471889
>720p
oh my god i'm so sorry
1080p will blow your mind mate, forget 144Hz
>>342471889
Go to youtube and compare a video at 480p with a video at 720p. Thats what difference high resolution makes.
>>342470938
Just moving my mouse after enabling 144hz blew my mind.
>>342472023
Not true
Having double the FPS is a huge fucking improvement for any reasonably fast paced games. FPS, TPS, Driving, it's all pretty fantastic.
I'd say it's well worth it. Going back to 60 now feels kinda garbage. It's just so jittery to me now.
>>342471769
>what? no, resolution does not give more screen real estate
Yes it does for anything that does PPI scaling of screen element (see: every software made after 2006).
Just look at the usable screen space in the UI on something like Unity or Premiere on 1080p vs 4K
I went from never using above 60hz to a 3440x1440 75hz monitor and 75hz blows my mind
>>342472023
The "stutter" would be similar to NTSC 2:3 pulldown, ie you wouldn't really notice it until it's side by side.
FPS over Resolution any day.
I'll gladly play at a lower resolution in return for higher frame rates. Feelings smooth and fast response is better than a few less jaged edges on the screen.
Especially if your eyes aren't great anyway.
>>342472095
my dick literally twitched when I bought SotFS and played it for the first time compared to original DS2
>>342472323
I got to demo one of those monitors at an event and damn do I want one so bad.
>>342470938
yeah
still doesnt look as buttery as a crt monitor would
>>342470938
What the fuck don't you understand? It's just more frames.
>>342472323
This is the one I got and I love it, it's curved and has FreeSync support.
I got it for $55. EVGA is sending me a 1080 Superclocked ACX3 so I should be able to get 75hz maxed in every game I play including ARMA3
>>342472318
that depends on what you mean by screen real estate
a higher resolution isn't magically going to make the screen physically bigger, it's just going to cram more shit into the same physical screen space
>>342472429
Really? i've seen pictures of it and played the original DS2 onxbox 360and didn't really noticed that much of an improvement.
Its not like it looks like the early build with the orgasmic lightning.
But, i don't really care about graphics as long as the game runs well.
Wich i can't have because games in this piece of shit notebook both look and run like fucking shit.
>>342470938
>I've done research and I don't quite understand the difference between the two.
Are you a fucking retard?
>>342472531
>including ARMA3
Should we tell him?
Not OP.
I'm building my first rig and I'm considering monitors. Do I go for 1080/144 or 1440/60?
It blew mine, at least. Everything looks incredibly smooth, and it'll make 60 fps feel choppy as hell.
>>342472502
i agree, a crt looks like ass
dohohoho
>>342472630
I already get 60hz 3440x1440 on my 980ti so I should be able to get 75hz @ 3440x1440 with SMAA 4x
>>342470938
Probably, yes.
I use 144hz and it's so much smoother. You can't imagine it until you experience it.
If I go to 60hz now it feels like choppy shit.
>>342472646
Do you want better and sharper IQ? Get the 1440/60 (make sure it's IPS)
Do you want smooth and fluid frames while you play? Get the 1080/144 (Sadly has no IPS but the TN's are decent)
You can't go wrong with either honestly.
>>342472579
To me it means how much usage every inch of the screen can give. 1440P is a big improvement over 1080. I'd know,because i have both a 1440p and 1080p screen standing next to eachother.
>>342472646
depends on what games you play. if you play fps get a 144hz but if you play stuff like rpgs the higher framerate isn't as important so you might want the 1440p more. or you could be a true patrician and get 1440p/144hz
>>342470938
get it. if you thought 60 was smooth 144hz will blow you away. going back to 60 is painful for me now
>>342472646
1440/144
The monitor is the way you experience everything you'll ever use your computer for, don't cheap out on it.
>>342472754
Could you put that in layman's terms for a fucking retard?
>>342472812
I don't think I have the money for a 1440/144, since most of my budget went toa 1070
>>342472848
1440/144 is too expensive right now
>>342472881
So are you from 2013 or poor? Because they can be had for $550 on sale, that is not "too expensive" for anyone who isn't 14, NEET or living in Brazil.
>>342470938
no.
>>342472848
Then you'll have to buy a 1080 to be able to play most games 1440p 144hz.
>>342472937
Or Australia. The Acer Pedator one is $899 here
>>342472718
>>342472531
>frames per second
>hz
>>342470938
Maybe. Around 90 fps is where I stop noticing much of a difference, and I cap my frames in demanding games because wildly fluctuating framerate bothers me more than a cap around 60 or so. Doesn't bother me at all, whereas I'd rather gouge my eyes out than play at 30 fps.
>>342472937
Costs close to 700€ here. Just for the monitor. Add another 1k+ for the PC.
>>342470938
I found there to be quite a difference
>>342472881
i got an asus mg278 on sale for $400. best purchase of my life.
>>342472857
>1070
basically do you want your games to look prettier with better color, or do you want your shooters to run smoother and less choppy?
IPS is the panel you want if you get 1440p, IPS means the colors look much better and more accurate.
My problem with 144 is the pretty much absence of IPS and so shit looks weird if you look at it wrong.
>>342473153
I use a BenQ XL2411Z (1080p, 1ms, 144hz) and everything looks quite good to me after initially fiddling with the options a little bit.
Of course a good IPS will look better, but my main interest is in playing games, not doing photo work or watching only movies.
>>342472857
Pretty pictures = 1440
Smoother gameplay = 144hz.
>>342472937
i am living in turkey its like 2500$ with the taxes
you fucks talk abou these monitors i still play at 720p kill me
>>342472805
physical screen size is important too
although the difference is mostly a technical point since higher res usually means a larger screen
1440p is mostly all 27inch but if you're shopping for 1080p or ultrawides there are a few sizes you can choose from for the same resolution which do meaningfully affect user experience
Be aware OP, some games do not handle 144FPS well.
>>342473327
wow turkish bro , selam.
It's a noticeable difference, but higher resolution or monitor size have a bigger wow factor.
144HZ is only worth it if you play a lot of CS:GO or Quake
It probably will throw you off for a bit, after a while you'll adapt to it, and then if you try going back to 60fps you'll be fucked.
>>342471232
In my experience, I grew up playing games at 30fps on console, then I got a PC and couldn't go back to 30fps after becoming accustomed to 60fps. With 144hz, it's more or less the same. I didn't really noticed a first, but now whenever I play something at 60fps I can tell. For example I can no longer play CSGO at 60fps without feeling like the game isn't running very well.
If you're going to buy one of those new fangled 1440p/144hz IPS (AHVA) monitors, do yourself a favour and buy the ASUS version, not the Acer.
Both use the same panel, that comes from a factory with 0 quality control standards. Return rates are astronomical so the big difference in the brands is the return agreements.
Acer has the worst monitor return rules ever. On a panel of that resolution you need to have at least 15 dead pixels in 1cm square area for it to qualify for return under Acer, anything less is considered "fine for use"
ASUS on the other hand will return it for a single dead pixel, any level of backlight bleed or dirt under the panel (all things a massive percentage of these panels suffer from)
>>342470938
i have a 144hz monitor. I'm happy with 90+ fps and it's noticeable when a game dips below that to me :/
I would advise against getting it. just be happy in your ignorance. seriously.
>>342473467
144hz is even godly when just moving around the desktop or dragging a folder somewhere or browsing
you'll never go back to 60hz
>>342473416
aleykum selam.
>>342473467
why not gta v or other games like that
>>342473258
>Of course a good IPS will look better, but my main interest is in playing games, not doing photo work or watching only movies.
Unless you're playing black and white games, colours matter everywhere. I'll never fucking touch a TN again. I will never understand why you fools accept that god awful washed out palette and 0 viewing angles just because you think you're getting 1ms panels because of marketing bullshit.
>>342473285
>>342473149
That's a tough call, really. It doesn't help that the prices are in a similar range. I'm really thinking it'll be best to wait until 1440/144 becomes more standard or IPS for 144 is a thing. So I'm probably gonna go with 1440, because I know everything will work normally at 60 and 60 looks just fine to me right now. But I'm not sure. I don't play a lot of twitch shooters.
>>342473258
If I'm going for 144, that's what I'm looking at.
>>342473327
>>342473416
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGb6DGZJG84
>144 FPS
>144 FPS
>144 FPS
>144 FPS
Wait I'm god damn confused. Aren't hz and fps different things? Like hz refers to the refresh rate of your monitor while fps refers to how many images are displayed on aforementioned monitor during a span of time (per second)?
>>342473576
>144hz is even godly when just moving around the desktop or dragging a folder somewhere or browsing
>Have 144hz main monitor and 60hz secondary
>Drag folder from main to secondary
>Suddenly looks stuttery as fuck
Every time.
Bought a 1440p@144Hz screen half a year ago but generally speaking 144Hz has a lot of issues and I don't recommend it unless you "need" it for a particular experience - that is low-input-latency gaming for fast paced titles, of wich there aren't many. 120/144Hz is only worth it if you can keep releatively stable framerates - if you can't everything will feel sluggish as input-lag spikes each time frame rate takes a dive.
Currently you'll run into several recurring issues thanks to the fact that most new titles are console centered multiplatform releases which can't handle the whole 144Hz thing very well. Many games are frame-locked, in particuarly indie-games. Most games are badly optimized and get bottlenecked by the CPU due to bad threading.
Then there's the general quality issue - went through 11 different screens spread over 4 manufacturers until I got one without backlight bleeding and uniformity issues. Can't say how long the screen will last either as it's only half a year old. Perhaps it's better with 1080p@144Hz, didn't try as I wanted the resolution increase.
If you get a 120/144Hz screen, also go get a mouse with a polling rate of at least roughly 300Hz. 500Hz is the most common value for quality mice you'll find when going higher than the default 125 and such probably what you'll end up getting. 1000Hz is too much and can make CPU-bottlenecking worse in certain games as the hardware can't keep up with the I/O spam.
One thing about 1440p - regardless of refresh rate: There's almost no native content. You have to stretch 1080p videos, UIs in games will often cause issues, most games have tiny text and UI elements and even Windows 7,8 and 10 have trouble scaling well. Linux handles high resolutions better because it's easier to customize everything. The same applies to 4K but there it's even worse, don't bother with it until software has caught up.
>>342471232
There is barely any difference
>>342473605
because GTA V is not a twitch shooter and you can't render GTA V at 144Hz unless you spend $1500 on GPUs, at which point you should be playing 4k or 5760x1080 anyway
>>342470938
>done research
>don't undrstand
Are you some kind of special retard?
>>342473731
how the hell same pc give one monitor 144 and the other one 60? are you using 1 graphic card for each monitor?
>>342473727
They don't mean the same thing, but almost equate to the same thing. A 60 Hz monitor can display ~60 FPS, a 144 Hz can display ~144 FPS
>>342473535
what's the point
it's gotten to the point where better hardware doesn't meaningfully improve things
instead of games looking better, the future is just games looking the same but the developers needing to put in less effort
you're not going to be able to get 1440p144fps because developers are lazy pieces of shits who see more powerful hardware as a ticket to care not a whit about optimisation
>>342473735
thats why we advice people g-sync monitors
>>342473910
>it's gotten to the point where better hardware doesn't meaningfully improve things
Having a panel that is 1440p with IPS colour gamut but running at 144hz is a big fucking thing
>>342473735
>There's almost no native content
I'm this guy >>342472646 and that's my biggest worry about 1440. I've honestly considered just going with fucking 1080/60 because that's standard for EVERYTHING and I would never have issues on anything new. I've seen very few games with native 1440 support.
>>342473886
>A 60 Hz monitor can display ~60 FPS, a 144 Hz can display ~144 FPS
Aight.
So getting a 144hz monitor without the GPU to back it up would be fucking pointless yeah?
>>342473910
>you're not going to be able to get 1440p144fps
I ge tit all the time, thanks. You see having special shadows that are 5% sharper but 500% more demanding is needless. I'll take high at 1440/144 over max at 45fps
>>342473962
read the last sentence
>>342473810
this is wrong, there is a huge difference
>>342473735
this is good advice, 144hz is only god-tier when you get it for special games, namely twitch shooters that you don't mind lowering the settings on so you get a solid 144 FPS. if you play stuff like dark souls, witcher 3, fallout and GTA get 1440p because you probably can't run those in 144 FPS anyway
>>342473735
>One thing about 1440p - regardless of refresh rate: There's almost no native content. You have to stretch 1080p videos, UIs in games will often cause issues, most games have tiny text and UI elements and even Windows 7,8 and 10 have trouble scaling well.
I have had a 2560x1600 monitor since 2009 and this is absolute horseshit. Windows has no scaling issues, no software I use has issues, nothing
There is a grand total of ONE game in my 300+ I've tallied up in Steam since 2009 that have has had an issue with it was unsurprisingly a shitty Jap game with a hard locked resolution cap.
>>342474039
getting WQHD @ 144Hz requires a GPU that can easily do 4k@60Hz. At that point you should really be playing in 4k because sharpness.
>>342474172
So what happens with videos that aren't even available in 1440?
>I've played in 60hz my whole life
so you never had a CRT monitor?
>>342474227
They look no different scaled to 1440p than they look playing on my 1080p monitor side monitor.
>>342474271
Not him but I had 5 CRTs growing up and 4 of them were out of the box at 60 and required massive resolution drops to go higher, my final one was 75 at 1024x768
>>342470938
>Will switching to 144hz blow my mind?
only for the games that actually support it
>>342474493
So like 95% of my steam library?
Stop buying chink garbage and you'll be surprised how many don't have FPS caps.
>>342471889
The image will look way sharper because theres more pixels to display, youll need a good graphics card though. Another advantage is that you wont need Antialiasing as much since you wont have jaggies at 1440p
>>342474493
Which is a big chunk of them.
>>342474039
did you get it on asscreed unity on launch?
bf4 on launch?
batman ak on launch?
fallout 4 on launch?
xcom2 on launch?
and probably even more triple a titles with horrendous optimisation that i can't remember
>inb4 i only play 'good games'
>>342474493
Which is like majority of modern games right now.
The only "big" modren games not supporting it are Bethesda games and Souls. Even then there are still workarounds.
>>342474556
>since you wont have jaggies at 1440p
1440p here, this is the biggest lie about this resolution. Every game is still aliased to ass, god forbid the game feature power lines.
>>342474005
yes
>>342474565
Fallout 4 wasn't that terrible besides the godrays bullshit.
>Try Virtual/Dynamic Super Resolution
>Can crank resolution up to 1800p on a 1080p screen
>Refresh rate is locked to 60Hz
God why
it's the same as the first time you ever saw a blue ray movie on a 100hz television. it looks more fluid, like you're seeing a 3d movie basically.
>>342470938
144hz smoothness is great, but basically every 144hz monitor I've used has made huge sacrifices in constrast ratio or colour vividness to achieve it. BenQ 144hz monitors have some of the most inaccurate colour representation I've ever seen - I sold mine it was so disgusting. Personally I would only go 144hz IPS or stick with a high-quality 60hz panel. 144hz TN is really nothing special, if you value accurate colours. If you value smoothness instead, then go for it.
fuck me, I can hardly follow this thread...
1440p is the new 1080p
> prettier pictures
> ultra ultra high def
> indicated by the resolution of the monitor (i think???)
> will blow your mind
144hz is much smoother than 60hz
> but you can still play 60fps and more at 60hz
> buttery smooth if you have the rig
> 144hz allows even more fps
> probaly won't blow your mind
A monitor 1440p moniter at 144hz is expensive in Aus. The Acer Predator is cheap, but has a chunky bezel.
I'm currently using cheap 7yr old 32" tv as my monitor. My mind will defs be blown when I upgrade to 4K LG monitor (27UD68)
>>342474604
>>342473735
All this shit makes it sound like I should get a fucking 1080/60. Neither 1440 nor 144 sound good enough to overcome the hefty pricing and drawbacks.
>>342474740
>1440p is the new 1080p
Not until a couple of years. Consoles can't even manage 1080p30fps most of the time, and standards are dictated by them.
I got an ips 2560x1440 27" screen with 100hz refresh from korean for 350$, pwm flicker free.
Downside is:
Have to manually calibrate color in windows
only has a single dual link dvi input
no osd
>>342474778
then you better get ps4
>>342474740
Play whatever you enjoy, expensive monitors can't really improve your fun factor
>>342470938
If you play a competitive FPS at a serious level then it's worth it.
If it's just for singleplayer games then it's not worth it.
![medium01[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/S6uQujm.jpg "medium01[1].jpg")
>>342474740
>google the LG monitor
>this is on the official page
Are LG a chinese toy company or something?
>>342474778
stay with 1080/60 then you little bitch. i bought a 1440/144 and it's the best decision I ever made. only problem is it's not IPS but I have a second IPS monitor anyway.
>>342474604
there is some aliasing, but games look actually good without AA unlike 1080p where they look like ass.
>>342474778
2560x1440 is a big improvement over 1080p, but it might be a smarter choice to go straight to 4k.
>>342474889
Nigga, it's affordable, has decent resolution and has a skinny bezel. That's all I need. No shill
>>342474889
Most monitor pages have shit awful "fake game screenshot placeholders".
>>342471279
30 to 60 isnt mindblowing.
>>342474942
A 4k monitor is way out of my price range. 300 is my max, pretty much.
>>342474854
Can PS4 run anything at 1080 OR 60?
>>342470938
pretty much when you turn (fast) in games everything is smoother, especially in FPS games like cs:go/battlefield/and even overwatch
I've used a 144hz monitor for 2 years now and whenever my monitor auto-switches to 60hz (having chrome opened) my eyes bleed profusely. its as if 60hz is 30 fps even though my game runs at 100+ fps
only down side to 144hz is the price. for instance, 1440p 144hz 1ms monitors go for around $600 or more, outpricing gtx 1080's, whereas 1440p 60hz 1ms monitors go for around half that price
>>342474978
I agree, it seems to be a nice monitor, but the CANON DRY got me laughing.
>>342474942
I really like the fact that at 1440p i only need 2x aa or no aa in games
When I switched to 120hz from 60hz I didn't notice anything, but when I switched back down to 60hz I started noticing. Feels like having drunken eyesight in comparison.
>>342475008
Bullshit. I spent a decade and a half playing on console before making the switch to PC and I don't ever want to go back.
>>342470938
GPUs still aren't able to play modern games at 144 fps maxed out. 144hz is literally useless for gaming.
>>342470938
I decided to go with a 144Hz screen when I recently built my new rig
I can absolutely not recommend it enough, it's amazing and I can never switch back to 60Hz again. The difference is monumental imo
>>342472593
it's not the graphics it's how fucking smooth it runs
>not using CRT
So what if you got 144hz, you still have input lags.
>>342475215
*144hz is literally useless for playing recent games
>>342474227
I have a 1440P monitor. When watching anime,i just tell the player to display the video in the resolution of the video,without stretching it. I don't mind the video not filling up my entire screen.
>>342475249
even if you only reach say 60 fps, those 60 fps will still be smoother on a 144Hz screen vs a 60Hz screen
>>342475215
you don't need a game to be running at 144 fps for 144hz to work
>being this retarded
>>342475357
It won't fill up your entire screen? That's fine then. What about games that don't have native 1440 support? Where 1080 is the highest resolution?i don't know shit please don't hurt me
>>342475380
Maybe because you have a G-Sync/Freesync monitor?
>>342475215
even if you only reach say 60 fps, those 60 fps will still be smoother on a 144Hz screen vs a 60Hz screen
>>342475380
That simply isn't true. Unless you have a monitor with adaptative sync, 60 fps on 144Hz causes uneven frame pacing, aka stutter.
>>342474942
4k is unnecessary unless you have bigger monitor more than 32"
>tfw poorfag and just stay with 60/1080 because i know if i will go beyond this i will get spoiled and will need to invest a shitton into a new rig
i think i will be just fine with getting a new monitor with freesync and maybe maybe will go up to 1440p,if the new amd card is not a scam this will be fucking great.
truly a good time for mid rangers.
>>342475138
To me, i can game on gtx980 or xbone, the 980 never gets used. 60 vs 30 isnt the massive thing people make it out to be. Yeah the games abit more responsive but 30 is fine.
>>342475460
>Unless you have a monitor with adaptative sync, 60 fps on 144Hz causes uneven frame pacing, aka stutter.
VG248 here, never encountered any stutter in any game
I have a 144hz screen and I honestly can't tell a difference. It was a waste of money.
>>342474160
Dark Souls 3 is frame rate capped to 60.
The Witcher 3 has no cap and looks great at high framerates, same with GTA5.
Fallout 4 has a soft cap of 60 but you can remove it, only issue is it breaks lockpicking and you can get stuck at computer terminals if it's not capped at all, I used rivatuner to cap it and it worked fine.
For the most part you'll be able to get games to work at 144 frames per second more often than not, some will just werk, some will require some fiddling, once you've gone 144hz once you'll likely think the effort for the latter category is worth it.
>>342473914
That won't help. I have tried g-sync and freesync ones because I built several compters for a few people at the same time and that's why I ended up having the patience to order so many screens from different manufacturers to begin with until we got good ones.
I wasn't talking about tearing when I mentioned input lag - because the latter is present with g-sync as well and if you dabble with high-Hz screens for a while you can feel input lag. It's an unpleasant sensation as the brain notices you see something that isn't relating to your hand movement the same way it used to a few seconds earlier.
Generally that happens when frame-times changes from what you had gotten used to but for sakes of making it not uncessary complicated one can say that each time framerate drops in game you'll notice input lag and discomfort. It also messes with your precision and ability to predict virtual movement.
G-sync does not prevent input lag or the sensation from it, it only avoids screen tearing the frame rate changes could cause.
Funnily enough that's ultimately why the pro-gamers all say "don't use g-sync, disable it for less input lag (m-muh miliseconds) and instead cap the frame rate". That's in theory fine but obviously only makes sense if you can keep the framerate perfectly stable without it dropping significantly in busy scenes, which won't apply to most (new) games a normal user would play, even more so when one wants decent graphics instead of running everything at low-details for highest possible framerate.
The screen I personally ended up keeping was a 1440p/144Hz/Freesync BenQ XL2730Z and while the technical implementation of freesync compared to g-sync has drawbacks it still works well enough to avoid tearing and on top the screen came significantly cheaper than the g-sync couterparts. Then again the reason I got a 144Hz screen wasn't purely tryhard esports games but because I needed a high-Hz screen for work.
>>342475617
spot the xbox shill. why do consoletards always claim they have the most powerful PC, yet they still use their shitty laggy consoles?
>>342475705
I can tell the difference with mine, the colours are washed out and terrible compared to the IPS 1440p monitor I had before. Definitely a waste
>>342470938
>Will switching to 144hz blow my mind?
Diminishing returns.
>>342475705
I'm sure you're not retarded anon, but for good measure go to your screen settings and make sure you're actually running at 144Hz. I've had friends who have been gaming for years with 144Hz monitors while blissfully ignorant to the fact that it was actually set to a lower Hz
>>342470938
Unless you're playing a serious competitive shooter at the top level, and I mean TOP level, there's no reason to play on a 144hz monitor.
>>342475705
Are you sure your monitor and Windows are set to 144Hz?
>>342475617
>30 is fine
>>342475617
>xbone
144fps is pretty cool, but 60 is good enough, you can easily tell when a refresh rate is that fucking high, but after a while you grow accustumed to it, and it requires too much power to run newer games with that framerate, much unlike 30fps, which is easy to notice, hindering in action games and inexcusable at this day and age
now 4K/downsampling, that's where it's at
>>342475617
144 is relatively inconsequential compared to 60. It's a jump but not an incredible jump.
60 compared to 30 is a titanic jump. Take Skyrim. It's 30 on consoles, 60 on PC. Once you've played Skyrim on PC once you'll never be able to play it at 30 again.
>>342475826
thank you for saving my money
>>342470938
>IPS
>1440p@144hz
>G-sync/Freesync
Can anyone recommend a good monitor with these specs?
>>342475826
Yea, colors are shit, that much I can tell and am reminded off every day. If I took the same amount of money I paid back then today I'd go for colors and resolution over gimmiky refresh rate.
>>342475852
>>342475840
It's set to 144hz and I play cs:go with it on dmg rank, but I just don't notice the difference to 60.
Fast paced games benefits from 144hz, while slower paced games won't have a big effect.
>>342475990
Don't let me sour you on 144hz, it's worth trying at a shop or a friends house to get a sense of whether you like it or not. But it's so overpriced compare to the benefit and the TN panels are just not that great compared to a solid 60hz IPS. Just my opinion
>>342470938
>Will switching to 144hz blow my mind?
not really, i wish i bought the 4k meme instead
>>342476007
Acer XB280HK
>>342475914
Not him but it's generally either 1080p "30"fps or 900p 60fps. Don't think there's a single game on the one running at 720p 30fps.
Source: Exboner
>>342476007
Acer's XF270HU
>>342476112
4k is still a meme though. A 1080 doesn't play games that well at 4k.
Give a year and a half, the next gen of cards + cheaper monitors = no more maymay
>>342475556
THIS.
just stay with 1440p and IPS
>>342476171
TN+
>>342476403
This. 4k is pointless until there's a single card that can push stable 60fps in most modern games
>>342476505
1080 can do 60 fps on most things on maximum settings. It really only struggles with Witcher 3.
>>342476007
>IPS
>144Hz
Don't. There is not a single decent panel on the market the screen manufacturers could even build into their screens. The few ones available all have severe problems and you'll spend a lot of money on flawed tech. Get a nice 60Hz IPS or a 144Hz TN.
>>342475810
I7 as well lol fuck pc its gay as shit
>>342476196
>Don't think there's a single game on the one running at 720p 30fps.
Battlefield 4
>>342476702
Shame. I keep asking this question hoping that there's a model I missed somehow. The Acers and ASUSes people mention have really terrible QC issues going by the user reviews. Maybe I should wait another year before replacing my 1080@60 display.
>>342473846
The monitors are just capped at what fps they can show.
Your operating system doesn't really have an FPS cap beyond your monitor refresh rate.
>>342476505
>until there's a single card that can push stable 60fps in most modern games
1080 is well enough for this now, the inevitable 1080Ti will seal the deal late this year
>>342475935
You niggas fucking gay. I always go for graphics + 30 fps. 60 fps i better than 30 fps, but aftet a while playing at 30 fps you won't give a fuck.
You niggas are living memeboys.
It's definitely noticable. I jumped from a 1080p 59hz monitor to a 1440p 144hz monitor and it's the most "next gen" jump I've ever felt.
Even in games that aren't hitting the 144fps cap, if it's at 120 or 100 I can definitely tell the difference.
I have a 144hz gsync monitor, I went from a 60hz monitor.
I fucking love it. I'm not sure if it would be the same effect with 144hz by itself or gsync by itself, but going from my 60hz to this was delicious.
Everything is smoother, it's easier to parse the scenes onscreen because more information is hitting your eyes, even if you're not consciously aware of it. I always had problems reading text whilst moving, that's a lot easier now for example.
I'm pretty crap at shooter games, but with this monitor I can make up for my crappy reflexes a bit.
>>342477174
If you can't get good grafix and 60 fps you're either a poorfag or terrible with money.
>>342475935
>going from 144hz monitor to "cinematic" 12fps ps3 games on tv
fucking kill me please
>>342470938
Got a 144hz monitor - Dota felt a lot smoother. Then I got better better video cards and can pretty much play anything past 120fps at 1080p. Feels great. The effect is pronounced the first time you open try it out. Try to find 144hz test videos if you have the chance before getting the monitor.
>>342477174
>but aftet a while playing at 30 fps you won't give a fuck.
Poorfags gonna poor.
>>342477174
>after while playing at 30 fps you won't give a fuck.
This isn't true for most people. The reason why COD and Halo are so popular with normies and that they constantly feel like they have "better shooting" is because of the framerate, they just don't know how to articulate the smoothness.
anything above about 45-50 all looks the same to me desu
There won't be that much of a noticeable difference.
>>342477163
and then you'll get another fucking rome total war 2018 edition and ten other buggy optimised pos triple a titles that absolutely slaughter flagships not because they look good but because triple a devs cannot or will not optimise to save their lives
>>342477260
Good to see that you can talk about the actual subject, retard.
I bet you can run Crysis 3 maxed with 4k at 60 fps.
>>342477417
>say stupid shit
>get called out on it
Running anything at 30 fps is unacceptable. That's why 4k hasn't caught on as hard as it would be expected to. Not even the 1080 can keep a stable 60 in everything that's currently out.
>>342477569
>get called out on it
You just tried to move the goalpost, idiot. You didn't call me out on anything. Grow a brain.
>>342477350
>anything above about 45-50 all looks the same to me desu
I can never tell if people who say shit like this just haven't played high framerate games before or have something wrong with their brains.
>>342477725
>I always go for graphics + 30 fps
>"you're retarded and poor if you can't get 60 with graphics"
>m-moving the goalposts!!
>>342477817
There are two options here:
A) You're baiting
B) You actually have brain damage
Either way, i don't have time for you.
Have a wonderful day and keep up with elitism. People love that.
G-Sync/Freesync and 144Hz yes
>>342478494
Expecting what's been practically standard for the past decade isn't elitism, cuck.
ay mane 144hz is the shit man just got the asus one and its mad comfy
youll get used 2 it real soon but you cant go back
so dont buy
or do
whatever man
it's p. good for 144 Hz and 2560x1440
still have my catleap for color reproduction
but a good IPS 144Hz 1440 is like $600+ and they have bad quality control issues
>>342478791
Yeah, that's the thing. Most of the reasonable 144Hz you see are are TN or VA. It must be said that TN has gotten better in terms of color accuracy (if you got an 8-bit TN) and viewing angle might not matter for the gamer, but color depth is better on IPS.
>>342470938
120/144 Hz is really nice but, but the real "next" tier is 120+ Hz plus backlight strobing plus matching source framerate.
Strobing (as in LightBoost, ULMB, etc.) lets your eyes track moving objects on a screen and still see sharp texture detail on them by preventing a mismatch between long, discrete frames and relatively smooth eye motion.
It's a pain in the ass however though since strobing causes flicker that's perceptible to different people at different thresholds, and the source content has to match the display refresh/strobe rate or you see multiple copies of moving objects (like so-called PWM artifacts).
